|
Costing a Prefabricated Mass Timber Data Center
While most stakeholders stop at a comparison of timber versus steel based on material price alone, teams must consider the end-to-end cost of a complete project, from design through operations. When accounting for the savings achieved with prefabrication, on-time delivery, less demand for skilled labor on site, and other factors, financial and schedule modeling efforts reveal that a TIER 3 total build time and cost is approximately 30-40% less than a typical concrete and steel data center.
​
Evaluating the cost of MT for data center construction requires a nuanced approach that moves beyond simplistic line-item comparisons. The true financial benefits emerge holistically through the integration of prefabricated solutions and a shift to off-site fabrication and on-site assembly.
​
While premiums and cost reductions vary by region and project, validating these factors through data-driven feasibility studies ensures accuracy and informed decision-making. Self-performing general contractors with direct, historical, and comparative data increases reliability and informs an optimized building program and design. This approach not only streamlines workflows but also positions MT as an essential driver in delivering the fastest time-to-market data centers and high-performance buildings, reinforcing its role as a transformative force in industrialized construction.
Procurement Pricing
At the procurement level, MT’s materials like CLT and Glulam typically exceed the cost of steel and concrete by 20-30%, often ranging from $50-$70 per square foot for MT components compared to $40-$55 for traditional materials. This higher initial cost can lead contractors and design teams to prematurely dismiss MT, yet such a narrow focus overlooks significant offsetting savings across the project lifecycle.
Contractor Pricing
General contractors may pad material budgets or overestimate labor due to unfamiliarity with MT—a risk noted in early adoption scenarios. This could potentially inflate estimated costs and devalue the ROI. However, advancements over the past decade in design optimization, estimating software and contractor expertise are yielding more accurate cost modeling and reducing uncertainty.
Build Faster, Save Money
Savings emerge through accelerated schedules and reduced on-site labor demands, core advantages of the off-site fabrication model. Many sources report MT buildings erecting 25-30% faster than steel or concrete counterparts. When pairing a TIER 3 MT deployment with off-site MEP fabrication, timelines could potentially drop to 14-16 months for a large-scale data center (80-100mw) versus 18-24 months traditionally. Shaving months off schedules avoids significant costs for general conditions—an estimated $500,000-$1,000,000 per month for a typical hyperscale facility. Additionally, MT’s lighter weight (up to 80% less than steel/concrete) reduces transportation costs by cutting truckloads by 90%, saving on logistics expenses while decreasing foundation requirements, trimming excavation and material costs by 15-20%.
​
Aesthetically, MT doubles as a finished product, eliminating the need for additional coverings (like drywall and drop ceilings) that can cost $5-$10 per square foot in traditional builds. It also avoids intumescent coatings required for steel fireproofing, saving an additional $2-$5 per square foot. Additionally, it reduces unnecessarily shifting primary MEP trade work to other areas to open zones for drywall and painting activities.
Additional Savings
Beyond direct savings, external factors influence MT’s cost-effectiveness. Regional variations in MT supply are strong in the Pacific Northwest but less so in the Southeast, and can affect material costs and shipping expenses. Developers in MT-rich areas like the Pacific Northwest may see 10% lower procurement costs.
​
Labor market dynamics further tilt the equation. AGC estimates a need for 500,000 additional workers annually, inflating on-site labor costs by 5-10% yearly, while prefab efficiencies mitigate this.
Partnering Strategically to Minimize Risk
Mitigating MT’s cost challenges involves strategic partnerships and planning. Engaging experienced design-build teams familiar with MT can prevent over-estimations, potentially saving 10% on budgets, freeing up much-needed capital, and ensuring precise sequencing of just-in-time deliveries to avoid delays costing $100,000/week in financing. Sourcing from local MT suppliers can reduce shipping costs by 15-20%, while modular MEP integration ensures energy efficiency gains are realized early.
​
This reimagined approach transforms data centers into manufactured assemblies, balancing higher initial costs with substantial lifecycle savings, and positioning MT as a financially viable option for forward-thinking developers.