Construction methods for building houses: comparing wood, concrete, brick and steel

Choosing the right construction method is one of the most important decisions when building a house. Whether wood, concrete, brick or steel – each construction method has its own advantages, challenges and areas of application. In this guide, we compare the most common construction methods for building houses and explain what is important when making a choice. You will find out which construction method suits your requirements, your budget and your goals – technically, economically and in the long term.

Those who build today are increasingly thinking about tomorrow. Wood construction makes exactly that possible: a construction method that is efficient, flexible and practical. Wood enables fast and precise construction, reduces construction time and supports room insulation thanks to its natural properties.

EGGER offers a wide range of wood-based building products for this purpose: OSB boards are versatile, robust and suitable for walls, ceilings and roofs. The vapour-permeable DHF boards are reliable for the external panelling of roofs and timber frame construction walls. Flammex solutions contribute to tested fire protection measures. The innovative EcoBox allows modular, flexible construction methods that can be adapted to different project requirements.

Wood construction is suitable for a wide variety of projects – from single-family homes and extensions to modular additions. Fast, flexible and practical: modern, economical and customised construction projects are created with wood.

Concrete is a classic in the construction industry: pressure-resistant, solid, durable. For many builders, this sounds like safety. However, these three advantages also conceal some disadvantages:

• Stability: concrete achieves its high mechanical strength through the combination of cement, water, sand and gravel, for example. However, it is precisely this composition that is problematic: cement production is extremely energy-intensive and causes around 8% of global CO₂ emissions.

• Solidity:the solid construction method ensures stability and sound insulation – but also requires high material usage. Concrete production requires large quantities of water, which is problematic in water-scarce regions, as well as sand, the extraction of which damages the environmental and causes habitat loss. This means: more resource consumption, more transport costs, more grey energy.

• Durability: concrete is considered to be very durable – but only if it is permanently dry and evenly loaded. In practice, the situation is often different: moisture, frost or road salt can penetrate the surface through even the smallest cracks. Even inconspicuous settlement cracks can become a problem. This is because water expands as it freezes and gradually enlarges the cracks. Such freeze-thaw cycles reduce the stability of concrete and can shorten its service life by years. To prevent damage, experts therefore rely on additional protective measures such as admixtures, which in turn cost resources and energy.

This means that behind the stable façade lies a high ecological footprint – primarily due to cement production. Anyone who wants to build sustainably quickly reaches their limits here.

The construction itself also requires patience: concrete has to cure before subsequent work can be carried out. This extends the construction time and makes the procedure less flexible. Spontaneous changes to plans are therefore virtually impossible.

Conclusion: concrete provides stability – but requires compromises in terms of the environment, speed and adaptability. Anyone who decides in favour of concrete should know exactly what is important to them.

Building with bricks is also an established construction method that has been used for many years, as bricks are robust and provide a solid basis for your home. However, brick construction is more time-consuming as the material is heavy and requires a lot of manual labour.

These factors can delay the construction process and make the logistics more complex.

In terms of sustainability, brick construction lies in the middle: although CO₂ emissions are produced during the firing process, the long service life and low maintenance requirements compensate for this to some extent.

Anyone considering building with steel is opting for a construction method with high technical precision and fast realisation. Steel can play to its strengths, especially in larger or more complex construction projects: short construction times, high load-bearing capacity and great design flexibility.

However, these advantages come at a price – both literally and figuratively. Steel production consumes large amounts of energy, which is reflected in a poor environmental footprint. In addition, the material and assembly costs are usually higher than for other types of construction.

Another point that builders should bear in mind: steel conducts heat very well. Without elaborate insulation, heat loss occurs, which has a long-term impact on energy costs.

Conclusion: if you value speed, technology and clear structures, steel construction is an efficient solution. If, on the other hand, you want to build as sustainably and energy-efficiently as possible, you should carefully consider whether this construction method really suits your own goals.