With Climate Events on the Rise, Material Selection is Critical for Long-term Resilience

When Hurricane Helene made landfall on September 26, it began a 500-mile path of destruction that wreaked havoc on homes, businesses, and infrastructure. Experts estimate flood and wind losses from Helene to be as high as $47.5 billion. 

As the climate gets warmer, hurricanes are likely to grow in intensity. Researchers suggest that the most damaging US hurricanes are three times more frequent than 100 years ago, and the number of major hurricanes, classified as Category 3 or higher, in the Atlantic Ocean has doubled since 1980. 

Wildfires are also growing in number, costing the U.S. between $394 to $893 billion each year in economic costs and damages, the equivalent of 2-4 percent of GDP.

As these extreme climate events continue to grow in number and size, owners are turning to architects, engineers, and construction professionals to deliver more resilient buildings without higher costs. 

Can Cold-formed Steel Outperform Wood Framing? 

Sustainability and resilience are critical factors in building design and construction. While sustainable construction aims to reduce environmental impact by using eco-friendly materials, minimizing waste, and promoting energy efficiency, resilience focuses on a building’s ability to withstand natural disasters without significant damage. Both work together to create long-lasting and environmentally responsible structures.

Building for resilience and sustainability begins with material selection. When it comes to framing, the choice often comes down to steel or timber. While there are benefits to cold-formed steel (CFS) and timber framing, it’s essential for owners, developers and AEC professionals to consider how they compare on everything from resilience and sustainability to insurance and total cost of ownership. 

Resilience: During a flood, wood can suffer from water damage and structural weakness. Cold-formed steel is capable of withstanding significant forces without deforming. A high strength-to-weight ratio means that CFS structures can endure the dynamic pressures exerted by floodwaters better than traditional materials. Unlike wood, steel does not warp, crack, or rot when exposed to water, ensuring the structural integrity of buildings even after a flood. 

A significant post-flooding issue with traditional materials, such as wood, is the widespread growth of mold and mildew, which can pose serious health risks. Steel is resistant to mold growth. Eliminating this risk reduces potential health hazards and lowers maintenance costs over the building’s lifespan. 

CFS Steel framing is non-combustible. Unlike wood, steel does not ignite or contribute to the spread of flames, which offers critical time for occupants to evacuate in the event of a fire. Steel can withstand high temperatures, reducing the amount of combustible material in a building. Fire-resistant coatings can be applied to steel to delay structural damage, further enhancing safety and potentially lowering insurance premiums. Steel framing also maintains its fire-resistant properties over time.

Sustainability: The construction industry accounts for 36 percent of global energy consumption and 40 percent of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. As the world becomes more focused on sustainability and green standards, construction materials significantly impact the environment. For years, timber has been viewed as the go-to method for construction, seen by many as a natural and renewable material. However, when considering materials, it’s essential also to consider waste. Recent research released by the World Resources Institute found that using wood in construction will likely increase emissions for decades, even relative to using steel. 

The accurate and precise design and manufacturing of CFS minimizes waste, reducing the environmental impact of waste going to landfills. In some cases, waste from frame and truss manufacture and fabrication is less than one percent. 

Steel is the most recycled material on Earth and can be recycled repeatedly without losing strength or properties. Because it is 100 percent recyclable, using steel reduces the overall environmental impact of any waste created. Steel framing scrap is a valuable commodity. The recycling rate of the steel industry is 66 percent, the highest of any industry in the world. 

With traditional methods, it is common for builders to factor 20 percent of material waste into the total cost of a project. Across projects, material waste can equal as much as one out of every five buildings constructed. CFS produces less waste, uses fewer scarce resources in construction and delivers more energy efficiency than traditional methods.

The durability of steel-framed structures translates to fewer replacements and repairs over a building’s lifecycle, reducing waste and resource consumption. 

Comparing Costs

Often, material selection comes down to cost, so how does CFS stack up to wood? A recent study by R. A. Smith titled “Costs to Build with Cold-Formed Steel Versus a Wood-Framed Building” aimed to find out. The study compared two identical 49,900 SF mixed-use, multi-family residential buildings—one framed using CFS and one with wood framing. It found the overall cost variance of CFS and wood framing to be less than 1 percent when including the cost of construction insurance. 

The report highlights how mid-rise wood-framed buildings may not be insurable or, in some cases, require a contractor to purchase multiple policies. Builder’s risk insurance, which covers buildings under construction and protects against various risks, including fire, wind, theft, and vandalism, is influenced by several factors, including the materials used in the construction process. 

The non-combustible nature of steel significantly lowers the risk of fire-related incidents, a primary concern for insurance providers. By opting for steel framing, developers and builders can benefit from substantially lower builder’s risk insurance premiums. Steel-framed products can lower premiums by as much as 25 to 75 percent.  These savings can be considerable, especially for large-scale projects, where insurance costs constitute a significant portion of the budget. 

The durability of CFS framing leads to fewer claims related to damage from pests, rot and structural failures. This reduction in claims lowers immediate insurance costs and contributes to lower long-term maintenance expenses. Over time, the cumulative savings from reduced insurance premiums and maintenance costs can make a substantial difference in the overall financial health of a construction project. 

Using steel framing can also help meet stringent building codes and safety regulations, which can further reduce insurance costs. Insurers perceive buildings that adhere to higher safety standards as lower risk. 

On the path to accurately determining cost, owners, developers and contractors need to consider the total cost of ownership, potential for repairs and maintenance, risk of loss from fire or climate events and cost of insurance premiums. All of these factors contribute to a building’s overall cost. 

Rethinking Material Selection for Resilience 

In a world where wildfires and extreme climate events are rising, the choice of framing material is crucial for determining a structure’s durability, safety and long-term viability. While wood has been a traditional choice for centuries, steel framing is increasingly considered a superior option for modern construction projects. 

The durability, strength, durability, insurability, and resilience to natural disasters of steel make it an investment in structures that will stand the test of time. Transitioning to steel framing is not merely an upgrade in material choice; it’s a commitment to constructing stronger, safer, and more sustainable buildings.