Many thanks for yet another concise and informative article on a subject around decarbonisation.

When I grew up in Austria in the 1970ies, the smell of fresh concrete was a sign of progress in the momentum of the post-war economic boom. All domestic construction used and still uses a lot of concrete, for foundations, walls, ceilings and everywhere possible in large quantities: buildings looking like bunkers to last for 1000 years. However, in Austria, every generation likes to build its own houses; so lots of them are demolished again after one or two generations when they start to look tacky. That attitude needs to change, in Austria and everywhere else.

Move over to the UK where much more wood is used in private houses, albeit often with inferior build quality, intended for one or two generations, but lasting for hundreds of years. There is something to be learned from this approach. Perhaps in an improved form, as you say Michael, engineered timber could be an excellent building material for both countries and beyond, learning from Scandinavian countries. The limits in terms of the numbers of floors is being pushed, too, like the 24-storey tower in Vienna: https://lightwood.org/worlds-tallest-timber-building-hoho-tower-in-vienna/

As for the remaining need for concrete; alternatives to Portland cement are being developed, e.g. clinker not based on limestone but industrial slag, https://www.istructe.org/resources/guidance/beyond-portland-cement-low-carbon-alternatives/.