I am always sucker for a good YouTube video, especially if it is transit oriented. I am mesmerized by the below video demonstrating the effectiveness of pervious concrete. It is simply stunning how the concrete disperses all the water and seemingly not a single drop makes it to the side of the road.
I’ll let the National Ready Mixed Concrete Association explain how it works.
In pervious concrete, carefully controlled amounts of
water and cementitious materials are used to create a paste that forms a thick coating around aggregate particles. A pervious concrete mixture contains little or no sand, creating a substantial void content. Using sufficient paste to coat and bind the aggregate particles together creates a system of highly permeable, interconnected voids that drains quickly. Typically, between 15% and 25% voids are achieved in the hardened concrete, and flow rates for water through pervious concrete are typically around 480 in./hr (0.34 cm/s, which is 5 gal/ft min or 200 L/m, although they can be much higher. Both the low mortar content and high porosity also reduce strength compared to conventional concrete mixtures, but sufficient strength for many applications is readily achieved.
While pervious concrete can be used for a surprising number of applications, its primary use is in pavement. This site focuses on the pavement applications of the material, which also has been referred to as porous concrete, permeable concrete, no-fines concrete, gap-graded concrete, and enhanced-porosity concrete.There is more info on the linked website to explain the science of pervious concrete, how it is made, how it is poured, how it is maintained, and its many benefits.
The Daily Reporter wrote about a recent construction project in Shoreview, MN where the construction was paved with pervious concrete. The material is admittedly not cheap, but by using a system that prevents run off it also saves costs in various other infrastructure like storm drains.
The pavement isn’t cheap; its upfront cost is about 50 percent more than traditional concrete, Lee said. But he added that it’s cost-effective considering that “you are getting a storm water management system” instead of just a driving surface.
Maloney concurs.
“When you net out what you don’t have to build — mainly ponds and piping and catch basins and manholes — when you consider the cost of those things, it is almost a break-even,” Maloney said. “We would not be doing the project if that weren’t the case.”
As more contractors become familiar with the product, and learn how to apply it with the proper tools and techniques, the price is likely to fall.
There are obvious questions about how the pavement will keep when the weather freezes, so the technology may be better suited for Florida than North Dakota. Regardless, I am excited about any product that can reduce the amount of infrastructure needed and save space while accomplishing the same functions as older systems.
September 4, 2009
Building Communities to Lower CO2 Emissions
Posted by meltzerm under Public Transportation, Transportation Commentary | Tags: Climate Change, CO2 Emissions, Energy Use, Foreclosure, Geoff Anderson, Housing Policy, Jane Jacobs, Planning, Public Transportation, Roads, Smarth Growth America, Subways, Transportation Research Board |1 Comment
Courtesy of Smart Growth America comes a review of a new Transportation Research Board (TRB) report on the role of planning and transportation on carbon emissions. The report is titled TRB Special Report 298: Driving and the Built Environment: Effects of Compact Development on Motorized Travel, Energy Use, and CO2 Emissions. While this blog focuses on transportation there is no doubt that transportation policy and land development, especially housing models, are deeply interconnected. The history of American sprawl, suburban development and exurban expansion are deeply based on the fact that American policy for an entire century was based on building roads and making individual home ownership a priority.
Geoff Anderson of Smart Growth America summarized the conclusion succinctly:
Developing or redeveloping community to feature new more dense housing and mixed use communities has a positive effect on transit. It is hard and impracticable to develop public transportation in areas that are not dense. Moreover, the report also points out that such development has also positive effects on land use in terms of environmental effects, construction of infrastructure like sewers and telecommunications, and prevention of sprawl. In addition, denser communities could potentially have positive social effects as Jane Jacobs would observe.
There are hurdles to such construction, as the report points out, because American and state policies are not geared toward the development of such neighborhoods. However, developing new mixed-use communities with multi-modal transit are two parts of the same solution. Building dense communities is useless and building transit without a community is equally so. America is waking up the insanity of its transportation and housing policies in light of climate change and the housing foreclosure crisis. We cannot expect Phoenixes and Las Vegases to spring up again, it is time to build new communities that are focused on walkability, public transit, and places where people can still own their own houses, but do not necessarily have a huge back yard with it.