The use of timber in construction in Latvia is being hampered by deep-seated historical stereotypes, regulatory acts, and a lack of state incentives for making fuller use of the resources within our own country
This picture emerges from a discussion hosted by the magazine “Dienas Bizness” and the Latvian forestry and related industries portal zemeunvalsts.lv regarding the use of wood in construction in Latvia and abroad. While Latvia does have public buildings, manufacturing facilities, warehouses, and infrastructure structures built from wood, there are relatively few of them; the situation is better when it comes to private houses.
We produce, but others use it
“Latvia produces wooden houses, but for the most part, they are sold abroad, practically all over the world; it would be difficult to imagine a place where there are no houses manufactured in Latvia,” explains Kristaps Ceplis, Executive Director of the association Zaļās mājas. Latvia has companies capable of manufacturing and has the resources (timber) to produce, but the finished products end up abroad.
“There are no motivating tools in Latvia for building wooden structures, and historical stereotypes regarding fire safety in wooden buildings still have a major influence. For example, the belief that ‘wood rots, warps, and burns’, and that if we use concrete and minerals, all problems will be solved, without delving into the side effects that can occur in all types of structures,” explains Krists Slokenbergs, head of a timber construction company. He points out that there is not a single instrument from either the state or municipalities that incentivises the construction of buildings from wood.
“The good news is that the number of timber structures in Latvia is nevertheless growing, as the myths about wood were much more influential ten years ago; at the same time, this rate of growth is too slow,” says K. Slokenbergs. He acknowledges that forestry organisations related to timber are trying to popularise wooden construction, but these efforts are fragmented. Moreover, it is easy to conjure up an image of modern construction where everything is glass and concrete, and although there are many good examples – the regional offices of “Latvijas valsts meži”, the Ogre library, etc. – people do not see them and are unaware of them. “Representation in timber construction is very fragmented,” concludes K. Slokenbergs. In his view, the rapid rise in timber prices is not the factor that has had the greatest impact on construction costs.
“The biggest influencer of construction prices is labour costs, which make up the largest proportion,” explains K. Slokenbergs. He emphasises that wood is the most grateful material, allowing for prefabrication at a much higher level to specifically reduce labour costs, and it still holds great untapped potential.
Fire safety
“Today, no one doubts the quality of wood. Wood is recognised as a very good material from which to build structures,” says Edvīns Grants, a researcher at the Institute of Forest and Wood Products Research and Development at the Latvia University of Life Sciences and Technologies, Faculty of Environment and Civil Engineering, and a fire safety consultant. He admits that there are several deep-seated stereotypes regarding fire safety. “Our country has many buildings that, from the very beginning, do not comply with fire safety requirements. Fire safety standards are evolving and becoming much more complex, which in turn requires greater investment, but people do not have the money to bring their homes into compliance with these requirements; therefore, there is a special section for housing that has no fire safety requirements, and wooden materials are included in this group.
As a result, when talking about wooden buildings, from a regulatory perspective we are automatically talking about unsafe buildings,” points out E. Grants. In his opinion, the section regarding safety levels in fire safety should be revised. “Timber construction solutions need to be grouped so that it is known which safety level each one falls into. Very high-quality solutions with a very high level of fire safety are possible, they just need to be included at this level,” explains E. Grants. In parallel, a catalogue of solutions must be developed that allows all people to familiarise themselves with what must be done in the construction process to achieve the required level of safety. “Then the problem would be solved, but it is a long process,” E. Grants believes. He has experience with the manufacturing, design, and construction of houses in European countries, and in standardising products in all the Baltic states where wooden houses are produced for export.
“It turns out that every country has its own conditions, they differ, and foreign clients, when ordering a wooden building from manufacturers in Latvia, define exactly what they want and how. And what a client demands for their market does not necessarily mean it will be correct or appropriate for us here in Latvia,” says E. Grants. In his opinion, if Latvia does not have its own criteria, one cannot claim that a building intended for Sweden will perform just as well as it does in Sweden. “That is to say, in Latvia, it would not be necessary to use such massive timber structures as in Sweden, where snow loads are slightly different than in Latvia, and moisture conditions are also different; therefore, one should think about moisture protection for the building.
The climate in the Nordic countries is drier than in Latvia,” points out E. Grants. He recalls that when standards had to be written and target markets defined for manufacturers, it was a serious problem for all Baltic manufacturers, as they were trying to create a universal solution that did not truly fit everyone. “Yes, with a few nuances, a building kit can be created that can be supplied to Norwegian and Swedish clients,” answers E. Grants when asked if the differences between countries are that great. He adds that exactly the same applies to fire safety.
Lack of state will
K. Ceplis points out that Latvia has excellent examples of timber construction both in the private house segment and in the public sector – the library in Ogre, sports facilities in Jelgava, the industrial buildings of a/s “Latvijas Finieris”, which are used as production facilities and warehouses – but it lacks the state will and vision. “If there were, then the situation would be different, because Latvia has the resources – forests (which cover more than 50% of the entire territory of Latvia), where timber can be obtained, and there are also many timber construction manufacturers who produce and sell their products abroad,” says K. Ceplis. He acknowledges that the EU Green Deal is an inevitability, it is just a question of what exactly it will entail.
“This is where the paradoxical situation arises: on one hand, the Green Deal demands that wood be treated as a renewable resource, and we focus on that, but on the other hand, Europe wants to preserve natural wilderness and not cut down trees. I hope that the Nordic countries, including Latvia and Estonia, will succeed in proving that in the 21st century there are technologies and also needs, and there are many spheres that wood as a resource can provide for, while also impacting the environment significantly less than other materials,” says K. Ceplis. He hopes for common sense, that those living in Portugal will understand the Europeans living in the North.
The question of resources
K. Slokenbergs points out that when comparing the timber construction potential of Latvia with our northern neighbour, one must conclude that Estonia is (again) ahead of us. “The strict norms that the European Union is trying to introduce, the Estonians tried to introduce themselves, and that changed the reaction of market players. Good practice would be to balance available resources, because Latvia has sufficient timber resources, but as soon as market instability begins, the bulk (of timber materials) is exported and timber materials start to run out on the local market,” explains K. Slokenbergs. He recalls that in March and April of this year, there was a feeling that: wood had run out in Latvia... Now the situation has stabilised.
“We also have to throw a stone into our own garden, because overall the wooden house manufacturing industry does not consume that much wood, but in ‘good times’ the industry relied too much on materials from Belarus and Russia, which are no longer available,” adds K. Ceplis. He believes that such a problem would not have faced wooden house manufacturers if, in the good old days, they had signed contracts with sawmills in Latvia, perhaps at a slightly higher price than with suppliers from the eastern neighbour countries.
“In the spring of this year, sawmill operators were fulfilling long-term contracts intended for foreign consumers, but with the drying up of imports of sawn timber from Belarus and Russia, a short-term shortage of these resources arose for wooden house builders,” recalls K. Ceplis. In his opinion, mutual security is important, because one cannot be guided by the principle – I am fine, I don't need anything, and I do as it suits me, but when things are bad, then I want everyone else to adapt to me. “In Latvia, the annual volume of tree felling is half the annual increment of wood, so there is no doubt about the availability of timber in Latvia, and the forecasts that predicted almost a desert in Latvia many years ago have not come true, because the forest industry manages things wisely, even though several improvements are necessary.
Only the European decision to increase the amount of protected areas and reduce felling volumes could reduce the volume of available timber in Latvia,” explains K. Ceplis. He emphasises that the question is not about whether or not the amount of protected areas will be increased, but rather by how much the quantity of these areas will increase, thereby reducing the available timber resources, which will also become more expensive. K. Slokenbergs is baffled by the situation – a Latvian log is more than twice as expensive compared to the same log in Sweden. “This creates confusion in the market and even an absurdity, when spruce from Germany is brought to Latvia for processing,” says K. Slokenbergs.
Action plan
E. Grants, agreeing with what was said before, points to the memorandum on wooden building construction. “Talking about conditions, the German example was studied – a charter that was created as a document to shape political direction and strategy for the goal of creating legislation that protects the local resource and thereby supports the local economy. To bring this to life, it was necessary to ensure that all related sectors – construction, education – were also involved in this process and each contributed their part to achieving the common goal,” explains E. Grants.
He points out that this solution was also taken up by Europe, securing its manufacturers with its own resources, which adds value and successfully sells to everyone who needs it. “When the document ends up on the table, it turns out that in the actual situation, raw materials from ‘somewhere’ are cheaper compared to what is available on-site, and therefore they want to take other material in order to be able to export their product,” reminds E. Grants. In his opinion, this is a matter of state strategy – everyone must agree on that small amount that would circulate locally and guarantee volume.
K. Ceplis recalls that once, when a cooperation memorandum was signed to promote the use of wooden building materials and products in construction, the minister expressed the opinion that at least 20% of building materials in newly built public buildings should be made of wood. “That should have already been brought to life, and if the Scandinavians in many places take pride in the fact that a specific building was built using wood from a 50 km radius, one could also find a solution in Latvia to create demand for the local market, while local small manufacturers would consume more wood and might even combine into a single procurement of sawn products, so that the sawmill operator would also have a greater interest in such supplies,” K. Ceplis is hopeful. In his opinion, one should be proud that public buildings, schools, and petrol stations are built from wood obtained right here in Latvia.
“Why are we in Latvia any worse than France, where from this year a relevant condition (the share of wood in structures) of not just 20%, but 50% applies to all public buildings? There are companies that want to build their own customer service centres using wood, but that is the decision of individual actors, because at the state level there is nothing like that,” says K. Ceplis. K. Slokenbergs views the mentioned drivers of timber construction positively, however, in his opinion, there is a peculiar void at the state level.
The education factor
“These are ambitious people who are trying to learn or take something,” answers K. Slokenbergs to the question of how timber construction companies are born in Latvia. He points out that creating very precise forms from wood is easier than creating them from concrete, of course, with the help of technology. One of the cornerstones is education; the solution could be continuing education courses in which active, wood-using builders would participate.
“We organise lectures for construction students about timber construction, but the level of knowledge about wood among third- and fourth-year students is non-existent, unless the student is interested in it themselves,” concludes K. Ceplis. Edvīns Grants recalls that when he finished his basic studies, he was not yet mature enough to be able to think about wood as an engineer. “Maturity came after 3-4 years, when I was involved in the process and at the same time saw the link with education, because good lecturers teach, but you understand the meaning and the essence a long time after you have already gained experience in your professional life,” says E. Grants. In his opinion, that is precisely why one must think about how to provide young people with the opportunity to practice with different materials during their studies, and not in the way of – working during the day and studying at night.
“Good interns are ‘snapped up’,” points out K. Slokenbergs. In his view, young people, even those who study at educational institutions, in the forges of young specialists, have too little interest in timber construction.
“In normal functional construction, one does not need creators of works of art, but rather industrially thought-out production, so as to make a wall of a house where the supporting frame is precisely manufactured in wood and easily connects with the subsequent elements. It is a technologically precise, previously very well thought-out process, in a way comparable to the automotive industry. To work in the automotive industry, is it necessary to be the world's best welder? No, it is not! But you must know how it happens, you must master the processes in order to be able to transform an idea into an industrial form,” explains K. Slokenbergs.
CO2 emissions matter
“The responsible people should meet, ‘put their heads together’ – we are so many, we have these resources at our disposal and we need to do this and that, and one cannot fail to see that wood is our ‘super-resource’,” suggests K. Ceplis. In his opinion, a situation like this is illogical – a German bus company, in order to be able to continue its business, plants a forest (which cannot be cut) in Latvia. “We should not be proud that we are becoming a peculiar reservation, but on the contrary – take pride in our forests and wooden houses, which are produced from those same – our – forests,” emphasises Kristaps Ceplis. Listening to what the officials say, he has not had the opportunity to hear a common vision – we have the resource – wood – and let's use it!
“Perhaps, through small steps, with the support of EU funding, educational clusters should be created, because if many small, specifically-thinking companies were born that built with wood, it would create an development of the internal market, and we would see enough public buildings, such as, for example, the Ogre library,” answers Krists Slokenbergs to the question of what to do in Latvia. He admits that as more and more such wooden buildings emerge, the moment will come when it will be possible to “break the critical mass”.
“Just as a/s “Latvijas valsts meži”, just as a/s “Latvijas Finieris”, which build buildings from wood, the state also needs to build public buildings, for example, an acoustic concert hall, from wood. Furthermore, there must be a clear system (mechanisms) that forces the use of the maximum amount of green materials,” suggests K. Slokenbergs, mentioning window certification in Sweden and CO2 emissions as an example. “We are in a better position than Swedish window manufacturers because our windows are ‘greener’”. This means that at the moment a building permit is issued, CO2 emission quotas are determined, which must be adhered to; if these are exceeded, a fine must be paid. A builder may conclude that replacing concrete or aluminium with wood results in lower costs.
“Environmental criteria will ‘come over our heads’ and solutions will have to be found to reduce the CO2 footprint. The entire legislative and educational system will have to be transformed,” predicts E. Grants. In his opinion, Latvia should change the system that concerns the creation of regulations and standards (this currently happens according to voluntary principles), for example, the inclusion of one solution in building regulations is often a matter of personal initiative, based on the desire of some sector or sphere.
Discussion video available here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnHug3nNvrs
Photographs by Andra Marta Babre and zemeunvalsts.lv used