> For example, aerated autoclaved concrete has better structural strength, doesn't need additional insulation, completely non-combustible, and is cheaper to build.
Apparently it ages out though and becomes unsafe when it does, resulting in a scandal in the UK:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-66686864
"There is nothing fundamentally wrong with reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete (RAAC) as building material or system. Many buildings from the 60s and 70s built from many materials are now having problems due to inadequate maintenance, and old age."
I'm not exactly sure what this is supposed to mean. I've never heard of this problem with regular brick or concrete structures.
Not really. AAC was used to build floors without enough of additional reinforcement, and this is a bad idea. Just like regular concrete, it's weak in tension and is even more brittle.
If you use it to build walls and then use regular concrete or wood to build floors, it has none of these issues.
It's an amazing material, very light and it can be cut with a special handsaw on site.