Concrete may have found it's killer app in graphene-sheets' I've never been a big fan of concrete. From my experience it tends to break, and once it's broken it's hard to repair. Concrete is like the equivalent of an iPhone in terms of its popularity and design. What if instead of making this into a singular entity we simply break down the process of making concrete. This might be what could save concrete, and actually do it better. By breaking down a chemical process of making concrete, one can create a product that is lightweight, self heals, has self-repairing properties. By breaking down the materials being used in making concrete, we might actually be able to make it better. The same goes for so many "modern" things. Our need for instant gratification leads us to believe that just adding more hardware is the way to go, but maybe with a bit of creative thinking, and the "old school" method of breaking down and analyzing a problem we can find a real solution. It's about time we go back to the old ways, if for no other reason than to take back a bit of sanity from the digital world and bring some of the things it has shown us to our daily lives. As someone who has spent a large chunk of his life working to make things better, I think that it is sad to watch our progress get put at risk. That would make things slower and more complicated, leading to longer lines and less overall. I see a path of self-sabotage in using newer materials. On the other hand, people are beginning to see the benefits of "smart" materials. It's a double-edge sword. There are times when people are too smart for their own good, and that can lead to problems. However, sometimes, thinking in these "out of the box" ways leads to discoveries that are helpful. Re: The Future of Concrete This may sound bad, but I don't think the future of concrete is something to embrace. The fact is, it's so very bad. It doesn't just break, it crumbles. I can't think of a more un-green material to use, no matter how much you want to reduce waste. A concrete-eater would be cool, at least if it didn't turn into something that resembles more of the ground than of anything in concrete. If you can mix some of this with concrete, it would have a way better use for road building (I don't know, let's imagine one day people could just lay down asphalt, instead of the usual concrete or rocks.) It's already widely used for roads. It's just that they are using it to make huge bridges rather than the usual small bridges. If you make small bridges then it can fall apart, whereas big bridges don't have that problem. As for sustainability, there are all sorts of concrete that do that. So far the best concrete at that is probably concrete with re-bar in it, which is already commonly used in bridges in the US and also seems to be a pretty good mixture for small bridges. It's one thing to try to build bridges in the traditional way, using old-fashioned re-bar, and when the materials aren't ideal for it, and another to design the material and process to fit the actual job at hand. Re: The Future of Concrete It's another thing entirely to use a "concrete-busting re-bar technology." In essence, a bridge made of this stuff will essentially fall apart when it gets too warm. This sounds awfully close to a "self-destructing bridge," and I don't like the sound of that at all. Re: The Future of Concrete The main problem is the fact that some re-bar gets to be really too hot to handle. So, the "concrete-busting re-bar" only works as long as the thing you made is not too hot, which makes it hard to build an entire bridge out of it. But, even then, it still has the same problems as a normal re-bar bridge. Maybe instead of using "concrete-busting re-bar," we can use a "cool-down re-bar," and make our bridges actually cooler than their actual function demands. I guess that's still not really sustainable, but at least it might work in a place that gets crazy hot. Re: The Future of Concrete It's been a long time since I was in High School, but I think in chemistry we learned that you shouldn't try to make a new material, you should just try to find a way to make that old stuff into a new material, by adding some extra stuff in. If I had to speculate, that's what making concrete more sustainable might look like: find a way to add some stuff in to make the concrete the way it used to be (i.e., a self-healing material), but without the parts of concrete that make it a bad thing. In other words, find a way to make a better material out of what we have now. Re: The Future of Concrete Concrete is no different than a lot of other materials. For example, to build a bridge, you first make a mold, and then pour the concrete into it. The difference in quality is the difference in design. I imagine this kind of technology is just the next step in the design of the material, not the technology itself. Now, don't get me wrong, there are better ways to use the existing materials we have, but that doesn't mean that the new ways we have come up with are bad ones. It just means that they are new, and more advanced ways to make the same materials we have now, except in better form. Re: The Future of Concrete I am curious about this subject. Not about the concrete-busting in itself, but why there are not more solutions to this kind of problem? Every year tons of building materials are damaged during the transportation from the construction site. This will happen with more and more, as more and more of the world is connected with highways and other ways. Even when you are in a city center, the buildings is only a few meters above the ground, but the traffic can bring tons of pollution. It is no fun to breathe heavy, or feel as if you were having a headache due to the pollution. I am interested in technologies to make things safer, more efficient and eco-friendly, instead of thinking in making changes. And on top of this, think of all the time and money that gets wasted on these mistakes. What if the technology for a self-repairing concrete became widespread today? Re: The Future of Concrete I like to think of it as more of a "self-healing" type of construction material. The reason concrete does not like to heal on its own, is because it is often poured on a dry surface (usually pavement) rather than a wet one. When concrete does not have proper contact with the ground, it tends to "slide off of the sides", so the part above is "missing" the material which is below. This leads to cracks, and other problems. But if the concrete is poured on a wet surface, this problem becomes minimal. This may be a bit more far-fetched, but if the concrete is designed with some type of healing agent that can make the material regenerate, why can't it help itself as it grows older? That is probably what I am trying to say. Perhaps it could look for a way to change its material properties over time, which might lead to a type of "self-repairing" mechanism. Of course, that is not as "green" as simply pouring a new piece of concrete, but if the material has more "free will" when it comes to healing itself, it could be more than just pouring a new chunk of concrete. That would require the material being able to heal from the inside. If the concrete itself can do this, then perhaps some other material could do the same. It might be easier to help "repair" old concrete than to make new. To make new, you would need the right materials and the right machines to work with. To repair old concrete, you would only need simple tools to be able to work with the materials. Maybe I am over-simplifying, but I am trying to illustrate the point. It might be possible, for example, to "heal" the cracks and holes in the concrete in a few easy steps, but it would require some sort of a chemical additive to do that. Then the chemical additive would "re-bond" the cracks, maybe by injecting it into the cracks with a small tube. I'm trying to make it seem easier than it really is, so if it ever gets used as a material, it can be easily mended with a couple tools. That might be a lot simpler than what it would take to "re-engineer" a new form of concrete, which would have to be made using a different set of concrete manufacturers. I think that would be even more expensive to maintain.