3 ms·
As I read it, it's not paint, it's actually mixed into the concrete. As far as whether it is effective or not... well, it's probably more effective than not do
by colonelxc 16y ago
As I read it, it's not paint, it's actually mixed into the concrete.
As far as whether it is effective or not... well, it's probably more effective than not doing anything (additional costs and construction techniques need to be considered). Overall, I think absorbing pollution near the vehicles that produce it is a good idea. The raw amount of paved area in the world makes it an attractive target for any 'green' development (I've heard of projects trying to put solar panels into roads).
- revorad 16y agoAs far as whether it is effective or not... well, it's probably more effective than not doing anything That doesn't make sense. Resources are finite. If something is not effective, then you shouldn't be wasting time and money on it, definitely not public money. The raw amount of paved area in the world... Have you thought of the raw amount of air in the atmosphere? ... makes it an attractive target for any 'green' development You hit on a good problem here. "Solutions" like this one end up being nothing but certificates for companies and governments to show that they are doing "sustainable green development (TM)".