Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Is Our Infrastructure Ready For Rising Temperatures?

Posted by Soulskill on from the all-the-more-reason-to-aircondition-the-outdoors dept.

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.'"

12 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 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.

  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 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.
    2. 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.

    3. 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

    4. 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.

    5. 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.
  3. "...in a future of weirding weather." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Stand back! This weather has the weirding way!

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. 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