> Currently the cost of this new technology is still considered prohibitive, as it is twice the cost of regular concrete manufacture (70-80 € / m3), making it only viable for projects where leakage and corrosion are particularly problematic, such as underground and underwater structures.
What's funny to me though is that they consider this cost prohibitive despite the expected theoretically longer life without replacement or maintenance.
Also, when planners are choosing between alternatives, net present value (NPV) is calculated which takes into account predictable maintenance, so the cost of future repairs is already considered in these decisions.
Civil engineering is also not computer engineering. There is no agile development and you have to get it right the first time. The industry as a whole is not quick to adopt new technologies without seeing them proven in the field relatively thoroughly.
Vermont is of the opinion that resurfacing roads frequently (like every two years) is cheaper than investing in anti-frost heavy road beds and cement... The reasoning behind this is that intense ground freezing can end up upsetting the best bedding techniques and causing frost heaves anyway - that coupled with frequent ploughing to deal with heavy snow fall makes long term road investments fiscally irresponsible. Also the state has frequent flooding issues which can upset road bedding in more different and fun manners.
Then you get into the territory of lightweight fills and it gets really expensive very quickly even beyond basic roadbuilding.
Most likely the roads are not being "rebuilt" but rather getting microsurfacing, and occasionally a mill and inlay of just top layers of the road surface. Fully rebuilding roads is more time consuming.
Edit: designing -> redesigning.
Additionally, something I’ve noticed is cutting out squares of broken asphalt around a pothole and filling that, only repeated every few feet to make it look like a patchwork quilt. I get that it is cheaper, but it’s not even going to last through a single winter...
Hard to say without knowing the details. Asphalt is not garbage and the only people I know who can evaluate it by sight work with it routinely.
Eh, that's a little overstated. You'd be surprised how many buildings and bridges have major refits when it becomes obvious that their design didn't live up to expectations.
Predictable maintenance is already factored into decision making.
Fixing mistakes in structures you have to take apart gets very expensive quickly.
Time value of money plays a big part here. The extra cost is now, the maintenance costs are paid later. Costs paid immediately are significantly more expensive than costs paid a long time from now.
Unless almost all maintenance and replacement needs are due to cracks that don't rapidly become more than 0.8mm wide, this reduces maintenance costs but doesn't let it go an extended time without normal maintenance and replacement. At double manufacturing cost, that could well be a losing trade-off for most applications.