Technical, Technological, Environmental and Energetical Aspects in Livestock Building Construction Using Structural Timber

Jan Barwicki, Witold Jan Wardal (), Kamila Ewelina Mazur () and Mikhail Tseyko
Additional contact information
Jan Barwicki: Agency for Restructurization and Modernization of Agriculture (ARMA), Poleczki 33, 02-822 Warsaw, Poland
Witold Jan Wardal: Department of Technology and Entrepreneurship in Wood Industry, Institute of Wood Sciences and Furniture, Warsaw University of Life Sciences—SGGW, 159 Nowoursynowska St., 02-787 Warsaw, Poland
Kamila Ewelina Mazur: Institute of Technology and Life Sciences—National Research Institute, Falenty, Hrabska Avenue 3, 05-090 Raszyn, Poland
Mikhail Tseyko: Polish Biomass Society POLBIOM, 01-839 Warsaw, Poland

Energies, 2025, vol. 18, issue 20, 1-22

Abstract: The demand for energy-efficient construction in agriculture calls for a reassessment of materials used in livestock buildings. This study evaluated the use of timber as an alternative to traditional materials, with a focus on embodied energy (EE) and carbon footprint (CFP) Eight EU countries (Germany, Poland, Spain, Italy, Denmark, France, Sweden, and Finland), were analyzed considering both forest resources and livestock populations. The forest area varied from more than 310,000 km 2 in Sweden to just 6464 km 2 in Denmark. Meanwhile, livestock populations varied significantly, with Germany reporting over 8.2 million LSU (livestock unit, 500 kg) in cattle alone. The number of livestock buildings was estimated assuming 100 LSU per building, allowing for a comparison between timber and conventional designs. Timber-based cowsheds were found to lower embodied carbon by up to 10,433 kg CO 2 e per barn compared with 17,450 kg CO 2 e for conventional structures. Embodied energy for a single wooden cowshed was around 151 GJ versus more than 246 GJ for a traditional counterpart. Scaled up to the national level, this represents a 35–40% reduction in total embodied energy. In addition to environmental outcomes, the analysis considered economic, technical, and regulatory aspects influencing adoption. The results suggest that substituting conventional materials with timber can contribute to emission reductions in agricultural construction, while further research is needed on fire safety, prefabrication, and policy harmonizations.

Keywords: biomass; wood; forestry; animal buildings; energy savings; employment policy; rural region development (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q Q0 Q4 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q47 Q48 Q49 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/20/5411/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/20/5411/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jeners:v:18:y:2025:i:20:p:5411-:d:1771080

Access Statistics for this article

Energies is currently edited by Ms. Cassie Shen

More articles in Energies from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().