Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Road Makers Turn To Recycled Plastic For Tougher Surfaces (economist.com)

Posted by msmash on from the taking-a-step-back dept.

Recycled plastic is already used to make some products, such as guttering and sewage pipes. Now attention is turning to roads. From a report: On September 11th in Zwolle, a town in the Netherlands, a 30-metre bicycle track made from 70% recycled plastic and the rest from polypropylene was opened [Warning: the link may be paywalled; alternative source]. It will be used to test a product called PlasticRoad, which is being developed by two Dutch firms -- KWS, a road builder, and Wavin, a firm that makes plastic piping -- in partnership with Total, a French oil-and-gas firm. PlasticRoad is prefabricated in a factory as modular sections. The sections are then transported to the site and laid end to end on a suitable foundation, such as sand. Because these sections are hollow, internal channels can be incorporated into them for drainage, along with conduits for services such as gas and electricity. For the Zwolle project, sections that were 2.4 metres long and 3 metres wide were used. These were fitted with sensors to measure things such as temperature, flexing and the flow of water through the drainage channels. A second pilot cycleway is being built in the nearby town of Giethoorn.

If all goes well, the inventors hope to develop the idea and make the sections entirely from recycled plastic. Paths, car parks and railway platforms could follow. Eventually, sections for use as actual roads are planned. These could contain sensors for traffic monitoring. In time, the circuits in the plastic roads might extend to assisting autonomous vehicles and recharging electric cars wirelessly. Prefabricated plastic roads should last two-to-three times longer than conventional roads and cost less, the companies claim, mainly because construction times would be reduced by almost two-thirds. Anti-slip surfaces could be incorporated, too, including crushed stones which are traditionally used to dress road surfaces. The sections, when replaced, can also be recycled. But engineers will be watching to see how the track stands up to wear and tear and if the hollow structure causes resonance, which would make such a road unduly noisy.

64 of 109 comments (clear)

  1. Mulched rubber tires by sinij · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Where I live they tried adding mulched rubber tires to asphalt, this resulted in road surfaces that are less durable (more potholes) and the practice was abandoned.

    How is this different?

    1. Re:Mulched rubber tires by rojash · · Score: 1

      Jeez, man, this is for bicycling trails, not for regular assfault roads. Big diff.

    2. Re:Mulched rubber tires by Brett+Buck · · Score: 1

      How is this different?

      Its probably even worse.

    3. Re:Mulched rubber tires by avandesande · · Score: 1

      if you RTFA there is no asphalt in this material

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    4. Re:Mulched rubber tires by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Eventually, sections for use as actual roads are planned."

    5. Re:Mulched rubber tires by PPH · · Score: 1

      this is for bicycling trails

      Bicycles wear surfaces just like autos do. Sometimes even more. We had an abandoned Nike missile site near me that was used for decades by four-wheel drivers. No problems. The county closed off motor vehicle access and turned it into a mountain bike trail park. Now the place is seriously rutted and the soil runoff into nearby salmon creeks is significant.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    6. Re:Mulched rubber tires by postbigbang · · Score: 5, Informative

      Um, no. Just no.

      You're talking about non-paved surfaces. This is about paved surfaces.

      On paved surfaces, the data says that adding rubber/plastic recycled materials improves durability. Overweight trucks and plenty of them, will still erode them. High traffic volume, wide ambient environment, poor road beds, all will do their share to screw up paved surfaces. Bikes, by their nature, do not present the weight and lateral surface impact that heavy trucks present.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    7. Re:Mulched rubber tires by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Wear on the road is a factor of the vehicles weight. Therefore while a bicycle might wear a road, it is insignificant to the wear caused by a loaded dump truck.

      Here, cause I know your going to start whining:
      https://streets.mn/2016/07/07/chart-of-the-day-vehicle-weight-vs-road-damage-levels/

    8. Re:Mulched rubber tires by Ormy · · Score: 1

      Road wear & tear is proportional to the 4th power of vehicle weight. Anything to the 4th power is slightly unusual in Physics. Buses and trucks cause over 90% of the damage. But that doesn't mean only trucks should pay, there is still a significant cost to build the road in the first place and that should be shared equally.

    9. Re:Mulched rubber tires by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Because taxing transit of goods at this level would raise prices of staple products excessively and end up being a regressive tax that primarily affects the poor. Maybe. I'm not actually sure if that would be the result, but it would be a large change that nobody will understand the ramifications of until it's too late.

    10. Re:Mulched rubber tires by PPH · · Score: 1

      I'm going to pass on a web site that includes "justice" and "empowerment" as factors in road maintenance. I'm also going to ignore anyone who doesn't actually look at tire loading per square inch as a more important factor than big trucks vs little trucks.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    11. Re:Mulched rubber tires by PPH · · Score: 1

      adding rubber/plastic recycled materials improves durability

      OK. But plastic/rubber roads will still wear. And we don't need to change the subject to 'overweight trucks'. Bicycles will wear a road surface, cars will wear a road surface and trucks will wear a road surface. The plastic and rubber might reduce that wear but the resulting debris from all uses will end up floating in the oceans and get into our food supply. No thanks.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    12. Re:Mulched rubber tires by postbigbang · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Still, no.

      You're concerned over 200lbs distributed over two tires. I'm talking 80,000 pounds distributed over 18 wheels, sometimes more and less.

      I, too, don't want to see plastics in the oceans. Roads aren't paved in the oceans. It's true that particles are leached into aquifers. We don't have good data on how much, what kind, deterioration, and more. If you were looking to stanch plastic pollution, talk to your local grocer, and encourage products made from paper, or better still, re-usable packaging that requires little cleaning before re-use.

      More effective plastic stanching is possible. It's because plastics compressed as described are so strong, that they'll last much longer as paving products, although all the data isn't in yet.

      There are experimental paving stretches across the US. Some involve plastics, tires, stone mill grinds, and many more. Let's see what works best before condemning them. I want to stanch plastics pollution as much as possible. First things first, please.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    13. Re:Mulched rubber tires by sinij · · Score: 1

      Your data is wrong or maybe it is just wrong for climate where I live. Adding recycled rubber notably reduces durability of roads here. They had to redo road near where I live in just 2 years after trying this method.

    14. Re:Mulched rubber tires by avandesande · · Score: 1

      On September 11th in Zwolle, a town in the Netherlands, a 30-metre bicycle track made from 70% recycled plastic and the rest from polypropylene was opened. It will be used to test a product called PlasticRoad, which is being developed by two Dutch firms—KWS, a road builder, and Wavin, a firm that makes plastic piping—in partnership with Total, a French oil-and-gas firm.

      Yes I understand a asphalt mixture was discussed later but this material was the focus.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    15. Re:Mulched rubber tires by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      Likely true-- the mix is all important. It's easy to fudge one ingredient for a more expensive one, when no one's looking, or knows hot to evaluate the mix.... just like regular asphalt. Densities are all important.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    16. Re: Mulched rubber tires by diaz · · Score: 1

      Quite from my intro traffic engineering prof.: âoeOne truck does the same damage as 10,000 passenger carsâ. The ratio is probably similar cars to bikes.

    17. Re:Mulched rubber tires by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      To add to your comment, it's not just 80000 pounds over 18 wheels, it's that wear on a paved surface by a vehicle is a function of the FOURTH POWER of the axle weight.

      So while actual weight presented on each wheel would be 44x that of a bicycle by your example, actual road wear is 62000000x worse for a truck compared to a bike.

    18. Re:Mulched rubber tires by SpzToid · · Score: 1

      In India, an engineer has been adding plastic to reduce bitumen as an asphalt component; mostly to reduce waste in landfills.

      https://www.theguardian.com/wo...

      Which sounded great to me until I read the poster's comment below, with their idea of microplastics in the food chain.

      --
      You can't be ahead of the curve, if you're stuck in a loop.
    19. Re:Mulched rubber tires by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      That is too bad. Vulcanized rubber tires are expensive to un-vulcanize, in terms of energy. It would be better to have a good use such as roads (and only so many play-grounds).
      Out of curiosity, did they just add it as a topping, or all through it?

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    20. Re:Mulched rubber tires by belg4mit · · Score: 1

      Damage proportional is to the fourth power of a vehicle's weight, this is one reason why we have weight stations for trucks.

      --
      Were that I say, pancakes?
    21. Re:Mulched rubber tires by rojash · · Score: 1

      I doubt this 'web site' controls verbiage :) I also doubt anyone cares when someone says they will ignore LOL No offense

  2. This will DEFINITELY... by Type44Q · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This will DEFINITELY help with the 'mcroplastics in the foodchain' problem.

    1. Re:This will DEFINITELY... by sremick · · Score: 1

      Seriously. That was my first thought: as these roads get plowed, you're making piles of microplastics that are washing directly into wildlife and the food stream.

    2. Re:This will DEFINITELY... by pgmrdlm · · Score: 1

      Where I live, they grind off about an inch of the highway then blacktop it. Which is nothing but an oil product. This is eastern ohio, we constantly get snow. Between the chemicals they use and the plowing. doesn't the same thing happen. All that hazardous waste from the highway gets back into the eco system?

      --
      Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
    3. Re:This will DEFINITELY... by PPH · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Which is nothing but an oil product.

      A lot of the volume of blacktop is gravel and sand. Which, when worn down becomes sand. When that gets into water ways, it just settles to the bottom with the other sand. The tar and other heavy petrochemical products do enter the environment, but at a pretty slow rate where they are broken down by biological activity*.

      *We had a city park near me that was found to be an old (WWII era) fuel tank farm. With plumes of fuel soaking into the soil. The solution was to remove the sod, till up the dirt underneath and mix it with some specialized bacteria strains and let it sit for about a year. After that, all the petroleum waste was gone and it's now a park again.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    4. Re:This will DEFINITELY... by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      I hope this is a successful endeavor, but I have concerns that the test will hopefully figure out.

      TFS did stateverything that the surface could be dressed in gravel. So hopefully that will take care of traction issues from the plastic itself, but also when the traction layer itself wears smooth. Hopefully this will also minimize plastic wearing off and beingreleased into the environment.

      Repairable is also a concern. It's not like an asphalt road that can be easily patched. Or maybe it can. I didn't RTFA.

      The drainage channels are also something I'm curious about. How will they be kept free of clogs? And how easy will it be to unclog them? Then there's the question of how the drainage channels will deal with snow melting and entering the drains and re-freezing at night or when the temperature drops. Will the surface Crack like current roads do? Or will it cause the surface to bubble? Either way, it will cause problems. Bubbling will make the surface uneven and weaken the material from expanding and contracting repeatedly. Whiche makes me wonder how it will do with expansion and contraction due to temperature changes.

      I'm sure this is all stuff they will be testing for and thought of already. I hope they have resolved all of these and other issues. Because it would be pretty cool to find something this massive to help with the plastic waste we have.

    5. Re:This will DEFINITELY... by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1
      Yeah, all in all this is a pretty interesting experiment.

      plastic wearing off and beingreleased into the environment.

      There's likely to be some of that. But probably a great deal less than we currently have, with most plastic going unrecycled.

      Repairable is also a concern. It's not like an asphalt road that can be easily patched. Or maybe it can. I didn't RTFA.

      It being plastic, there might be a simple way using heat & resin to patch a bad spot. Or you lift out a section and drop in a new one, I don't know. But I have my doubts about the greatly reduced construction times these guys claim: most of the effort in building new roads seems to go into preparing the right of way, the foundation, and grading, and you still need to do all that when using these plastic segments. Once they've done the ground work, surfacing the road doesn't seem to actually take that much time. But perhaps it's different for bike paths.

      How will they be kept free of clogs? And how easy will it be to unclog them? Then there's the question of how the drainage channels will deal with snow melting and entering the drains and re-freezing at night or when the temperature drops.

      Here in the Netherlands, drainage is pretty much a solved problem.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    6. Re:This will DEFINITELY... by Solandri · · Score: 1

      Oil and tar are relatively short hydrocarbon chains (less than 10 to a few dozen carbons). There are bacteria which can break them down.

      Plastics are extremely long hydrocarbon chains. Thousands of carbons or longer - if you stretched it out, a single PE molecule can be as long as a fraction of a mm. It's this length which makes them so durable and persistent. Bacteria cannot break them down. They remain stable until ionizing radiation (primarily UV light) breaks them into shorter hydrocarbon chains, and then bacteria can cope with them.

      The same "problem" exists with naturally occurring hydrocarbon chains. Sugars like glucose form the basic hydrocarbon energy block that almost all life on earth relies on. If you glue sugar molecules together, you end up with starches, which most organisms can break down into sugar to use as fuel. But plants figured out that if they make the sugar chains even longer, they end up with cellulose. That's long enough that most organisms can't break it down into its constituent sugar molecules. Herbivores and termites are completely dependent on a few specialized bacteria which can break down those long cellulose chains, to unlock the sugar they contain. (That's why herbivores have 4 stomachs and regurgitate cud to chew it again - it's all a complex laboratory process to break down cellulose into shorter molecules so they can get at the sugar.)

      In both cases, most of the original energy of the oil/sugar is still there (both plastic and wood burn readily). They're just protected from breakdown via biological processes by the extremely long molecular length. So yeah, making a road out of recycled plastic will result in microfragments of plastic which are resistant to bio-degradation being released into the environment.

    7. Re:This will DEFINITELY... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      A lot of the volume of blacktop is gravel and sand. Which, when worn down becomes sand.

      A lot of the volume is polymers too. Plastic is already mixed in, the difference being is that the quality and grade is tightly controlled as it affects the properties of the road surface.

    8. Re:This will DEFINITELY... by hackertourist · · Score: 1

      In the Netherlands, plowing is rare enough that it won't be a significant factor. Snow deep enough to need plowing occurs maybe 1-2 times per winter, and many winters we don't have snow at all. Mostly the roads are just salted.

      The biggest source of micro'plastics' from roads is from tire and brake wear. Tarmac roads also produce microscopic particles from road wear.

      Much of this debris collects around the roadside, where the next rainfall will sweep it into the sewer system. The Dutch sewer system is very well equipped to filter out small particles.

    9. Re:This will DEFINITELY... by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      In the Netherlands, plowing is rare enough that it won't be a significant factor. Snow deep enough to need plowing occurs maybe 1-2 times per winter, and many winters we don't have snow at all. Mostly the roads are just salted.

      Maybe in the Netherlands, but in most of North America? Not a chance. To make it clear what the OP is saying, I live in Ontario(Canada). Figure there's 400km between the two of us, for him the plowing could be 1-2 times per day. For us, it can be 1-2 times per hour or more. The winters though the US central states, and north eastern states can be severe. ~9 years ago here in Ontario, we had snowfall amounts of 5.7m(19ft) over a 3 day weekend in the southwestern part of the province, that's actually fairly rare. But used to be common enough that houses were built with a door on the second floor so you could get out, pretty much any house that hasn't been renovated and built prior to 1970 still has them. Get into eastern and western Canada(minus very southern BC) outside of Southern Ontario and not even salt cuts it anymore, gets too cold. We use gravel-crush mixed with sand on the winter roads.

      The biggest source of micro'plastics' from roads is from tire and brake wear. Tarmac roads also produce microscopic particles from road wear.

      Well that's not really true. Tires are pretty much all rubber(natural or synthetic about 60-80% component material the rest being carbon and other non-plastic materials) to the outside, the belts are usually a fiber-plastic blend, or blended with a steel belt. If tires are throwing plastic, then you're driving on the belts. Brakes on cars are either semi-metallic or ceramic. Semi-metallic is iron, copper, waste steel(i.e. poor quality steel), mixed with sand and a resin binder. Fun fact, the resin binder was thought at one point to be more toxic then asbestos(what brake shoes used to be made out of). More expensive semi-metallic components may contain carbon fiber. Ceramic shoes are around 95% ceramic and 5% copper or steel. There's no plastic in either type of shoe in use, brakes get far too hot.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    10. Re:This will DEFINITELY... by hackertourist · · Score: 1

      Microplastics are not uniquely dangerous. Microscopic anything non-biodegradable can be a problem when it gets into the food chain.

    11. Re:This will DEFINITELY... by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Microplastics are not uniquely dangerous. Microscopic anything non-biodegradable can be a problem when it gets into the food chain.

      Yeah, well the world isn't a safe place either. And if you don't want to develop skin cancer, stay indoors and become a vampire to boot.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    12. Re:This will DEFINITELY... by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

      Why would this help?

      Microplastics come primarily from wear and tear of plastic articles, such as polyester clothing. If we make roads out of plastic, tires will grind off bits of microplastic, which will wash off the road.

      It WILL help with large plastic waste, which can be recycled. But I see this only making the microplastics problem worse.

    13. Re: This will DEFINITELY... by pgmrdlm · · Score: 1

      Lets see.
      I support paper straws and bags.
      What, do we go back to glass bottles instead of what receive our liquids in now?
      How about almost all of our devices have plastic in them., what do we do with them. Change all manufacturing globally>
      The world, globe now relies on numerous products. What, you going to push everyone back into caves>
      You are an idiot, you offer no solutions. You also are too fucking stupid to recognize why it will never happen.
      Now, if recycling of all plastic could be achieved. That would be an answer. So mother fucker, I do have a solution. It's a hell of a lot more realistic then fucking yours. Asshole

      --
      Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
  3. Re:Recycle everthing possible ffs by Joce640k · · Score: 1

    Sometimes there is no other option.

    None, apart from re-using/refilling it.

    --
    No sig today...
  4. Microplastics problem maybe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This has been done with rubber (not plastic) on our estate in Milton Keynes, UK. When it's done properly it's basically un-noticeable and so far has worn extremely well. I can't imagine doing this with plastic as that's basically a bit stupid given the microplastics 'news' currently in the worlds focus

    However there is food for thought - this stuff basically wears down as dust, and even if it does it slowly there'll be a lot granted, but dust is a lot smaller than your evil microbead problem, so much so that it's likely not a problem anymore at that scale.

    Certainly brake pad dust would be more of an issue - how many tonnes of that gets put into the air? Some compounds used are *not* nice. and this certainly gets worn down faster, and on a far greater scale than a plastic road.

    1. Re:Microplastics problem maybe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Where I am from (nebraska). They tried recycled plastic on several large stretches of road on I80 outside of Omaha. The conclusion was the road wore out about 20%-40% faster than normal. UNL and NDOT did several very good writeups on it. The 'wear' factor was mostly from the crushing amount of 18 wheelers that travel along I-80. It was about half the cost (at the time).

      Now for a bike trail (which is the use case here)? That could work decently. For automobile roads? It is just not as durable than the asphalt they are currently using. Which most of the time they scrape off the roadbed and just recrush it and smooth it back out.

    2. Re:Microplastics problem maybe? by Misagon · · Score: 1

      Oh, when the plastic pieces turn smaller than microplastics they become nanoplastics which have a whole lot of other issues for health and the environment. You would not want to inhale it.

      Wear-down of car tyres is known as a significant cause of micro and nano-plastics in the environment. Tyres are usually made of a mix of natural rubber and synthetic rubber - and synthetic rubbers are also plastics, more or less.

      Another significant health issue in colder climates is that studded snow tyres wear down paved road surfaces into hazardous airborne dust. Many cities in Nordic countries have therefore banned the use of studded tyres in city centres and/or on their most well-trafficked streets.

      --
      "We mustn't be caught by surprise by our own advancing technology" -- Aldous Huxley
  5. Paywall and images by forkfail · · Score: 5, Funny

    For those who can't see past the paywall, there are some pretty good images of the road sections here.

    --
    Check your premises.
  6. What really matters: by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

    The things of real consequence here are the cost savings and how well the road can stand up to heavy loads. If it doesn't perform well in those two areas then it will get limited use. It might be exactly what Zwolle wants, Hell it might even be great for all of the Netherlands but for widespread use, one must consider global applications.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  7. Impressive! by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    A 30-metres long bicycle track made in recycled plastic....

    Wait, 30 metres?

    Do you want to have flawed data? Because that's how you get flawed data.

    Make it at least 3 kilometres long, otherwise all your data will be coming from basically the same exact spot.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
    1. Re:Impressive! by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 3, Informative

      First they get their data from the exact same spot. If the road stands up to normal use, doesn't wreck bicycle tires, doesn't turn incredibly slippery in rain or snow, isn't riddled with holes after a few frost / thaw cycles, doesn't kill a kitten an hour with microplastics produced by wear and tear... then it's time to build a longer stretch and see if the economics also work out.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  8. Nano particles by TJHook3r · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't worn down plastic end up in gutters, and from there into watercourses... and finally the sea?

    1. Re:Nano particles by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      We call those "plastic pebbles" or "starshine".

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    2. Re:Nano particles by hackertourist · · Score: 1

      In the Netherlands, gutters are connected to the sewer system, which has rigorous filtering before any water is allowed out.

  9. What could possibly go wrong by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    "The Plasticman"

    A lone venturer comes across a crashed plane containing a body wearing the uniform of the USPS (Uniformed Salsa Plastic Service) with a bag full of plastic water bottles.

    He travels down a plastic road, weathered by erosion and sunlight, which chokes him to death before he can reach the town about to be destroyed by plastic beetles. So they die.

    Everyone is happy in their plastic ruins.

    The End

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  10. Re:Recycle everthing possible ffs by hey! · · Score: 1

    Technically, this doesn't meet the strictest standards for "recycling". It's re-use, which is better than throwing away, and is casually called by many people "recycling", but it doesn't actually form a cycle.

    Recycling should form a closed loop, with the molecules being recycled moving through the cycle over and over again. The idea is to mimic natural biological systems in which matter is reused over and over again with an input of energy and an output of entropy.

    So the big question is: what happens to the road sections when they wear out or have to be removed? If they're processed into new road sections, then that meets the strictest definitions of recycling. Also, the fate of plastic particles lost to the cycle has to be taken into account. Recycling milk bottles to more milk bottles can be very efficient in terms of matter losses, but exposing a former milk bottle to erosion for a decade or longer is a different story.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  11. Re:Recycle everthing possible ffs by sexconker · · Score: 2

    Recycling is the worst option of all.

    1: Reduce
    2: Reuse
    3: Recycle

    Recycling is not reusing. Recycling takes tons of energy to recover material from something and repurpose it. It often creates an inferior product.

  12. Why Roads by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

    They eventually want to make roads out of this product if it proves tough enough. Why not try and get driveways and some parking lots made from this instead? Then it doesn't have to put up with the heavy loads a busy road would put on it but still replace asphalt. Then as the product improves it can begin to replace roads.

  13. Re:Recycle everthing possible ffs by Herkum01 · · Score: 1

    It maybe a inferior product, but if it takes less energy to generate then starting from scratch you are still coming out ahead.

  14. Bikeways, paths, yes. Roads no. by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    This is potentially a reasonable application for bikeways and paths, but it's a non-starter for roads. Their claim that adding plastic increases durability is simply nonsense. Road surfaces already contain quite a bit of plastic. Various polymers are mixed into the bitumen in a very controlled way to achieve a wide variety of different grades suitable for different duties, with different road bases, and different environmental conditions.

    On a footpath where this stuff doesn't matter as much you can make the surface out of pretty much anything. On a bike path the road base is far more important than the final surfacing. However on an actual road with an actual vehicle load making blanket statements about the mixture and makeup of the materials is simply showing you have no idea what goes into making a road.

  15. Re:Recycle everthing possible ffs by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

    How is that not recycling?

    Because classically, "recycling" means putting it back through industrial processes to manufacture a new item. The extended meaning of recycling to cover reuse, repair and repurposing inadvertently puts carbon-intensive collection and reprocessing of glass on an equal footing with not putting the glass in the bin at all and using it to store things instead of silly plastic Tupperware items.

    --
    Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
  16. Re:Recycle everthing possible ffs by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

    It maybe a inferior product, but if it takes less energy to generate then starting from scratch you are still coming out ahead.

    Many forms of recycling take more energy than working from raw materials. Such recycling is only commercially viable thanks to the high charges for landfill and dumping of used goods.

    --
    Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
  17. A milestone! This advances microplastic production by Rambo+Tribble · · Score: 1

    ... by decades, and decades.

  18. Re:Recycle everthing possible ffs by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    Many forms of recycling take more energy than working from raw materials. Such recycling is only commercially viable thanks to the high charges for landfill and dumping of used goods.
    Care to point one, or a couple of them out?
    I never have heard about such a thing, how should that be physical possible?

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  19. Re:Recycle everthing possible ffs by sexconker · · Score: 1

    It maybe a inferior product, but if it takes less energy to generate then starting from scratch you are still coming out ahead.

    It almost never does. Recycling only makes sense when the material is rare or valuable, or when the method of recycling is dead simple and cheap compared to making new.

    I'd say there's about an order of magnitude of importance between each of reduce, reuse, and recycle.
    That is, 90% of the focus should be on not using and wasting so much shit.
    Then 9% of the focus should be on fully utilizing the shit you do use
    With .9% (or a whole 1%) of the focus being on recovering materials from the thing when its functional life is over, IF those materials are worth recovering.

    But no - society expects you to buy a new iPhone every year. Lease (not even fucking buy) a new car every 3 years. How many people do you know who will spend a few minutes to stitch and mend clothing (or even know how to)? What about appliance repair or basic home maintenance?

    One of the few things the hippies got right is that the disposable, consumption based society is fucking retarded.

  20. Re:Recycle everthing possible ffs by sexconker · · Score: 1

    I was going to give you a serious list of examples, but then I noticed your username.

    Just in case OTHERS want to know, look at your county's website for recycling centers, then check them out and see what they won't take. Then search for "recycle" and those things. Plenty of products are created in such a way that it's too costly, or outright infeasible, to recover the materials. A classic example is a juice box. Cardboard, plastic, foil, and lots of glue.

  21. Re:Recycle everthing possible ffs by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    Nevertheless the cardboard and the plastic gets recycled ...

    Or do you mean a juice container? Made from the stupid mixture of cardboard and plastic? They actually get recycled, too. But into park benches and other silly stuff.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  22. Re:Recycle everthing possible ffs by sexconker · · Score: 1

    No, they typically don't get recycled because of all the layers of different materials all glued together. It makes no sense to recycle them to recover the materials. Look it up. "Recycle juice box".

    In the 90s, people started complaining about this packaging, and a few companies in the US started recycling them to prove that it could be done. Yet it's still not feasible to do so, and today most places in the US won't recycle them. If they take them they'll likely end up in a landfill. The most efficient thing to do with them is to burn them for heat or to produce electricity.

    In Europe, they're recycled more often due to legislation requiring it. But that doesn't mean it makes sense from an energy, economic, or materials/resources standpoint. The standard process it to shred and boil it for ages to create a slurry like pulp, then chemically extract the metal and nobody cares about the rest. I guess you can make shitty paper based product out of it.

    The leading manufacturer of this shit, Tetra Pak, has a goal of getting up to 40% of the things to be recycled by 2020. How are they getting to that number? By building a handful of facilities that can separate the layers (at great cost) and then telling other recycling facilities to fucking ship empty juice boxes to them. It's absurd.

  23. Re:Recycle everthing possible ffs by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    Well, they are recycled. Just not to make new tetra packs from them.

    However you are right, those things should be forbidden.

    Anyway, the parent was more one of those wackos who claims that melting iron/steel costs more energy than melting ore. Or similar for glass. There are so many people here who thing melting bottles costs the same energy as melting fresh glass from sand.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  24. Re:Recycle everthing possible ffs by sexconker · · Score: 1

    60 to 80% of them are NOT recycled in any way.

  25. Re:Recycle everthing possible ffs by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    60% - 80% of what?
    Of course it gets recycled, same for steel and aluminum. At least here in Europe.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.