What L.e.e.d. Certification And Cost Savings In Pavement

FirefightnRick · July 20, 2009

http://www.gomeangreen.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=47575#

Rick

July 20, 2009

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for cutting waste and not trashing the environment. But, while some of the energy saving ideas really have merit, about as many are a lot of hooey.

As Rick pointed out, this grass paving doesn't work in this area without a lot of cost which defeats its purpose. Not only that, it is dangerous to small children.

Unless and until we can get green solutions that work in this area we should go with those things that are tried and true and the most cost effective.

Don't get me started on their disdain for the oil, coal, nuclear power and lumbering industries. I guess their lobbyists didn't fill enough coffers.

KingDL1 · July 20, 2009

Never work in texas even with tons of watering.

L.E.E.D is a bit of a joke just a fad without thought, while good with intentions it will almost certainly date the hell out of our stadium if they really go this way.

Edited July 20, 2009 by KingDL1

UNT90 · July 20, 2009

So cheap looking. It reminds me of this (below), which also sucks to the nth.

http://snapsports.com/shocktowerOut.html

Evan · July 21, 2009

here is quite a bit of information about it......

Grass paving information

quite a few pictures of different methods

EagleGreen · July 21, 2009

Looks good, just doesn't work in Texas.

UNTflyer · July 21, 2009

If done right, it can look good.

eulessismore · July 21, 2009

They've done a lot of studies on this in North Carolina and especially at North Carolina State U. (NC's version of Texas A$M). I think the following link presents a good discussion of the issues:

NC State Paper on Interlocking Pavers

There's a lot of information out there; one thing I'd like to see is for the UNT Engineering school to design a project to study the effects of several different methods on the New Stadium site.

Honestly, as an environmentalist, I'm disappointed at some of the L.E.E.D. efforts put forth by the City of Dallas. For one thing, two of the buildings I've visited have training facilities, but are so inconvenient to public transportation that one starts thinking of the energy it takes to get people to these sites compared to what is saved at the building itself.

The permeable paving has larger contexts as well, mainly how to use it within an overall drainage plan for a facility. It seems to me that the costs and maintenance of the paving materials may be near or even above that of asphalt at the time of some studies, but that the time and cost savings realized from a reduced need for drainage structures might be beneficial to our project.

Our President has mentioned some of the things done at the Universities in North Carolina that were beneficial to the environment; I hope she can apply some of what they and others have already learned to our construction needs.

One thing to consider: these paving methods can result in greener pavement, literally and figuratively.

Edited July 21, 2009 by eulessismore

FirefightnRick · July 21, 2009

NC State Paper on Interlocking Pavers

Well, I was going to point to page 14 in the above study as an example I suggested previously for a better option, installing aggregate rock instead of throwing money out the window by the buckets full by trying to maintain grass here in Texas. But then they had to mention the Global Warming scam on page 29? :rolleyes:

Rick

UNT90 · July 21, 2009

Baby out with the bathwater, Rick? Maybe one small aspect doesn't work for our specific context. Ok. The goals of LEED certification are still worthy. They aren't even that lofty. They are really mostly just doing something more than the other guy. And we are all about that at UNT. Doing less with more is our life.
So let's use cisterns, CF lights were appropriate, waterless urinals, and whatever else we can do to gain recognition and be good stewards or public money and welfare.

Funny. Intentional or not.

EagleGreen · July 21, 2009

Baby out with the bathwater, Rick? Maybe one small aspect doesn't work for our specific context. Ok. The goals of LEED certification are still worthy. They aren't even that lofty. They are really mostly just doing something more than the other guy. And we are all about that at UNT. Doing less with more is our life.
So let's use cisterns, CF lights were appropriate, waterless urinals, and whatever else we can do to gain recognition and be good stewards or public money and welfare.

Waterless urinals? Let's just piss in the parking lot...uh...paver lot...whatever.

KRAM1 · July 21, 2009

Waterless urinals? Let's just piss in the parking lot...uh...paver lot...whatever.

Would this mean we would have to drink less beer???? :blink:

MDH · July 21, 2009

Nice post Rick. I was looking forward to this aspect of the stadium but I can now see how this really isn't possible in this area without a ton of maintenance.

FirefightnRick · July 21, 2009

Nice post Rick. I was looking forward to this aspect of the stadium but I can now see how this really isn't possible in this area without a ton of maintenance.

Well it is possible and doable here. But what 97and03 and others seem to have missed is, it's doable in a different, smarter way and the NC State study above even offers it as a suggestionable alternative. For a third time now, instead of grass for infill, I hope we go with an aggregate rock. It's more affordable without the never ending expense of having to maintain and increase the retention ponds, yet allows us to meet the goal of preserving the water table, which is what this aspect of L.E.E.D. is for.

Rick

Edited July 21, 2009 by FirefightnRick

gangrene · July 21, 2009

Has it been confirmed that our parking lots are going to consist of some sort of grass/block mixture? This stuff looks awful for tailgating and even walking on....driving, may be ok, but it certainly does not appear to be tailgate friendly. I hope they plan on having a medical team present to tend to all the twisted ankles. Frankly, I'd rather just have an all grass parking lot than this block and grass mixture.

Not to mention the jokes we'll endure from SMU et. al about how we couldn't afford enough concrete to pave the entire lot.

Edited July 21, 2009 by gangrene