Slashdot Mirror


Is Our Infrastructure Ready For Rising Temperatures?

Hugh Pickens writes "Megan Garber writes that last weekend, a US Airways flight taxiing for takeoff from Washington's Reagan National Airport got stuck on the tarmac for three hours because the tarmac had softened from the heat, and the plane had created — and then sunk into — a groove from which it couldn't, at first, be removed. So what makes an asphalt tarmac, the foundation of our mighty air network, turn to sponge? The answer is that our most common airport surface might not be fully suited to its new, excessively heated environment. One of asphalt's main selling points is precisely the fact that, because of its pitchy components, it's not quite solid: It's 'viscoelastic,' which makes it an ideal surface for the airport environment. As a solid, asphalt is sturdy; as a substance that can be made from — and transitioned back to — liquid, it's relatively easy to work with. And, crucially, it makes for runway repair work that is relatively efficient. But those selling points can also be asphalt's Achilles heel. Viscoelasticity means that the asphalt is always capable of liquefying. The problem, for National Airport's tarmac and the passengers who were stuck on it, was that this weekend's 100+-degree temperatures were a little less room temperature-like than they'd normally be, making the asphalt a little less solid that it would normally be. 'As ironic and as funny as the imgur seen round the world is, it may also be a hint at what's in store for us in a future of weirding weather. An aircraft sinking augurs the new challenges we'll face as temperatures keep rising.'"

83 of 416 comments (clear)

  1. Nothing new by Narmi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Lots of bus stops where buses are expected to sit for a while are paved with concrete because of this problem. When it's really hot out, buses sink into asphalt.

    1. Re:Nothing new by TapeCutter · · Score: 2

      Not sure what it is but the tarry substance they use to fill cracks in ashphalt often turns into a sticky, black, chewing gum like substance in the Aussie heat. The more modern roads (freways,ect) don't appear to use it. Some of the older freeways use concrete but concrete has problems too since it expands in the heat, the concrete freeways have expansion joints to compensate but I've seen concrete footpaths buckle in the heat so badly that kids were using it as a skateboard jump.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    2. Re:Nothing new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Correction to the article, runways are made of thick concrete. Ramps and Taxiways are made of asphalt since they don't need to absorb the impact of an airplane landing gear traveling at 100+ MPH.

    3. Re:Nothing new by SternisheFan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Lots of bus stops where buses are expected to sit for a while are paved with concrete because of this problem. When it's really hot out, buses sink into asphalt.

      Yes, asphalt's cheaper and quicker to lay down, cheaper to replace too. N.Y.'s Palisades Parkway was made all concrete back in 1958 and only in the last decade or so have heavily trafficed sections been resurfaced with asphalt. Concrete does rarely 'buckle' in high heat though. The recent heat wave made a section of a U.S. highway raise up, catching a motorist doing highway speed unaware. http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DoHMdjhEI73c&v=oHMdjhEI73c&gl=US

    4. Re:Nothing new by fotbr · · Score: 2

      While kids using buckled footpaths as skateboard jumps is impresive, it pales in comparison to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nf0l3NO-35U from Wisconsin just a few days ago.

    5. Re:Nothing new by Black+Parrot · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Lots of bus stops where buses are expected to sit for a while are paved with concrete because of this problem. When it's really hot out, buses sink into asphalt.

      I think the actual reason for the concrete is that the frequent stops by heavy vehicles "pull" the blacktop like taffy, making a wavy spot on the road.

      You get the same effect at stop lights on highways/boulevards that carry a lot of heavy vehicles.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    6. Re:Nothing new by Chewbacon · · Score: 2

      Would a decent foundation mitigate this? I can understand the asphalt compressing and making ruts, but what's underneath supporting it? As I live in a city where road construction never fucking ends, I see a lot clay, gravel, etc. get laid down before it's paved over. Since there are airports in hotter areas of the world with airports (remember, USA is not the only place on earth), could this be an isolated incident where poor engineering is to blame?

      --
      Chewbacon
      The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
    7. Re:Nothing new by jklovanc · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually you have it the wrong way around. Most runways are asphalt with concrete landing areas while taxiways are concrete so aircraft can sit on them or long periods of time. Asphalt is used because it does not have expansion joints and is less susceptible to heaving. Here is an example of a USAF airfield with just that configuration. Note that the taxi ways are a light colour while most of the runway is dark. In the text it explains exactly what kind of asphalt was used. Here is another example in Alaska. Notice that the aircraft are sitting on concrete while most of the rest of the taxiways and runways are asphalt.

    8. Re:Nothing new by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 2

      That black tarry stuff is called tar. It's used to fill cracks because it prevents water penetration that will eventually cause much more serious damage to the roadway, especially if you live in country where frost is possible.

    9. Re:Nothing new by aklinux · · Score: 3, Informative
      Depends on the airport. At larger airports, even the taxiways are concrete. The heavier the aircraft serviced, the thicker the concrete. Many, maybe most, runways & taxiways are topped with some inches of asphalt. The asphalt is largely sacrificial.

      A highway engineer of my acquaintance told me that in states such as California it's common to use concrete topped w/ asphalt for intersections and a distance out to support the vehicles stopped for traffic lights. If you want to see what happens to heavily traveled intersections where they don't use concrete, come to Anchorage. We have a few that are a nice washboard ;)

    10. Re:Nothing new by tbannist · · Score: 2

      This particular issue, no. However, Canada has other issues based on receding permafrost and other effects. Climate change is expected to cost the Government of Canada about $5 billion in direct costs by the end of the decade and between $21 billion and $43 billion by 2050.

      I expect the story is pretty much the same around the world, that countries are facing infrastructure costs related to the changing climate.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    11. Re:Nothing new by smooth+wombat · · Score: 2

      There were several issues I had with that video but the biggest one was the person filming. At first they do a great job of holding their phone (I'm presuming it's a phone) steady so you can see the SUV launch into the air, but then they turn and twist the phone so it's all but impossible to watch what happens afterwards.

      Folks, if you're going to film something like this, DO NOT TWIST THE CAMERA! Hold it steady and pan left/right so people can see what you're trying to show them. You don't have to be a film school attendee/graduate to grasp this basic concept.

      Too many videos are absolutely worthless both from a viewing perspective and from an investigative perspective because people toss their camera about while filming.

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  2. Nope. by Kenja · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Our infrastructure was built 40 years ago and had a 25 year life expectancy. Every day that things dont simply fall apart is a blessing. Since apparently putting people to work rebuilding and improving things would be socialsim, so I guess there's nothing we can do about it.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    1. Re:Nope. by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Er, a tarmac can simply be maintained for a longer life. I am not sure if ripping it off and rebuilding it would be socialism, but it would definitely be stupid.

    2. Re:Nope. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 5, Informative
      No, not an infrastructure problem.

      Tarmac is formulated for specific climates, so that it heats and flows properly for the maximum temperature expected in that area. For instance, 25 years ago in the region where I live, a Hot day was around 80 degrees. So the asphalt mix used was intended for that sort of climate. Now that our summers mave many days in the mid-upper 90's, and a few that tweak 100, that asphalt is out of it's temperature range.

      The reason that they use different mixes depending on climate is that the mixes that set will in a cooler climate, also have some resistance to frost heaving. The mixes that harden at a higher temp are more brittle at freezing temps.

      This is probably more than anyone wants to know about asphalt paving or tarmacadam.

      Otherwise, yeah, we are sure letting a lot of stuff fall apart.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    3. Re:Nope. by mug+funky · · Score: 5, Insightful

      roads can't be traded like "generic trade goods" can. they don't work like TVs in boxes on trucks.

      infrastructure is not a traditional product, and market models can get somewhat confused when dealing with immovable things that are used all the time and need maintenance.

      if you look at private rail systems, they're a very mixed bunch. some do it better than others.

      what prevents the selection and evolution you speak of are the little details like you can't just choose another city's infrastructure because they're better or more efficient. you're stuck with what you've got where you live, and there's very little incentive for the local monopoly to improve things if their bottom line is not going to be improved.

      melbourne's rail system was privatized in the '90s, originally split to 3 companies who handled a third of the network each. they eventually all merged into the one, which was a multinational. they made more money in london than they did here, so they effectively trained up drivers here and offered them packages in london. they only bought new trains when their hands were forced. they hired goons to shake people down for ticket infractions. the fines for no ticket are higher than the fines for exceeding the speed limit by 20km/h +.

      this company then got the arse when their contract was up for renewal. people were sick of them. the network had not had significant works in over a decade. another company moved in their place, and were left with the canonical "stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure" of a system. the previous tenant had left enough leeway in their contract that major works were not assigned explicitly to either state government or them, so they just didn't get done.

      works are finally happening now, slowly. the public are absorbing the cost in a big way, road traffic is worse than it has ever been because people stopped taking the train.

    4. Re:Nope. by vivian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Roads, like all networks are a natural monopoly, and thus should be run by the state.
      Unless you want to allow for competition that is by having a second road network constructed and maintained alongside the first. Then you could have a dupoly.
      Services on networks should be privatized (bus services, mail services, electricity generation, internet service provision, telephone, etc) but the physical network structure itself should be in the hands of the public, via that trustworthy custodian, the government. If you don't like how they run things, vote in a new bunch.

    5. Re:Nope. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I highly doubt in 25 years the average climate in your region has changes from highs of 80 to highs of 95-99. That would be a cataclysmically drastic climate shift. Even the most alarmist of IPCC scientists is looking at global warming on the scale of 2-3 degrees in 40-50 years. I really wish people would stop blaming hot days on global warming, it just makes us all look stupid. Keep this in mind the next time you have an unseasonably cold day :P

    6. Re:Nope. by ghostdoc · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, the UK's road system started off as private toll roads maintained by the people who charged tolls on them.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turnpike_trust

      It was abandoned as being inefficient and the responsibility for the roads turned over to local government. So yes, roads 'should' be run by the state, but not as a natural monopoly, but just because it's actually more efficient to fund the roads through taxes than tolls.

      --
      Business/App ideas are like arseholes: everyone's got one, they're mostly shit, but very rarely they contain a diamond
    7. Re:Nope. by styrotech · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yep. It is also why (in temperate regions at least - ie no real freezing) resealing work is ideally always done at the hottest time of the year.

      There's an optimal viscosity for laying the stuff. So by sealing in summer they can then use a mix with the highest possible melting temp to hopefully avoid these sticky summer situations. Sealing roads etc when its colder requires a runnier mix, which then doesn't handle summers quite as well.

      Of course places with a very wide seasonal temperature range make this much more challenging.

    8. Re:Nope. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Where do you think that money to put people back to work building infrastructure comes from?

      It comes from the same place that the >$1Trillion bailout of bankers (who then took the money and set it on fire, and no it has not been "paid back"). At the moment it comes from being borrowed at an effective negative interest rate. It should come from printing money. Better yet, by minting several $1Trillion coins.

      But who would invest in such infrastructure? I don't know; that's the point of allowing a Free Marketâ"an environment where there are robust processes of variation and selection that give rise to the evolution of society, allowing society to adapt to the needs of the moment.

      That is an insane fantasy. There is no "Free Market" mechanism for building infrastructure. We actually sort of had a "Free Market" infrastructure here in Chicago in the 19th century - until the city burned down because the infrastructure sucked. Do you know what the "Free Market" approach to toxic waste management is? Dumping it in the lake.

      The vast majority of problems on a national scale do not have anything remotely like a "Free Market" solution, and that's assuming that there actually was something like a "Free Market" that could possibly exist. There is as much evidence that a "Free Market" could exist as there is for the existence of the pantheon of Greek gods or UFOs. OK, there's quite a bit more evidence for UFOs than there is for a "Free Market". And if you could have a "Free Market", it would suck so bad it would make your head spin. And you especially can't have a "Free Market" when the major players in the economy are legal constructs designed to deflect any kind of liability away from the people that own them. There has never been a "Free Market" in human history, especially not on a national scale. One of the first acts, of the first congress of the US (the one that had a bunch of Founding Fathers in it) was to put tariffs in place. The ink wasn't even dry on the Constitution when the Founders figured out that a "Free Market" was an impossible fantasy.

      Free Markets do not exist in nature. Just plain "markets" don't even exist in nature - they require a government, some form of central control. There is no "Free Market" mechanism for enforcing contracts, for example.

      It's unfortunate that they don't tell this to students until the 200-level econ courses, because by then the damage is done. That's how Ron Paul gets his fans.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    9. Re:Nope. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're mixing your measurements, 2-3 degrees is on a global scale. some regions have experienced more drastic changes. i am sure there are also some regions that have colder winters now, too.

    10. Re:Nope. by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Our infrastructure was built 40 years ago and had a 25 year life expectancy. Every day that things dont simply fall apart is a blessing. Since apparently putting people to work rebuilding and improving things would be socialsim, so I guess there's nothing we can do about it.

      FWIW, worries about our infrastructure started at least 30 years ago. The eternal problem is that politicians want their names associated with new stuff, but there's no glamour to be had for legislating money to paint rusty bridges or repave ragged-out highways.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    11. Re:Nope. by amiga3D · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I know things are heating up but really I remember 100+ temperatures when I was in my teens some 4 decades ago. A rise of 2 or 3 degrees since the 70's is hardly going to make asphalt flow like melted butter. Yes, I know it has serious implications for human existence on the planet but this kind of kooky sensationalism is what give climate change prophets such a bad name.

    12. Re:Nope. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      That 2-3 degrees would be the global average, but climate change could potentially result in greater local variation in temperature.

    13. Re:Nope. by Maow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I highly doubt in 25 years the average climate in your region has changes from highs of 80 to highs of 95-99.

      Parent didn't claim "average". They claimed higher summer peak temps. These can be offset by colder winter temperatures leaving averages little changed.

      That would be a cataclysmically drastic climate shift. Even the most alarmist of IPCC scientists is looking at global warming on the scale of 2-3 degrees in 40-50 years.

      Agreed.

      I really wish people would stop blaming hot days on global warming, it just makes us all look stupid.

      I really wish everyone pointing out changing weather patterns over the course of our lifetimes would stop saying it cannot be due to climate change. It makes us^W them look stupid.

      Keep this in mind the next time you have an unseasonably cold day :P

      You keep that in mind when re-reading the GP post: he said more hot summer days, you said he claimed averages.

      Of course, I'm not saying the GP is correct about the amount of temperature swing, but it does jive with my personal experience and with scientific predictions.

    14. Re:Nope. by Aardpig · · Score: 5, Informative

      In the US, you can always tell the tollways from the freeways -- they're far less well maintained, as the private businesses which own them are interested in extracting as much profit as possible. Since there is no cost incurred from the delays, accidents and/or deaths caused by the poor road quality, the businesses simply don't bother with maintenance. It's the invisible hand of the market at work, not giving a flying fuck about the externalities.

      --
      Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
    15. Re:Nope. by tmosley · · Score: 2

      Please demonstrate past mass extinctions in the oceans that were caused by acidification. CO2 has been much higher than today in the past (as high as 1500 ppm). I want to know if it correlates with a mass extinction event. If it doesn't, then your theory goes out the window, as the buffer system in the oceans doesn't change significantly (which is an assumption on my part, feel free to disprove it).

    16. Re:Nope. by DerekLyons · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Our infrastructure was built 40 years ago and had a 25 year life expectancy. Every day that things dont simply fall apart is a blessing. Since apparently putting people to work rebuilding and improving things would be socialsim, so I guess there's nothing we can do about it.

      That's what the soundbites you hear would have you believe. But it's bullshit. We, as a nation, spend tens of billions a year maintaining and upgrading existing infrastructure and building new infrastructure.

    17. Re:Nope. by JWSmythe · · Score: 3, Insightful

          Not that I'm a climatologist, but ...

          The whole global warming thing is a world wide weather change. Areas will experience different weather patterns than normal. Right now, we're experiencing hotter summers. Where I live, during the summer, we get heavy thunderstorms every afternoon. If we don't get those storms, the heat goes from ball melting hot, to "I'd rather hide in the oven" broiling.

          Today, the outside high was only 99F (feels like temp "ball melting hot"). When the thunderstorms came in, it dropped to 85F (and feels like a sauna).

          Our average high for this day is 90F. The historical high temp range is 77F to 96F. It hit 99, because the storms did not form as early as they normally would have.

          If the days remain hot longer, inland areas will dry out. That, in turn, will cause fewer thunderstorms in those areas. We had this happen in the 1980's, except the highs only hit 95 to 102, and we're still a month away from our normal hottest month.

          The storms are good enough to form in coastal areas, and we've already seen unprecedented flooding in coastal areas. That's from the water evaporating faster in the ocean, and drenching the coastal areas. Inland, they do receive some relief from these storms, but the water from even a hurricane will be gone in just a few days.

          We live a few miles inland, and will be moving farther inland soon. 3 times in the last month, the roads have flooded enough to stop all vehicle traffic. Just a couple more inches, and the houses would have been in it. When one storm blew through, the actual flood waters were 2" below where they predicted, which put the water about 1" from entering the house.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    18. Re:Nope. by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Funny

      [snip flame war]

      Remember the good ol' days, when polite folk talked about the weather because politics or religion might lead to an argument?

      [maybe it's all the flame wars that's causing all the hot]

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    19. Re:Nope. by RogerWilco · · Score: 2

      The problem is that the US still has a lot of frontier spirit, and isn't used to having a lot of legacy in their infrastructure or buildings.

      The move to social security and universal health care is a sign of the same thing. Where in the past the US could rely on an influx of young healthy immigrants to keep things running and could afford not to care for the old and the sick, with the shift to much stricter immigration the US is much more dependent on the existing population for it's work force.

      As the US gets older and less of an immigration country, it will have to adopt policies more similar to what Europe does. It will probably find it's own unique mix.

      --
      RogerWilco the Adventurous Janitor
    20. Re:Nope. by tbannist · · Score: 2

      While global warming is expected to aggravate a number of weather conditions both in degree and frequency, these weather conditions, such as extreme heat waves would still be expected to happen even in the absence of global warming.

      That's not quite true. One of the major issues with global warming is that it is affecting the probability of these events occurring and making new events, which were effectively impossible, possible.

      It's important to remember the climate change affects the probability of extreme events and changes the distribution of what events occur. For example, as the world warms, heat waves become ever warmer. Compared to a baseline of 1951-1980 weather we are already seeing seasons that are 4 sigmas above the baseline, and will soon be seeing seasons that are 5 sigmas above the baseline. Normally, 5 sigma events are be so rare (1 in 2,000,000) that they are the standard used for evidence in particle physics.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    21. Re:Nope. by HeckRuler · · Score: 2

      Because all his other posts here are "-1 batshit crazy"?
      Because you get the karma you deserve?
      Because it's a content-less micro-rant against Government?
      But mostly because he didn't actually offer any other solutions. If your counter-argument is that there are alternatives, but you don't list any alternatives, then you're not really arguing. You're just whining. A good debate would have you propose viable alternatives detailing their pros and cons.

    22. Re:Nope. by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

      I highly doubt in 25 years the average climate in your region has changes from highs of 80 to highs of 95-99. That would be a cataclysmically drastic climate shift. Even the most alarmist of IPCC scientists is looking at global warming on the scale of 2-3 degrees in 40-50 years. I really wish people would stop blaming hot days on global warming, it just makes us all look stupid. Keep this in mind the next time you have an unseasonably cold day :P

      Problem #1 - mixed units. You're using degress in Farenheit, while the scientists use metric, so 2-3 degrees is actually closer to 5-7F change.

      Second, a degree is not a degree. The average world temperature is to move up a couple of degrees (including the very coldest parts of antartica to the hottest parts of the desert regions), averaged over an entire year.

      The result of this is summers get hotter (much hotter), and winters get colder (much colder). No, previously cold areas like the northern regions do NOT get habitable. They may get nicer summers, but the winters will become even more bitterly cold, too.

      And even if a degree was a degree, think of it this way - an EF5 hurricane cools the ocean about 2-3 degrees. Its considered a mechanism of how the oceans regulate temperature as the storms drain off excess heat.

      So no, hot days and cold days are not purely the result of global warming or more correctly climate change. However, they are the cause of more extremely hot days in the summer, extremely cold days in the winter, and for making heatwaves and cold spells longer. Climate influences weather.

      In fact, none of this is really up for debate - it's been well acknowledged and accepted. What is debated is anthropromorphic global warming - i.e., is it the result of human activity or a long natural cycle?

    23. Re:Nope. by Shotgun · · Score: 2

      As a libertarian, I do wish people would stop talking about free markets in infrastructure. It's stupid.

      People, the key part of infrastructure is INFRA. It is those constructs that allow people to interact and is the FOUNDATION of a free market. How the hell can you have a free market, if the farmer is not able to get produce to the market because there is no road? A previous poster had it 100% correct. The construction of roads and communication networks is a proper and necessary role of government. In fact, owning and operating ANY infrastructure that requires the power of eminent domain to construct is a proper role of government. "We had to take your land for the public good." Well, if it is some important to the public, the public needs to maintain control of it.

      Call me socialist if you want, but the friggin' Founding Fathers (take that Glen Beck) recognized the importance of government own infrastructure. The Constitution (of the US) give the responsibility of maintaining interstate roads to the federal government. And it just makes sense, because anything else leads to an unmitigated cluster fuck, like what passes for a rail system in the US.

      To my Libertarian friends, please stop trying to define what the government should not be doing. You will always overreach and end up looking silly. Approach the problem from the direction of what SHOULD a government be responsible for and why. If we can politicians to do that, they will be way to busy to engage in most of the distractions that they currently do. (For example, why are you wasting time on hearings about professional athletes taking steroids instead of REGULATING A BROKEN RAIL SYSTEM!!!).

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    24. Re:Nope. by HeckRuler · · Score: 2

      Actually, you appear to have missed my 4 points explaining why he got down-modded, and have substituted your own original one I was trying to refute.
      Don't be an asshat just because I answered your question in a way you didn't like.

      And it's not that I hate him, I just think he's batshit crazy. And not to be a content-less hypocrite, here's why I think he's batshit crazy: He's absolutely fanatical about the free market. He's argumentative against anyone who holds a different opinion. He provides no real argument for his belief. While he does provide points about why capitalism is good, he doesn't listen or refute counter-points, he just continues on little rants about the evils of government. He doesn't acknowledge that some actions of government are good. He's a true believer and to hell with anything that gets in his way. Having read what he's posted here how do you believe he would behave if you sat across from him and tried to convince him that welfare was a good idea in some circumstances?

      And this goes beyond his tone. He's trying to apply a model that has prerequisites to items that don't meet those prerequisites. The free market schtick requires competition, informed buyers who can take their business elsewhere, and a legal framework to protect the markets. I think he just don't understand the idea of a natural monopoly. And, from his tone, I don't think there's ever a hope of him educating himself. Certainty not within the confines of this forum.

      The idea of the free market, capitalism, and all that jazz is a really good idea. It's a lot better than the alternatives, for some things. It's not one of those perfect things, and we'll never achieve it in absolute, but it's a good thing to work towards. However, where there are monopolies (where someone has simply WON in their field), natural monopolies (there's only so much river), or things you can't put a price on (like security), then capitalism isn't the best solution. It would probably work to a degree, but be rife with problems, and it would be better if we all voted on who gets right of way on the river. Likewise, where someone can compete with the government and provide a better service, capitalism is probably going to win out, like with package delivery.

      But oh, I know! How about you blithely ignore everything I've tried to explain to you, claim I'm simply disagreeing, and continue to pat yourself on the back? It really seems to be working for you.

  3. News to us in Texas by Aranykai · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is news to us in Dallas. Our international airport has been fine for many, many days of 105+ temperatures.

    Clearly this is a case of poor engineering and substandard materials, not 'hot environment destroying asphalt'.

    --
    If sharing a song makes you a pirate, what do I have to share to be a ninja?
    1. Re:News to us in Texas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I was going to say the same thing about Phoenix. We have at least a couple months of almost continuous 100+ temps and never hear of issues like this.

    2. Re:News to us in Texas by dbIII · · Score: 3, Informative

      Clearly this is a case of poor engineering and substandard materials

      They've just mixed the asphalt for the expected climate instead of having the same mix that would be used in Dallas, or a different mix again for a hot tropical climate. Other expected problems are rails buckling and problems with elongation of power lines.

    3. Re:News to us in Texas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not if the materials were chosen for expected temperatures that are no longer the norm. Washington D.C. has not historically had "many, many days of 105+ temperatures", so why would engineers waste money designing for such a scenario? A quick Google search for 'average temperature US cities" turns up one table showing a 5.8 degree difference between average July temp in Washington D.C. vs. Dallas TX.

    4. Re:News to us in Texas by SomeJoel · · Score: 3, Informative

      I also live near Phoenix. They do in fact occasionally shut down airport traffic when it hits the mid-high 110s (or even 120s). I'm not sure if it's because of this particular problem, or if the airplanes overheat.

      --
      <Complete your profile by adding a signature!>
    5. Re:News to us in Texas by profplump · · Score: 2

      Actually rail lines aren't a problem -- they are stretched when installed so that when the air temperature is ~100 degrees there's no stress on the line.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_stressing

    6. Re:News to us in Texas by mythosaz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      High temperatures thin air.  Thin air makes for less lift.  Less lift makes for dangerous takeoffs.

    7. Re:News to us in Texas by riverat1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Do you think the air in Phoenix (1200 feet) is ever at thin as the air in Denver (5280 feet)? Just by eyeballing it appears the density altitude in Phoenix at 115 F is about 4,000 feet.

    8. Re:News to us in Texas by MarioMax · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Probably not, but I bet the Denver airport runways are longer than Phoenix's airport runways to compensate for the reduced amount of lift.

    9. Re:News to us in Texas by michael_cain · · Score: 2

      Some years back (circa 1990) the Phoenix airport shut down when the air temperature went above 120 degrees F, the maximum for which most jets had been certified (in terms of safe take-off weight) under US FAA rules. Several people from our company were stranded for a few hours until evening when the air temperature dropped back down. IIRC, Boeing took at least one model of all its jets to Saudi Arabia, along with the FAA-qualified measurement gear, and certified the planes to 125 degrees.

    10. Re:News to us in Texas by Rich0 · · Score: 4, Informative

      The performance of aircraft engines at various altitudes and temperatures are well-understood. Before anything the size of an airliner takes off the crew calculates exactly how much thrust is needed to complete the takeoff safely.

      Things considered include:
      1. Temperature
      2. Altitude
      3. Takeoff weight
      4. Runway length (from start point to end of runway).
      5. Any obstructions beyond the end of the runway.
      6. Runway slope
      7. Head/tailwind
      8. Flap configuration
      9. Ground conditions (wet, ice, etc - this matters if the takeoff needs to be aborted)

      I might have missed something, but there are charts for every aircraft with any model of engines that allow you to look all this stuff up and determine if the takeoff can be performed safely. A safe takeoff is one where the aircraft can reach a safe speed and clear all obstacles should an engine fail right at the point of no return, and also where the aircraft can lose an engine right before the point of no return and stop before the end of the runway. None of this stuff is left to chance.

      Usually there is a considerable margin beyond what is necessary for a safe takeoff, and in this case the pilots instruct the aircraft to use less than full thrust. That saves wear and tear on the engines, reduces noise, and also gets rid of the "Top Gun" effect when a jet powered to haul cargo takes off mostly empty.

      If the air is too hot to take off safely on any available runway then the plane doesn't take off. Of course, they know that this will happen before they bother to load the plane - they would take on less cargo/etc if they could, or cancel the flight.

    11. Re:News to us in Texas by riverat1 · · Score: 3, Informative

      You got me there. The longest of 3 runways at Sky Harbor/Phoenix is 11,489 feet (others 10,300 & 7,800 ft). At Denver International they have one runway that's 16,000 feet but the other five are all 12,000 feet, not that much longer than at Phoenix. To address another point that's been raised in this discussion, all of those runways at both airports are concrete.

    12. Re:News to us in Texas by cnettel · · Score: 2

      As anecdotal evidence, an intended direct flight from Las Vegas to Frankfurt was changed in the last minute to include a refuelling stop in Iceland, due to very high temperatures in Vegas. I suppose the main point was to reduce the weight at original liftoff and this way was cheaper to the airline compared to refusing passengers and cargo. We were only about an hour late at our destination, if memory serves me.

    13. Re:News to us in Texas by Alioth · · Score: 2

      No, continuously welded rails are a problem if the temperature is hotter than expected. Typically the rails are pre-stressed to cope with the hottest rail temperatures expected. In the case of extreme heatwaves, if the rail temperature gets higher than it was prestressed for, it's likely to buckle. Usually this happens while a train is going across it.

  4. Not a problem in Montreal by Hamsterdan · · Score: 3, Funny

    Vehicules get stuck in potholes long before asphalt even has a chance to melt

    --
    I've got better things to do tonight than die.
  5. Big rains - bigger culverts by aggles · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The civil engineers around here are replacing any culvert that needs it with the bigger size, so that the increased run-off can be handled without washing out the roads. They assume 500 year events are now 100 year events and 100 year events are 30. 10 year events can happen at any time. Makes sense to me.

    1. Re:Big rains - bigger culverts by dkf · · Score: 2

      I like how Americans think they know what a 500 year event looks like. Sort of like asking a toddler what his future job is like.

      They can use archaeological evidence to have a good guess, combined with power-law modeling. Other evidence that is useful is looking at the location of the edge of rivers' floodplains in the landscape, as you can bet if it's been there before then it will become keen on flowing there once again. (There are a few exceptions to that, but let's not worry too much about a repeat of the Missoula Floods any time soon.) For sure it's not going to be certain, but then it isn't likely to be anywhere else in the world either; nobody's records are perfect so we make do with what we've actually got.

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
  6. "...in a future of weirding weather." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Stand back! This weather has the weirding way!

  7. Re:Average temperature a few degrees higher by TrancePhreak · · Score: 3, Funny

    Quick everybody! buy up some carbon credits to stop this from happening!

    --

    -]Phreak Out[-
  8. don't stand in one place by jklovanc · · Score: 4, Informative

    There is a reason that the area around the terminal is made of concrete and there are concrete pads placed at spots where airplanes sit. It is to allow them to stay in one place without sinking. While heat will hasten the effect, a fully loaded large airplane will sink into any tarmac. I ride motorcycles and on hot days my kick stand can dig through most tarmac quite easilly(I carry a small metal plate to spread the load on hot days).

    The idea is to keep moving so one does not sink. Whoever let the heavy aircraft sit on tarmac instead of concrete is to blame for the issue and not the heat. Even on an average day for July I bet the aircraft would have sunk to some degree in three hours.

    The solution to this problem is to not stand for more than a few minutes on tarmac. If the delay is longer, return to the gate or wait on a piece of concrete.

    1. Re:don't stand in one place by jklovanc · · Score: 2

      Here is an example of a USAF runway that is mostly asphalt. Concrete does not work well where frost heaves can be an issue.

  9. Re:Earth won't turn into Venus! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Damnit, even the worst fearmongers tell us that temperatures will rise by 1 degree per 20 years. Even ignoring the fact that this kind of temperature rise is insignificant in terms of what we're talking about, that's decades or centuries to replace infrastructure.

    Instead of worrying about asphalt on streets, I'm worring about brains already having melted in one-too-many climate change activists demonstration.

    Get a clue.

    "Temperatures will rise by an average of 1 degree" does not imply that temperatures will be ~1 degree higher each and every day. Quite the contrary, climatologists predict that the weather (including temperature) will be MUCH more volatile. That means you will have many days where the temp is >15 degrees above normal, in additional to crazier winter weather etc.

    Basically, because the size of weather fluctuations are expected to increase, you will get more days of crazy temperatures that will take a toll on infrastructure.

  10. Sky Harbor by overshoot · · Score: 4, Informative

    Sky Harbor (Phoenix airport) doesn't use asphalt runways for precisely this reason: archaeologists would be digging the bones of widebodied aircraft out of the tarpit centuries from now.

    FWIW, the record temperature at Sky Harbor was 50C. They had to shut down the airport until it cooled off because the standard tables for flap settings didn't go that high. Now they do.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
  11. Any mix for -18 to 38? by tepples · · Score: 2

    The reason that they use different mixes depending on climate is that the mixes that set will in a cooler climate, also have some resistance to frost heaving. The mixes that harden at a higher temp are more brittle at freezing temps.

    So what's the solution for a place like Indiana that can reach both 0 deg F (-18 deg C) and 100 deg F (38 deg C)?

    1. Re:Any mix for -18 to 38? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So what's the solution for a place like Indiana that can reach both 0 deg F (-18 deg C) and 100 deg F (38 deg C)?

      Here in Chicago, we have a bigger swing than that by about 15 deg F. We've gone from less than -10 deg to 105 deg.

      I swear, sometimes on the same day. Two weeks ago, we had very nearly a 50 degree swing in the course of 30 hours.

      Last week, when we were over 100 all week long, there were pavement buckles all over the expressways. Thing is, we can make infrastructure that will last, but it means making it a priority higher than building an embassy in Iraq bigger than the Vatican.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    2. Re:Any mix for -18 to 38? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 3, Insightful

      but it means making it a priority higher than building an embassy in Iraq bigger than the Vatican.

      Heck, we can feed everybody in the world who doesn't have a secure supply of food for 1/10th the US military budget. But when was the last time Starvin Marvin donated generously to a PAC, eh?

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    3. Re:Any mix for -18 to 38? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 3, Informative

      So what's the solution for a place like Indiana that can reach both 0 deg F (-18 deg C) and 100 deg F (38 deg C)?

      Building the road better, mostly. Layering is important. and drainage is critical. the larger the extremes, the more water you have to get well away from the asphalt.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    4. Re:Any mix for -18 to 38? by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      The temperature ranges asphalt are supplied in do not have a constant width. They can be cold temperatures, warm temperatures, wide temperatures. Same goes for other weathering conditions. There are asphalt grades which are resistant to moisture, and others where a sudden prolonged storm will gouge out massive potholes.

      The problem is different types of asphalt are made from different grades of crude, have different polymers blended into them, and are put through different production processes (like blowing). The end result is actually quite a wide variation in costs of various asphalt grades.

      Also the asphalt doesn't get to 38degC It'll get way beyond that. The temperature of a day is measured indirectly. On a 38degC day a black heat absorbing material exposed for several hours to direct sunlight will be double that temperature (known by anyone who tries to walk across the road barefoot in the summer).

    5. Re:Any mix for -18 to 38? by Pope · · Score: 2

      What a load of bollocks. Those are the current RECORD temperatures, the low in 1938 and the high in 1998. In no way is EDM hitting those extremes on a yearly basis. -25 to 25 is a far closer range to what you'd expect over a 10 year average.

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
    6. Re:Any mix for -18 to 38? by Life2Death · · Score: 2

      In some parts of minnesota and wisconsin I've seen it tweak -40'F to 110'F in one year...

    7. Re:Any mix for -18 to 38? by painandgreed · · Score: 2

      Heck, we can feed everybody in the world who doesn't have a secure supply of food for 1/10th the US military budget. But when was the last time Starvin Marvin donated generously to a PAC, eh?

      True, but then we'd need ten times the military budget to actually get it to the people who need it. If it was as simple as just giving people food, we'd already do it. Instead, if we hand out food, it gets collected and used or sold again by dictators, warlords, and corrupt officials and the people who need it never see the money or the food.

  12. Metling permafrost in Colo. closed major highway by michaelmalak · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Yesterday, CDOT closed US-24, about the fourth most important highway in Colorado, due to ice 100 ft. down that melted for the first time (since a railroad tunnel was constructed a century ago) and created a sinkhole.

  13. Another scaremongering story by dinther · · Score: 4, Insightful

    World temperatures increased by a fraction of a degree but here we go, now airports are melting because of it. What an idiot conclusion telling me a lot of the mental state of the author.

    In reality, the aircraft has been in the same spot for far too long. Additionally the consistency of the tarmac material might be sub-standard causing the melting point to be lower. I have seen roads here in New Zealand that had substandard tarmac on them turning to liquid in the hot sun. And New Zealand average temperate is actually dropping over the last decade.

  14. Re:Water by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 2

    Interestingly enough /. showed those perfectly in the preview, but then escaped them in the final post. /. really should fix their unicode support, I get that use of RTL and control characters were an issue, but there are better ways to prevent that than whitelisting a very small character set.

    --
    Not a sentence!
  15. Re:It's never been over 100 in DC before? by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 2, Informative

    The record high for July 9 and 10 in Washington DC was set in 1936 with 104 degrees on July 9, 1936 and 105 degrees on July 10, 1936. Those are the highest temperatures on record for Washington DC in July (the 7th this year matched the temperature from July 10,1936). The highest temperatures ever recorded in Washington, DC are from two consecutive days in August 1918. The events of this weekend do not represent an unprecedented heat level for Washington, DC. When one further considers that in the last 50 years Washington, DC has been developed in a manner that causes a local heat island effect, this has nothing to do with global warming and everything to do with the expansion of the federal government.

    --
    The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  16. Concrete is for serious runways. by couchslug · · Score: 2

    "And, crucially, it makes for runway repair work that is relatively efficient. "

    That's a nice way of saying "cheap", be it on runways or roads.

    There's good reason Air Force bases use concrete in the vast majority of cases for runways, ramp, and taxiways.

    Got asphalt "problems"? Dig that cheap shit up and recycle it by crushing (makes terrific residential driveways which stay packed but some foliage can penetrate, I've used it for many years) then man up and pour proper concrete instead.

    There's no nice way to put it.

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    1. Re:Concrete is for serious runways. by couchslug · · Score: 2

      SAC bomber bases were in many of those locations. They took heavily loaded strategic bombers and tankers year-round.

      Pour thicker concrete.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  17. Short term fix by gstrickler · · Score: 2

    Paint it white to decrease it's heat absorption.

    Longer term, use a higher temperature mix or switch to concrete like DFW and PHX. Concrete may be less ice tolerant, in which case, a relatively thin layer (~2") asphalt over concrete may be the best option. The concrete provides a solid base and will draw heat off the asphalt, while the asphalt provides an easier to refinish surface that can tolerate snow and ice fairly well.

    --
    make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
  18. Re:It's never been over 100 in DC before? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 5, Funny

    this has nothing to do with global warming and everything to do with the expansion of the federal government.

    Also, Drudge is reporting that the airplane was discovered to be a closet liberal, faking the whole thing to boost the whole fake AGW thing.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  19. Re:Average temperature a few degrees higher by SternisheFan · · Score: 4, Funny

    George Carlin had his own unique view on the 'save the earth' issue. God, I miss that guy! .....g, pale -blue-dot, perspective, plastic “We’re so self-important. Everybody’s going to save something now. “Save the trees, save the bees, save the whales, save those snails.” And the greatest arrogance of all: save the planet. Save the planet, we don’t even know how to take care of ourselves yet. I’m tired of this shit. I’m tired of f-ing Earth Day. I’m tired of these self-righteous environmentalists, these white, bourgeois liberals who think the only thing wrong with this country is that there aren’t enough bicycle paths. People trying to make the world safe for Volvos. Besides, environmentalists don’t give a shit about the planet. Not in the abstract they don’t. You know what they’re interested in? A clean place to live. Their own habitat. They’re worried that some day in the future they might be personally inconvenienced. Narrow, unenlightened self-interest doesn’t impress me. The planet has been through a lot worse than us. Been through earthquakes, volcanoes, plate tectonics, continental drift, solar flares, sun spots, magnetic storms, the magnetic reversal of the poles hundreds of thousands of years of bombardment by comets and asteroids and meteors, worldwide floods, tidal waves, worldwide fires, erosion, cosmic rays, recurring ice ages And we think some plastic bags and some aluminum cans are going to make a difference? The planet isn’t going anywhere. WE are! We’re going away. Pack your shit, folks. We’re going away. And we won’t leave much of a trace, either. Maybe a little Styrofoam The planet’ll be here and we’ll be long gone. Just another failed mutation. Just another closed-end biological mistake. An evolutionary cul-de-sac. The planet’ll shake us off like a bad case of fleas. The planet will be here for a long, long, LONG time after we’re gone, and it will heal itself, it will cleanse itself, ’cause that’s what it does. It’s a self-correcting system. The air and the water will recover, the earth will be renewed. And if it’s true that plastic is not degradable, well, the planet will simply incorporate plastic into a new paradigm: the earth plus plastic. The earth doesn’t share our prejudice toward plastic. Plastic came out of the earth. The earth probably sees plastic as just another one of its children. Could be the only reason the earth allowed us to be spawned from it in the first place. It wanted plastic for itself. Didn’t know how to make it. Needed us. Could be the answer to our age-old egocentric philosophical question, “Why are we here?” Plastic asshole.” George Carlin *** And here's a Youtube link of George... http://www.youtube.com/watch?nomobile=1&v=948Nm34arfA

  20. Re:Earth won't turn into Venus! by Black+Parrot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Translation... If the temperatures go up in an area, its global warming. If the temperatures go down in an area, its global warming. If the temperatures stay the same in an area, its global warming.

    In other words, he is saying no matter what happens, weather wise, that is bad it is global warming and would not have happened if you just paid the government money for the CO2 that you create.

    Actually, "global warming" just means more heat in the atmosphere and oceans, and more thermal energy means more stuff will happen.

    It does *not* mean that every place will be warmer than before by the same amount. If melting ice from Greenland shuts down the Gulf Stream, northwest Europe will suffer horribly - from the cold.

    OTOH, a given heat wave doesn't prove global warming any more than a given cold snap disproves it. What matters is the trend in the average... you know, those boring record-keeping and analysis things that scientists have to do.

    For an amateur to get a rough idea without having to consult world-wide records collected over centuries, just count how many record daily highs and record daily lows you get over a long time span, like a year, and look at the ratio at the end. Most places - but not all - have been breaking many more record highs than record lows in recent years. And that trend was noticed before the current heat wave began.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  21. Re:Nope. ? It is if you need to replace it... by Cimexus · · Score: 2

    Problem is, what you gain at the upper end, you lose at the lower. Australia does indeed get those high temperatures, but the US gets much colder temperatures than Australia does (well, most of it). You need a compound that won't melt in the local summer, but not contract to the point of cracking in the winter.

    As someone that has spent large portions of their life in both countries, it is interesting to see the difference in road engineering. Comparing Canberra Australia (temp range roughly -8 C to +40 C) and NE Wisconsin (annual temperature range -30 C to +35 C):

    - They seem to use a different blend of asphalt in Australia (doesn't start melting at 35 C, which I have seen in the US, but then again it doesn't have to cope with -30 C either!) It's harder and seems smoother/quieter to drive on than the US asphalt. (Also they use on-road reflectors a lot more than the US - driving at night or in the rain in Australia, it's much easier to see where the lane markings are compared to the US).

    - OTOH, they use concrete/cement a LOT more in road surfacing in the US. I can count on three fingers the number of concrete roads I know of around SE Australia (and they are all on major intercity highways, namely, the Federal Highway, portions of the Hume Highway and the F3 to Newcastle). In the US though virtually all highways (US routes and Interstate routes, at least in the Midwest) are concrete, and city streets in the downtown areas usually are too. They don't do this in Australia because it costs so much more than asphalt, but concrete is a lot tougher than asphalt roads and needs less total maintenance over a long period of time (which I suppose is why they used it on a ~few~ busy Australian highways). You do get a continual 'thump, thump, thump' driving around in the US though which you don't get in Australia, due to the expansion joints in the concrete. Annoying but you can't do much about that - they are necessary to deal with the wider temperature swings.

  22. Think again. by ukemike · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I highly doubt in 25 years the average climate in your region has changes from highs of 80 to highs of 95-99. That would be a cataclysmically drastic climate shift. Even the most alarmist of IPCC scientists is looking at global warming on the scale of 2-3 degrees in 40-50 years. I really wish people would stop blaming hot days on global warming, it just makes us all look stupid. Keep this in mind the next time you have an unseasonably cold day :P

    The 2-3 degrees increase is for the average global temperature. The sorts of changes of local seasonal high temperatures have already been seen in the 2003 and 2011 heat waves in Europe.

    And while it is difficult to blame particular weather events on climate change it is clear that the last decade of very extreme outlier weather events is attributable to climate change. http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn22037-climate-change-boosted-odds-of-texas-drought.html

    --
    -- QED
  23. The REAL Infrastructure Problems by ukemike · · Score: 2

    The REAL Infrastructure Problems will be preventing the rising seas from inundating Bangladesh, Florida, various Pacific Islands, and the many other low lying parts of our civilization. The real infrastructure problems will be relocating our agriculture once our current breadbaskets begin to fail. The real infrastructure problems will be figuring out how to make our cities capable of withstanding massive flooding and extended droughts, sometimes one right after the other. We've passed the point where we could prevent it, the big challenge now will be surviving it.

    --
    -- QED
  24. just throwing it out there by slashmydots · · Score: 2

    There are other countries in the world that get hotter than 100F and they have airports. Just throwing it out there. Something tells me there's a solution out there somewhere lol.

  25. Who cares? by BlackPignouf · · Score: 2

    The whole civil aviation is doomed to plummet due to oil scarcity.
    Soft tarmac will be the least of its problems.