Reprinted with Permission from the June 2000 " Hot-Mix Asphalt”

FACT: Asphalt is more cost-effective than concrete. This is true for initial construction, as well as for maintenance over the life of the pavement. Most construction engineers and officials involved in choosing pavement types know this already.

. . . One of the main arguments made by the concrete industry for increased use of their product is the fact that concrete represents savings in the long run. The literature circulated by the American Concrete Pavement Association (ACPA) claims that concrete lasts an average of 24 years compared to asphalt’s 12 years.
. . . The ACPA says that concrete is a long-term cure for problems like potholes and orange barrels, implying that if we would just use concrete now, we would save later.

Asphalt Costs Less -- Now and Later
. . . This argument is full of holes. One of the reasons over 98 percent of paved road surfaces in Ohio are asphalt is that asphalt costs less, both in the short-term and in the long-term. This shouldn’t come as a shock to most readers familiar with road construction. Hopefully, this article will provide you with the ammunition you need next time someone tries to tell you that concrete is more cost-effective.
. . . Willis Gibboney, PE, a former interstate pavement engineer for the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT), performed a 1994 study commissioned by Flexible Pavements of Ohio. Gibboney looked at all Ohio highways that had alternate stretches of asphalt and concrete pavements more than 19 years old. His study compared pavements of similar age and traffic load.
. . . Gibboney looked at both the costs for initial construction and the costs for maintenance over time, making adjustments for inflation. His conclusion:

In every case, asphalt was both cheaper to install and
cheaper to maintain over the life of the pavement,
which in some cases was over 30 years old.

Lower Life-Cycle Cost
. . . While it’s true that asphalt typically requires surface maintenance before concrete, this work is cheap and quick. What the concrete people don’t tell us is the fact that at some point during the purported 24-year life span of a concrete road, rehabilitation will be necessary. This, of course, means a time-consuming, expensive process that makes the life-cycle cost of that concrete road skyrocket over what it would have been if it were asphalt.
. . . At this point, asphalt’s life-cycle cost is not just lower than concrete – it’s not even in the same ballpark. Asphalt pavement is simply the better value – from day one until the day they have to rip out the concrete.
. . . Another point we should all remember is that no Full-Depth^® asphalt base has ever failed. So, while you eventually have to reconstruct or replace a concrete road, no Full-Depth asphalt road has ever gotten to that point. It’s simply not accurate to say that concrete lasts longer, because it doesn’t.

Head-to-Head
. . . Here are some recent examples of concrete and asphalt pavement going headtohead in Ohio. Asphalt wins, hands down, again and again.

• In 1998, both concrete and asphalt bids were accepted for the construction of an Ohio Turnpike maintenance plaza. Asphalt underbid concrete by 40 percent.
   
• The same year ODOT took both asphalt and concrete bids for three different roadway projects:
• part of State Route 35 in Greene County
• I-75 near Toledo
• and a bike path in Greene County.

For all three projects, contractors bid only asphalt. No one bid concrete because contractors knew they couldn’t come close to asphalt’s low cost.

• ODOT policy requires that a life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA) of the various repair options be performed for every major reconstruction project. Every one of these LCCAs has been for a rigid pavement. None have ever been performed for a flexible pavement because no flexible pavement has ever required major reconstruction.
   

. . . These are a few examples of how asphalt wins the cost war and why it dominates the road construction market in Ohio. These examples are to show secondary audiences – the media, legislators and general public – both sides of the story. Next time you hear someone say that concrete saves taxpayers money or that it is the best value, please share the information you have read in this article. Remind them that . . .  For Cost, It’s Asphalt.