Timber hoarding, once the go-to for all site hoarding needs, has slowly been eclipsed by new and improved methods of hoarding.
Steel and plastic hoarding has shifted the dominant position of timber due to several factors, with cost being an important one.
Both steel and plastic hoarding avoid many of the hidden costs of timber such as:
Timber hoarding is far more susceptible to the elements than either plastic hoarding or steel hoarding. As a result, it often has to be replaced mid-project, adding costs to the hoarding.
Timber hoarding often has to be installed first and then painted, increasing the install time and costing at least one additional site visit to paint – this incurs cost and increases the carbon footprint of the project.
Timber hoarding is often only be used on a single site. This can make timber hoarding far more expensive than sustainable systems which can be used on multiple sites.
Timber hoarding can often end up in a landfill, or be sent to a disposal plant where it is burned as fuel adding to the waste or transport costs of every project. Sustainable hoarding is erected, dismantled, and removed by the suppliers which ensure that there is no hoarding going to landfill.
All of the above can increase both the cost of a project and the carbon footprint and should be considered when comparing timber to more sustainable plastic hoarding and steel hoarding.