As sustainability becomes an increasingly important consideration in the construction industry, stakeholders are seeking transparent and reliable ways to assess the environmental impact of building materials and products. Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) have emerged as a key tool in this regard, providing standardized and scientifically-based information about the environmental performance of construction products. EPDs enable architects, builders, and consumers to make informed decisions about the materials for applications such as decking, contributing to more sustainable construction practices. This report explores the concept of EPDs, their significance in the construction industry, how they are created, and the benefits and challenges associated with their use.

Understanding Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs)

An Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) is a standardized document that provides detailed information about the environmental impact of a deck product throughout its life cycle. EPDs are based on a comprehensive Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), which evaluates the environmental impacts associated with all stages of a product’s life—from raw material extraction through production, use, and disposal.

EPDs are governed by international standards, primarily ISO 14025, which ensures that the data presented in an EPD is accurate, comparable, and reliable. The information contained in an EPD typically includes metrics such as greenhouse gas emissions (CO2 equivalents), energy use, water consumption, resource depletion, and potential impacts on ecosystems and human health.

In the construction industry, EPDs are increasingly used to evaluate materials such as decking, concrete, steel, insulation, and flooring, among others. They play a crucial role in green building certifications, such as LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) and BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method), which often require or encourage the use of deck products with verified EPDs.

The Role of EPD in the Construction Industry

1. Transparency and Accountability:
   • EPD provide a transparent and standardised way to communicate the environmental impact of construction products. This transparency allows architects, builders, and consumers to compare products on an equal footing, making it easier to choose materials that align with sustainability goals. By providing a clear picture of a product’s environmental footprint, EPD also hold manufacturers accountable for their environmental impacts, encouraging them to adopt more sustainable practices.
2. Facilitating Sustainable Design:
   • Sustainable design aims to minimize the environmental impact of buildings throughout their entire life cycle. EPD are invaluable tools in this process, as they allow designers to assess the environmental impacts of different materials and make choices that reduce the overall footprint of a building. For example, by selecting materials with lower embodied carbon (the total GHG emissions associated with the production of a decking material), designers can significantly reduce the carbon footprint of a building.
3. Supporting Green Building Certification:
   • Many green building certification systems, such as LEED and BREEAM, include credits or points for using materials with verified EPD. These certifications are important for developers and builders who want to demonstrate their commitment to sustainability and attract environmentally-conscious clients. EPD, therefore, play a key role in achieving green building certifications for decking products, enhancing the marketability and value of construction projects.
4. Driving Innovation and Improvement:
   • By making environmental performance data publicly available, EPD create a competitive environment that drives innovation in the construction industry. Manufacturers are incentivized to improve their processes, reduce resource consumption, and lower emissions to create products with better environmental profiles. This competition leads to the development of more sustainable materials and construction techniques, ultimately benefiting the entire industry.

How EPDs Are Created

The process of creating an EPD is rigorous and involves several key steps:

1. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA):
   • The first step in creating an EPD is conducting a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). An LCA evaluates the environmental impacts of a product across its entire life cycle, including raw material extraction, production, transportation, use, and disposal. The LCA is conducted according to specific rules defined by Product Category Rules (PCRs), which are tailored to the type of decking product being assessed. The LCA results provide the data that will be included in the EPD.
2. Product Category Rules (PCRs):
   • PCRs are a set of guidelines that specify how the LCA for a particular product category should be conducted. They ensure that all EPDs within the same category are consistent and comparable. PCRs are developed and maintained by industry groups, trade associations, or standardization bodies, and are based on international standards such as ISO 14040 and ISO 14044. The PCRs define what environmental impacts should be measured, the scope of the LCA, and how the results should be reported.
3. EPD Development and Verification:
   • Once the LCA is completed, the data is compiled into the EPD document. The EPD must be independently verified by a third party to ensure that it meets the requirements of the relevant standards and PCRs. This verification process is crucial for maintaining the credibility and reliability of the EPD. After verification, the EPD is published and made available to the public, often through databases or the decking manufacturer’s website.
4. Continuous Updates:
   • EPDs are not static documents; they need to be updated periodically to reflect changes in production processes, raw materials, or regulations. Regular updates ensure that the information remains accurate and relevant, allowing stakeholders to make informed decisions about their choice of deck material based on the latest data.

Benefits of EPDs

The adoption of EPDs in the construction industry offers several benefits:

1. Informed Decision-Making:
   • EPD provide architects, builders, and developers with the information they need to make informed decisions about the materials they use. By comparing the environmental impacts of different products, they can select decking materials that align with their sustainability goals, contributing to greener buildings.
2. Enhanced Marketability:
   • For manufacturers, having verified EPD can enhance the marketability of decking. EPD demonstrate a commitment to transparency and sustainability, which is increasingly important to consumers, developers, and regulators. Products with EPD are often preferred in public procurement and by environmentally-conscious clients.
3. Regulatory Compliance:
   • As governments and regulatory bodies introduce stricter environmental standards, EPD can help manufacturers demonstrate compliance with these regulations. They provide a clear, standard way to communicate a product’s environmental performance, which can be used to meet regulatory requirements or gain competitive advantages in tenders and contracts.
4. Environmental Stewardship:
   • EPD contribute to broader environmental stewardship by encouraging the construction industry to adopt more sustainable practices. By providing a clear picture of the environmental impacts of products, EPD drive improvements in manufacturing processes, reduce resource consumption, and lower emissions, contributing to the overall sustainability of the built environment.

Challenges Associated with EPDs

Despite their benefits, there are challenges associated with the creation and use of EPDs:

1. Complexity and Cost:
   • Conducting a full LCA and developing an EPD for a decking material can be complex and costly, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The process requires specialized knowledge and expertise, which can be a barrier for companies with limited resources. The cost of verification and updates also adds to the overall expense of developing an EPD.
2. Data Availability and Quality:
   • The accuracy of an EPD depends on the quality and availability of data used in the LCA. In some cases, data may be incomplete, outdated, or difficult to obtain, leading to potential inaccuracies in the EPD. Ensuring high-quality data is a significant challenge, particularly for decking materials with complex manufacturing processes.
3. Comparability Issues:
   • While EPDs are designed to be comparable, differences in PCRs, techniques, and assumptions can make it difficult to directly compare the environmental performance of products. This issue is particularly acute when comparing products from different regions or industries, where different standards or regulations may apply.
4. Limited Awareness and Use:
   • Although EPD are becoming more common in 2024, there is still limited awareness and use of them in some parts of the construction products industry. Educating stakeholders about the value of EPDs and encouraging their adoption is essential for maximizing their impact on sustainability.

Environmental Impact of Transport Modes

Transportation is a significant contributor to global greenhouse gas emissions and embodied carbon, with road transport being the largest emitter, followed by shipping, aviation, and rail. The sustainability of any transport mode can be assessed by examining factors such as fuel efficiency, carbon emissions, energy consumption, and the environmental impact of infrastructure.

1. Fuel Efficiency and Energy Consumption:
   • Shipping: Shipping is highly fuel-efficient, particularly when transporting large volumes of goods over long distances. Modern container ships can carry thousands of containers, and when energy use is measured on a per-ton-kilometre basis (the amount of energy required to move one ton of goods one kilometre), shipping is far more efficient than road transport. The large scale of operations, combined with technological advancements in ship design and propulsion, contributes to this efficiency.
   • Road Transport: In contrast, road transport, particularly trucking, is less fuel-efficient. Trucks consume more fuel per ton-kilometre compared to ships, primarily because of their smaller capacity and higher resistance on road surfaces. Even with improvements in fuel efficiency and the adoption of electric vehicles, the inherent limitations of road transport mean that it will likely never match the efficiency of shipping for long-distance freight.
2. Carbon Emissions:
   • Shipping: Although shipping contributes around 2-3% of global CO₂ emissions, it is relatively less carbon-intensive compared to road transport. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has implemented regulations to reduce emissions and is working towards reducing the carbon intensity of international shipping by at least 40% by 2030, compared to 2008 levels. Additionally, the use of alternative fuels, such as liquefied natural gas (LNG), hydrogen, and biofuels, as well as the development of more energy-efficient ship designs, are helping to lower the carbon footprint of maritime transport.
   • Road Transport: Road transport is a major source of carbon emissions, responsible for approximately 18% of global CO₂ Trucks, in particular, emit large amounts of CO₂, NO_x, and particulate matter due to their reliance on diesel engines. While there are efforts to reduce emissions through the adoption of electric trucks and stricter emissions standards, the widespread use of internal combustion engines and the fragmented nature of road transport make it difficult to achieve the same level of emission reductions as in shipping.
3. Infrastructure Impact:
   • Shipping: The environmental impact of shipping infrastructure is relatively limited compared to road transport. Ports and shipping lanes occupy a small fraction of the Earth’s surface, and once established, they have minimal ongoing environmental impact. Shipping also benefits from economies of scale, with a single large port able to handle vast quantities of goods with relatively low energy input. Furthermore, ships themselves use the existing natural infrastructure (oceans and waterways) thus requiring fewer resources to maintain compared to road networks.
   • Road Transport: Road transport, on the other hand, requires extensive infrastructure that has a significant environmental impact. The construction and maintenance of roads and highways consume vast amounts of materials, energy, and land. Additionally, the runoff from road surfaces can pollute waterways, and the noise pollution generated by heavy road traffic affects both human and animal populations.

Advantages of Shipping Over Road Transport

1. Scalability and Capacity:
   • Shipping is inherently more scalable than road transport. A single large container ship can carry as much cargo as thousands of lorries, meaning that fewer trips are needed to transport the same amount of goods. This not only reduces fuel consumption but also lowers the overall carbon footprint of transporting goods over long distances. The scalability of shipping makes it particularly advantageous for bulk commodities and large-scale manufacturing, where economies of scale are critical.
2. Lower Congestion and Infrastructure Stress:
   • Road transport is plagued by congestion, particularly in urban areas, which leads to increased fuel consumption, higher emissions, and longer delivery times. In contrast, shipping routes are generally free from congestion, allowing for more predictable and efficient movement of goods. The stress on infrastructure is also significantly lower in shipping, as ports and shipping lanes are less susceptible to wear and tear compared to roads and motorways.
3. Longer Lifespan of Infrastructure:
   • The infrastructure used in shipping, such as ports and docks, typically has a longer lifespan than roads. Ports can be in service for decades with relatively low levels of maintenance, whereas roads require frequent repairs and resurfacing, especially in regions with extreme weather conditions. The longer lifespan of shipping infrastructure reduces the need for constant resource input, making it a more sustainable option over the long term.
4. Potential for Technological Advancements:
   • The shipping industry has significantly potential for technological advancements that can further improve its sustainability. Innovations such as wind-assisted propulsion, hybrid-electric systems, and autonomous vessels could lead to even greater reductions in fuel consumption and emissions. Additionally, the development of carbon capture and storage technology on ships could mitigate the impact of CO₂ emissions, making shipping a more attractive option for companies looking to minimize their environmental footprint.
5. Environmental Regulations and Compliance:
   • The shipping industry is subject to stringent international regulations aimed at reducing its environmental impact. The IMO has introduced several measures to limit emissions, reduce pollution, and improve the energy efficiency of ships. These regulations are globally enforced, ensuring that shipping companies adhere to high environmental standards. In contrast, road transport regulations can vary significantly between countries and regions, leading to inconsistent environmental outcomes.

Challenges and Considerations

While shipping is generally more sustainable than road transport, it is not without its challenges. The industry must address several key issues to enhance its sustainability:

1. Transition to Low-Carbon Fuels:
   • Although shipping is more fuel-efficient, the transition to low-carbon and zero-carbon fuels is crucial for reducing its environmental impact. The adoption of alternative fuels, such as LNG, hydrogen, and biofuels, is still in its early stages, and significant investment is needed to develop the necessary infrastructure and technologies.
2. Reduction of Marine Pollution:
   • Shipping contributes to marine pollution through ballast water discharge, oil spills, and the release of plastic waste. To improve its sustainability, the industry must adopt better waste management practices, enhance spill response capabilities, and implement stricter regulations on ballast water treatment.
3. Port Emissions and Operations:
   • While ports are more sustainable than road infrastructure, they still contribute to local air pollution and environmental degradation and renewable energy sources and energy-efficient equipment would further minimise their environmental impact.

Conclusion

1. Wood Decking

• Sourcing and Environmental Impact: Wood, especially tropical hardwoods, can lead to significant environmental damage if not sourced sustainably, such as deforestation and loss of biodiversity. Certified wood, like that from the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), is recommended for sustainability.
• Carbon Sequestration: Wood sequesters carbon, reducing its carbon footprint, but the energy used in processing and transporting wood can negate some benefits.
• Durability and Maintenance: Hardwoods are durable but environmentally costly if unsustainably sourced. Softwoods are less durable but more eco-friendly when sustainably managed.
• End of Life: Wood is biodegradable but treated wood can pose environmental hazards if not disposed of properly.
• Fire Safety: Wooden decking is not suitable for apartments because the material is combustible.

2. Composite Decking

• Composition and Sourcing: Made from a mix of recycled plastic and wood fibres, composite decking reduces raw material extraction impact.
• Durability: Lasting longer with minimal maintenance, which can reduce overall environmental impact.
• Embodied Energy: Composite decking has higher embodied energy due to plastic production, but its long lifespan may offset this.
• End of Life: Recycling composite decking is challenging due to the difficulty of separating its materials, often leading to landfill disposal.
• Fire Safety: Composites containing plastic are not suitable for apartments because the material is combustible.

3. Plastic Decking

• Environmental Impact: Virgin plastic decking has a high environmental cost due to fossil fuel extraction, but recycled plastic options mitigate this.
• Durability and Aesthetics: Extremely durable but lacks the natural appeal of wood.
• Embodied Energy: High due to energy-intensive production processes. Recyclability is limited, leading to potential landfill disposal.
• Fire Safety: Plastic decking types are not suitable for apartments because the material is combustible.

4. Aluminium Decking

• Production Impact: Energy-intensive due to the mining and processing of bauxite. The extrusion process also consumes significant energy.
• Durability: Highly durable and resistant to rust and rot if treated properly.
• Recyclability: Aluminium can be recycled indefinitely, making it a more sustainable option over its lifecycle.
• Fire Safety: Aluminium decking can be suitable for apartments because the material is inherently resistant to fire.

5. Blazeboard Mineral Composite Decking

• Environmental Impact: Uses natural materials with low-energy production processes, making it environmentally friendly.
• Durability: Extremely durable, potentially outlasting other decking materials.
• Recyclability: Highly recyclable and can be repurposed, contributing to sustainability.
• Fire Safety: Blazeboard Mineral Composite decking is suitable for apartments because the material is inherently resistant to fire.

6. Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs)

• Role in Sustainability: EPDs provide standardized, transparent information about the environmental impact of building materials, aiding in sustainable design and green building certifications.
• Challenges: Creating EPDs can be complex and costly, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises.

7. Transportation Impact

• Comparison of Modes: Shipping is more fuel-efficient and has a lower carbon footprint than road transport, making it a more sustainable option for long-distance freight.
• Challenges: Road transport can be much more convenient for shorter trips and the final delivery will inevitably be by road.

In summary, each decking material has its sustainability trade-offs, with factors such as sourcing, durability, embodied energy, and end-of-life recyclability playing crucial roles in their overall environmental impact. The document highlights the importance of considering both the immediate and long-term sustainability of decking materials when making construction decisions.

Introduction

As environmental awareness increases, the sustainability of decking materials has come under scrutiny. Selecting a decking material involves considering factors such as durability, maintenance, cost, and importantly, environmental impact. In 2024 the sustainability information about construction materials continues to develop so that it can be considered in material selection.  This report delves into the sustainability of various decking materials, examining their environmental footprints, life cycle impacts, and the trade-offs associated with each option. The materials discussed include traditional wood, plastic composite decking, aluminium and Blazeboard mineral composite non-combustible decking.

Wooden Decking: The Traditional Choice

Wood has been the material of choice for decking for centuries, valued for its natural beauty, ease of use, and availability. However, the sustainability of wood decking depends largely on the species of wood used, the sourcing practices, the treatment methods and how long it lasts.

1. Environmental Impact of Harvesting:
   • The sustainability of wood decking begins with the source. Woods like tropical hardwoods such as balaua and teak are commonly used for decking. The environmental impact of these woods varies significantly. For instance, tropical hardwoods can often come from rainforests, where logging leads to deforestation, loss of biodiversity, and disruption of natural ecosystems. To mitigate these impacts, it is crucial to choose a source wood that is certified by organisations such as the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), which ensures that the wood is sourced from responsibly managed forests.
   • On the other hand, softwoods like pine and fir, when sourced from sustainably managed forests, can be a more eco conscious option due to faster growth rates and lower environmental impacts associated with their harvest. However these softwoods don’t last as long, and need to be replaced sooner, so in the long term can be less sustainable.  See our Blog article on the lifespan of timber decking.
2. Carbon Sequestration and Embodied Energy:
   • One of the significant environmental benefits of wood is its ability to capture carbon. As trees grow, they absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, storing it in their wood. When used as a building material, this carbon remains stored, reducing the overall carbon footprint of the material. However, the processing and transportation of wood do involve energy use, known as embodied energy, which varies depending on the distance the wood is transported and the energy efficiency of the transportation and processing methods.

3. Durability and Maintenance:
   • The durability of wood decking is another critical factor in its sustainability. Hardwoods like teak are incredibly durable and resistant to rot and insects, often lasting 25 years or more if cared for correctly. However, these benefits come with a high environmental cost if the wood is not sourced sustainably. Softwoods, while less durable, can be treated to extend their lifespan, but this often involves the use of chemical preservatives, which can have environmental and health implications. The maintenance of timber decking can involve specialist treatments, which are not always safe for non-specialists to use.
4. End of Life:
   • At the end of its life, wood decking is biodegradable and can be recycled or repurposed. However, treated wood, especially that treated with chemicals like arsenic or copper, poses environmental hazards and must be disposed of carefully to avoid soil and water contamination.

Composite Decking: A Mix of Materials

Composite decking, can be made from a blend of wood fibres and plastic, has gained popularity as a low-maintenance alternative to wood decking. This material is often marketed as a sustainable option due to its durability and the use of recycled materials.

1. Material Composition and Sourcing:
   • Plastic Composite decking typically contains a mix of recycled plastic (such as polyethylene or polypropylene) and wood fibres or sawdust. The use of recycled plastic helps reduce waste and the demand for virgin plastic, while the wood fibres often come from industrial waste products. This combination can reduce the environmental impact associated with raw material extraction and processing.
2. Durability and Maintenance:
   • One of the primary sustainability advantages of plastic composite decking is its durability. It resists rot, mould, and insect damage better than natural wood. Unlike wood, composite decking does not require painting, staining, or sealing, which reduces the use of chemicals and the associated environmental impact over its lifetime. However plastic decking can warp in warmer weather which can cause the walking surface to be not flat.
3. Embodied Energy and Carbon Footprint:
   • Despite its benefits, composite decking has a higher embodied energy than natural wood due to the energy-intensive processes required to produce plastic and combine it with wood fibres. However, requires less maintenance, the overall carbon footprint may be lower over the lifespan of the decking.
4. End of Life and Recyclability:
   • The end-of-life scenario for composite decking is more complicated than for wood. While some plastic composite decking manufacturers have recycling programs, the material is not as easily recyclable as pure wood or plastic. The combination of materials makes it challenging to separate and recycle, potentially leading to disposal in landfills.

Plastic Decking: Pure Durability with Environmental Costs

Plastic decking, made entirely from either virgin or recycled plastic, offers another low-maintenance alternative to wood decking. This type of decking is particularly popular in areas with damp conditions.

1. Environmental Impact of Raw Materials:
   • The environmental sustainability of plastic decking depends heavily on whether it is made from virgin or recycled plastic. Virgin plastic decking has a high environmental cost due to the extraction and processing of fossil fuels required to produce plastic. Recycled plastic decking, meanwhile, offers a more sustainable option by diverting plastic waste from landfills and reducing the demand for new plastic production.
   • The cutting of plastic decking can release microplastics into the environment, so it is important to consider where these cutting operations are carried out and make sure that swarf is collected and not released close to waterways and natural habitats.
2. Durability and Maintenance:
   • Plastic decking is highly durable against rot, splintering, and insect damage, and requires very little maintenance, which can contribute to its overall sustainability. However, its aesthetic appeal can be limited, as it often lacks the natural look and feel of wood or composite decking.
3. Embodied Energy and Carbon Footprint:
   • The production of plastic decking involves significant energy use, especially when made from virgin plastic. The carbon footprint of plastic decking is generally higher than that of wood or composite decking, primarily due to the fossil fuel-based nature of plastic. However, the use of recycled plastic can mitigate this impact, making it a more sustainable choice.
4. Recyclability and Disposal:
   • At the end of its life, plastic decking is theoretically recyclable, but the infrastructure for recycling large plastic products is limited. This often leads to plastic decking being disposed of in landfills, where it will persist for centuries. The challenge of recycling large plastic products remains a significant drawback to the sustainability of plastic decking.
5. Fire Safety:
   • Fire Risk makes plastic composites and virgin plastics unsuitable for apartments because the material can be easily ignited by discarded cigarettes etc, which can lead to rapid fire grown by flames up the building, as well as flaming droplets which can spread fire to the areas below simultaneously. Fire risk is assessed using the process described in our Blog article What is a Fire Risk Appraisal of External Walls (FRAEW)? – Blazeboard.  There are no treatments or coatings which can make a plastic composite or wood meet the requirements defined by EN13501-1 to make these materials suitable for high-rise residential construction.

Aluminium Decking

Environmental Impact of Production:

1. The production of aluminium is energy-intensive, with significant environmental impacts associated with mining bauxite, the raw material for aluminium, and the smelting process.
2. Energy use in the extrusion process can be broadly categorized into thermal energy (used for heating the billets) and mechanical energy (used for extrusion, stretching, and cutting).

Thermal Energy: Heating the aluminium billets accounts for a significant portion of the total energy consumption in the extrusion process.

Mechanical Energy: The hydraulic press used in the extrusion process for decking consumes a considerable amount of mechanical energy. The energy required for extrusion depends on the size of the press, the extrusion pressure, and the speed of extrusion. Higher pressures and faster extrusion speeds generally require more energy. Moreover, energy is also required for auxiliary equipment, such as pumps, compressors, and cooling systems, which support the extrusion process.

Cooling Energy: The cooling of extruded profiles can be energy-intensive, especially if water or air cooling systems are employed.

Finishing Processes: While finishing processes such as cutting, anodizing, and painting to give an attractive colour to the deck boards, can also consume usually gas and as such contribute to the overall energy use. The energy consumption for these processes depends on the specific finishing techniques employed and the quality requirements of the final product.

Durability and Maintenance:

• Aluminium decking is can durable if treated properly to make it resistant to rust, rot, and insect damage.

Recyclability and End of Life:

• Unlike wood, composite, or plastic decking, aluminium can be recycled indefinitely.

Blazeboard Mineral Composite Decking

Environmental Impact of Production:

1. The production of mineral composite uses mostly naturally occurring materials, combined with cement and re-enforcing fibres.
2. The production process occurs at a low temperature and so relatively small amounts of energy are used.
3. The production is a closed loop cycle where any offcuts produced during the process are re-cycled into the process.

Cooling Process: Since the production process is relatively low temperature, the materials cool naturally in air with no energy being consumed.

Finishing process: The finishing process is carried out by hand, with some power tools, and so the process utilises relatively small amounts of electricity.

Durability and Maintenance: Blazeboard mineral composite decking is extremely durable and will outlast timber or plastic composites.  This makes for a highly sustainable option.

Recyclability at end of life:  Re-use is always more sustainable than recycling.  Using a durable product means that it can be re-purposed if the building is demolished.  Blazeboard non-combustible mineral composite can be ground down and re-used in the production of new decking or in a range of end uses

Ultimately, the choice of decking material should consider both the immediate environmental impacts and the long-term sustainability over the life cycle of the product. By selecting materials that are responsibly sourced, durable, and recyclable, and by considering the specific environmental conditions and requirements of the project, homeowners and builders can contribute to more sustainable construction practices.

The Lifespan of Timber Decking and the Benefits of Non-Combustible Decking in the UK

Decking is a popular feature in UK balconies, terraces gardens and outdoor spaces, enhancing aesthetic appeal, functionality, and property value. Traditionally, timber has been the material of choice for decking due to its natural appearance and versatility. However, the lifespan of timber decking, alongside its susceptibility to fire, has prompted an increasing shift towards non-combustible alternative decking materials for balconies and terraces especially. This analysis will explore the lifespan of timber decking, the challenges associated with it, and the benefits of opting for non-combustible decking solutions, particularly in the context of the UK’s climate and regulatory environment.

Lifespan of Timber Decking

The lifespan of timber decking is influenced by a variety of factors, including the type of wood, maintenance practices, environmental conditions, and the quality of installation.

Types of Timber and Their Durability

Softwood Decking: Commonly made from pine, spruce, or fir, softwood decking is widely used due to its affordability. However, it is less durable compared to hardwoods. Typically, treated softwood decking has a lifespan of around 10 to 15 years if properly maintained. The treatment process involves infusing the wood with preservatives to protect it from rot and insect damage, but this does not make it immune to weathering and decay.

Hardwood Decking: Hardwood varieties such as oak, teak, and iroko are denser and more resistant to wear and tear. Hardwood decking can last anywhere from 25 to 50 years, depending on the species and the care it receives. However, the higher cost, specialist maintenance requirements and sustainability concerns associated with some hardwoods can be deterrents for many homeowners.

Environmental Factors:  The UK’s temperate maritime climate, poses specific challenges for timber decking. Prolonged exposure to moisture can lead to issues like rot, warping, and splitting, significantly reducing the lifespan of timber decking. In areas with high rainfall or near coastal regions, the lifespan of timber decking can be further compromised by increased humidity and salt content in the air.

Maintenance Requirements:  Regular maintenance is critical for prolonging the life of timber decking. This includes cleaning, sealing, and treating the wood to protect it from moisture, UV rays, and fungal growth. However, even with diligent maintenance, the natural aging process of wood will eventually lead to degradation. Maintenance can also be costly and time-consuming, making timber decking less appealing for those seeking low-maintenance solutions.

Installation Quality:  Proper installation plays a vital role in the longevity of timber decking. Poor installation practices, such as inadequate spacing between boards, improper support framework preparation, or substandard fasteners, can accelerate wear and tear.  Ensuring proper drainage and ventilation beneath the decking is also crucial to prevent moisture accumulation and rot.  For example, at the edge of a balcony closest to the building, it can be comment for timber decking substrate to be trapped against an area which does not drain well, this can cause accelerated degradation of the decking and/or support framework.   Covering the timber deck with carpet or artificial grass can slow the drying process after rainfall, which reduces the lifespan of any timber decking.  These coverings can also be flammable and create a threat from discarded smoking materials. 

Challenges of Timber Decking in the UK

While timber decking offers aesthetic appeal and a natural feel, it comes with several challenges that can limit its lifespan and functionality.

Susceptibility to Fire: One of the most significant risks associated with timber decking is its flammability. In the UK, where building regulations are increasingly focused on fire safety, particularly in light of recent disasters like the Grenfell Tower fire, the use of combustible materials such as timber in construction is under scrutiny. Timber decking, especially when dry, can be a fire hazard, raising concerns for both residential and commercial properties.  This risk can be exacerbated by flammable materials being allowed to accumulate on the deck, such as dead leaves, coverings such as artificial grass and stored possessions. 

Environmental Impact: The environmental impact of timber decking is another concern. The demand for hardwoods, often sourced from tropical forests, contributes to deforestation and biodiversity loss. While softwoods are more sustainable, their shorter lifespan means they need to be replaced more frequently, potentially offsetting the environmental benefits.  There are schemes which aim to provide confidence that

Cost Implications: The initial cost of timber decking can be lower than that of some non-combustible alternatives, but the long-term costs associated with maintenance, repairs, and eventual replacement can add up. In areas where fire regulations mandate the use of non-combustible materials, timber decking will not be an option. 

Benefits of Non-Combustible Decking

In response to the limitations of timber, non-combustible decking materials such as composite, aluminium, and steel have gained popularity. These materials offer several benefits, particularly in terms of safety, durability, and sustainability.  We talk in more detail about aluminium decking in our Blog article Aluminium Decking Explained – Blazeboard.

Fire Safety: Non-combustible decking materials are inherently resistant to fire, making them a safer choice for properties in the UK. These materials meet the stringent fire safety regulations that have been introduced in recent years, particularly for new builds and renovations.  The required standard for high-rise buildings and other higher risk buildings is A1 or A2-s1,d0 to EN 13501-1.  There is no treatment for timber or plastic which will enable these materials to meet this standard.  The process for determining the need for non-combustible materials to be retrofitted is known as a Fire Risk Assessment (External Wall) or FRAEW.  We talk in more detail about the FRAEW process in What is a Fire Risk Appraisal of External Walls (FRAEW)? – Blazeboard.  . By choosing non-combustible decking, homeowners can reduce the risk of fire spreading to or from their property, providing peace of mind and potentially lowering insurance premiums.

Longevity and Durability:- Non-combustible decking materials generally offer superior longevity compared to timber. Plastic Composite decking, which is made from a mixture of wood fibres and recycled plastics, can last 25-30 years with minimal maintenance, but it is also very flammable.  Some treatments to the plastic can reduce its flammability, but no treatment can get any type of plastic composite decking to meet the non-combustible standard. Aluminum and steel decking can meet the non-combustible standards, only if the correct coatings are used.  They also need treatment to be resistant to corrosion.  Blazeboard decking is a special mineral composite which doesn’t require any treatment and meets the highest standard of non-combustibility, meaning that Blazeboard decking is suitable for use on all buildings.   If properly maintained these types of non-combustible decking materials can last potentially 50 years or more.  Blazeboard decking will not warp, rot, or split, and is resistant to insect damage and moisture, making it ideal for the UK’s challenging climate.

Low Maintenance: One of the most appealing aspects of non-combustible decking is its low maintenance requirements. Unlike timber, these materials do not need regular sealing, staining, or treating. Cleaning is typically straightforward, involving nothing more than occasional washing to remove dirt and debris. This not only saves time but also reduces the ongoing costs associated with maintaining a deck.

Environmental Benefits: Many non-combustible decking options, particularly composites, are made from recycled materials, contributing to sustainability. Additionally, the long lifespan of these materials means they do not need to be replaced as frequently as timber, reducing the demand for raw materials and the environmental footprint of decking projects. Some non-combustible materials are also fully recyclable at the end of their life, further enhancing their environmental credentials.  If you want the most sustainable option, look for an Environmental Product Declaration or EPD. 

Aesthetic and Design Flexibility: Modern non-combustible decking materials are available in a wide range of colours, textures, and finishes, allowing homeowners to achieve the desired aesthetic without compromising on fire safety or durability. Some composite decking products are designed based on a mould taken from natural wood, which can give an appealing visual aesthetic of timber without the associated drawbacks. Additionally, the flexibility in design offered by non-combustible materials means they can be used in various architectural styles, from traditional to contemporary.

Conclusion:  While timber decking has been a longstanding choice for UK homeowners, its limitations in terms of lifespan, maintenance, and fire safety are leading many to consider non-combustible alternatives. The benefits of non-combustible decking, particularly in terms of fire resistance, durability, low maintenance, and environmental impact, make it an increasingly attractive option. As building regulations continue to evolve, and as homeowners seek long-term value and safety, the trend towards non-combustible decking materials is likely to grow. In the context of the UK’s unique environmental and regulatory landscape, investing in non-combustible decking offers a practical and forward-thinking solution that aligns with modern standards and expectations.

Following the tragic events of Grenfell, Dame Judith Hackitt chaired the Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety.  During the review it was found that, it was common for an Architect to write a specification that would describe the performance and aesthetics desired, and so may call for example: “non-combustible decking, to approved sample, Blazeboard or similar”.  Blazeboard is not available in non-combustible specification, so the balcony specialist contractor may have proposed samples of Blazeboard which achieves the desired aesthetic appearance or a range of Aluminium decking, such as Alideck or Mydek which achieves the performance requirement.  The balcony specialist contractor would then usually provide datasheets for all of these at the time.  The Architect and employer would then choose one of these samples.  But when the specification and drawings were rarely updated to the final agreed products before being handed over to the Accountable Person at the end, and so it wasn’t always clear (in this example) what kind of non-combustible decking the balconies actually ended up with.  Furthermore, the information about the pedestals and support structure could be completely missing too.  So if future refurbishment work is needed, often expensive investigation works were needed to establish what was actually installed.  Dame Judith noted that this type of occurrence was common and so changes had to be made.  

One of the key recommendations made by Dame Judith was to establish a Golden Thread of key information needed to manage a building safely.  The Golden Thread is a single master set of information from the design intent, development and any subsequent changes and preserved and used to support ongoing management and any safety improvements needed in the future of the building.  The concept of the Golden Thread has now been put into law in the Building Safety Act 2022.  There will be some secondary legislation which provides more details about what exactly is required.  The timeline of this is not fully clear but it is expected that the secondary legislation will be released around April 2023, and by April 2024 (via the Gateway System), building projects can be stopped if it is not in place, and Accountable Persons will be accountable in the case of existing buildings. 

What does the Golden Thread actually look like?

There has been no prescriptive guidance on what this key information required for the Golden Thread entails, but there is some functional guidance and consensus that it should contain the details about what materials are used in the construction of the building façade, the combustibility performance of these materials and also the performance of the materials and systems which have fire performing functions (such as fire doors and sprinklers).  Operationally the Golden Thread will take the form of an electronic register of materials, with accompanying drawings and technical details which cross reference.  The Golden Thread needs to be created before construction work starts and it is the responsibility of whoever commissions the building to create it, and so will likely be created initially and maintained by the Architect or Developers.  At the end of construction it must be handed over and managed by the Accountable Person (or the Responsible Person on their behalf) during operation of the building.  It then falls to the Accountable Person to make sure that it is kept up to date, and available when needed.  The Golden Thread will also form part of the Building Safety Case. 

For existing buildings, the Golden Thread will be the responsibility of the Accountable Person to compile.  This could present a significant challenge for some building owners who have older buildings where the information is poor.  However, as a result of the recent EWS1 process or PAS 9980, the majority of this information should be available. Under the requirements of Regulation 38 and Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, strictly speaking this information should have been in their possession anyway, its just that many building owners simply don’t have it.  It is hoped that the renewed regime of the Golden Thread will mean that this information is compiled into a structured format that will stand the test of time.    

The Building Safety Bill has now become the Building Safety Act from today. This Building Safety Act, compliments the Fire Safety Act, paving the way for update fire safety regulations.

This is the culmination of months of debate in parliament. Balconies on high-rise buildings were a topical subject of the debate in the house of Lords during the passing of the bill. Aluminium decking on high-rise balconies near the coast was raised by the representatives of a project in Dorset, where Blazeboard is installed. Blazeboard has weathered the salty air but the building has problems with EWS1. Developers have proposed aluminium decking to be installed to the balconies of this building. Baroness Fox-Buckley stated that, “We are all familiar with the #claddingscandal, but I want to avoid a scandal, or at least an injustice, emerging that is not to do with cladding”. The Baroness expressed concerns about corrosion of metals in salty environments, and suggested that replacement of the existing decking with the proposed aluminium decking may cause a future corrosion problem.

How does the Building Safety Act (and Fire Safety Act) affect leaseholders with combustible balconies? The Acts allow leaseholders to retrospectively sue their developer for unsafe materials such as cladding and decking, going back up to 30 years.

Registration of high-rise buildings will start in April 2023, requiring a Responsible Person to provide a Building Safety Case for their building.

New fire safety regulations will now stem from the Building Safety Act. The release of updated regulations is expected to be over the next 18 months.