36 percent of the US is covered by forest (1).
38 percent of the EU is covered by forest. That's EU with Britain. Without Britain, the percentage is higher (2).
I realize I use different sources, and that maybe all forests are not equally good for lumber production. But Europe has as much forests as the US. Yes, a lot of it is concentrated in Scandinavia and Eastern Europe, so traditionally, that would have been less accessible to most central and western European countries. Also, traditionally, there was far more farm land. But nowadays, Europeans could access lumber as easily as Americans.
And that's why the US market is eating most of Europe's construction wood supply at the moment? Which, by the way, is sourced to a significant degree from the former Soviet Union. So comparing EU forest surface with the US is somewhat misleading.
If "at the moment" is the past year and a half then it's because lumber prices have tripled or quadrupled so of course it makes sense to buy far afield and ship if the price is lower.
Yes increased demand drives increases in price if the supply is limited. Production has been constrained everywhere for the past year and a half so buyers have had to source material from further away than usual.
I just used the parent comment numbers converted to same unit with the first DDGed population result. Comparing pct land forested seemed an odd ratio to me. Population seemed to be a better proxy for housing demand. Pop density and other factors would probably confound but tree per capita seems to matter than tree per surface area.
In any region, there are going to be specific factors of soil, climate, infrastructure, etc. that all affect how you would build homes. Transporting materials is expensive, so the availability of local materials is also a factor, though less of a factor than it used to be.
Builders and skilled tradesman in any region are going to have knowledge and practical experience with these local factors, and with the techniques and materials that address those factors. And to some degree, you're better off with the type of house that they're really good at building than the type of house that they're less experienced with.
If you're comparing the US and EU though, I think you also need to account for culture and language barriers. Construction techniques and materials across the US are more similar because builders and tradesmen from Oregon, Arizona, Texas, and Florida can all communicate more easily than builders and tradesman from across Europe.
I realize I use different sources, and that maybe all forests are not equally good for lumber production. But Europe has as much forests as the US. Yes, a lot of it is concentrated in Scandinavia and Eastern Europe, so traditionally, that would have been less accessible to most central and western European countries. Also, traditionally, there was far more farm land. But nowadays, Europeans could access lumber as easily as Americans.
1:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forests_of_the_United_States#:.... 2:https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statis...