Case Study B: Medium-Sized Storage Building

The medium-sized storage case study building compared the metal building to a load-bearing masonry, concrete tilt-up, and conventional steel-framed building for each of the three locations. Overall, the metal building had less environmental impacts than all three other building systems in all six categories, with the largest difference between metal buildings and concrete tilt-up. The results are closest between the metal buildings and conventional steel buildings. The non-metal buildings case study buildings had the same structural roof members for California and Florida, and a higher roof tonnage for the Minnesota buildings due to snow load.

Case Study C: Large-Sized Industrial Building

The large-sized industrial building case study compared the metal building to a load-bearing masonry, concrete tilt-up, and conventional steel-framed building for each of the three locations. Similar to case study B, the metal building showed less impact than all three other building systems in all six categories, with concrete tilt-up scoring the worst among the nonmetal buildings. The environmental impact differences between the metal building and the other results were closer for case study C compared to case study B.

Case Study Conclusions

The Walter P. Moore study comparisons show that metal buildings perform quite favorably when evaluated against most forms of construction. The economical use of recycled materials when combined with the lesser need for foundation materials provide for a significant reduction in environmental impacts across all six measures for most building types and categories and in all building locations.