Using recycled aggregates in green roof substrates for plant diversity

Molineux, Chloe J.; Gange, Alan C.; Connop, Stuart; Newport, Darryl J.

doi:10.1016/j.ecoleng.2015.05.036

Cited by 56 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Inconsistent results between green roof and lab germination success for our 26 species highlight the difficulty of propagating native plants from seed in a rooftop context, and low germination rates confirm that green roofs are a challenging growth environment for seedlings. Compared to other studies testing direct seeding on green roofs, we had a very large range in seedling densities (0–1,000 seedlings/m 2 ; 70–75/m 2 in Molineux et al., and 5–100/m 2 in Nagase & Dunnett, ) as a consequence of microsite heterogeneity. Reduced temperatures and relatively stable moisture conditions associated with deep substrate created the most hospitable sites on this roof for seedling survival and species richness, similar to previous findings (Van Mechelen et al., 2015a; Zhang et al., ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 57%

“…Few studies (but see Bates et al, 2013) have considered the effect of specific heterogeneity treatments, other than variation in substrate depth (Heim & Lundholm, 2014;Van Mechelen, Dutoit, & Hermy, 2015a;Zhang et al, 2014) or composition (Molineux, Gange, Connop, & Newport, 2015), on the environmental conditions and plant dynamics of extensive green roofs. To our knowledge, no studies have considered the effects of specific heterogeneity treatments on seedling establishment and diversity on green roofs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Designed habitat heterogeneity on green roofs increases seedling survival but not plant species diversity

Walker

Lundholm

2017

Journal of Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urban areas benefit from the ecosystem services provided by low input green roofs. However, limited substrate depth on these green roofs creates challenging conditions for plant establishment and survival, leading to industry reliance on non‐native succulents. Through a green roof and glasshouse study, we assessed the impact of simple design modifications to the green roof surface, including redistribution of substrate and addition of logs and pebble piles, on both substrate temperature and moisture content. We added seeds of 26 native species and quantified seedling density, species richness and composition over a single growing season. Overall effects of microsite heterogeneity on species diversity were assessed using species accumulation curves. The modifications altered substrate temperature and moisture. Deep substrate (10–12 cm) and the presence of surface features reduced the temperature by 14.6°C and, while surface features had mixed effects on substrate moisture on the green roof, pebble piles slowed moisture loss during a 6‐week drought in the glasshouse. Following drought conditions, seedling density and species richness were greatest, relative to seeded controls, where substrate was deep on the green roof and where pebbles were present in glasshouse modules, despite high mortality overall. Design modifications did not result in differentiation of seedling communities among different microsite types. Species accumulation curves showed no difference in species richness between aggregates of modified vs. unaltered microsites. Synthesis and applications. Redistribution of green roof substrate and the addition of logs and pebble piles altered microsite conditions and created habitat heterogeneity on a green roof. These design modifications represent a minimalist strategy to ameliorate growing conditions, improve seedling survival and decrease species loss on shallow substrate green roofs.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 57%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designed habitat heterogeneity on green roofs increases seedling survival but not plant species diversity

Walker

Lundholm

2017

Journal of Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to PCA (2015), recycled aggregates can be used as applications with any processing, including the base of the fill for drainage structures. According to Molineux et al (2015), CDW could be viable constituents even of growing substrate.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recycled coarse aggregates can be used as a drainage material between DCE and DCI (Molineux et al, 2015;Tam and Tam, 2008). To determine the production of biogas of the landfill, some previous factors allowing the calculation of biogas valorization cost-effectiveness must be analyzed.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of inert wastes in the construction, operation and closure of landfills: Calculation tool

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Waste from construction and demolition activities represents one of the highest volumes of waste in Europe. 500 million tonnes are produced throughout the whole EU every year. In some EU members like Spain, approximately 83 per cent of such waste is disposed in landfills. The remaining part is classified and processed in treatment facilities so that it can later be used as recycled aggregates in the construction sector (sand, gravel, aggregates, etc.) but without much commercial success. The aim of this study is to use recycled aggregates from inert wastes (IW) in the different phases of a landfill (construction, operation and closure) with the aid of a new computer tool called LABWASTE.14. This tool incorporates the mathematical relationship among the activities of the landfill and provides as a result the economic viability of using recycled aggregates compared to aggregates from quarries.Therefore, knowing the needs of aggregates in landfills (dams, drainage layers, covering layers, collection wells, etc.) may determine the amount of IW that could be recovered. These 2 calculations can be obtained from some of the data that is introduced (population, land physiography, etc.). Furthermore, the use of LABWASTE.14 makes it possible to reduce the demand for aggregates from quarries. IntroductionConstruction and demolition wastes (CDW) are a growing problem in many countries. They account for large part of the waste generated in cities and they are usually placed in landfills (Ekanayake and Ofori, 2004). CDW represents around 31% of all waste produced in the European Union (EU) (Fisher and Werge, 2009). It is nowadays acknowledged that the consumption of raw materials in the construction industry is a non-sustainable activity. It is thus necessary to reduce this consumption, and the volume of CDW dumped, by using this waste as a source of raw materials for the production of recycled aggregates (Rodrigues et al., 2013). In fact, in many EU countries a very limited amount of CDW is recycled, the greatest portion being deposited or used as fill material (Masood et al., 2002). However, recycling concrete waste will lead to a reduction in valuable landfill space and savings in natural resources (Tabsh and Abdeltatah, 2009). Because of this, in the EU, the strategic plans about waste include CDW. The European Action Plan on the Circular Economy includes a number of actions that will target market barriers in specific sectors or material streams, such as construction and demolition wastes as well as horizontal measures in areas such as innovation and investment (EU, 2015). All these regulations establish the minimum requirements for their production and management, in order to promote prevention, reuse, recycling and recovery. The EU Waste Framework Directive (Directive 2008/98/EC) introduces recycling and recovery targets to be achieved by 2020 for household waste (50%) and construction and 3 demolition waste (70%). Furthermore, recycling CDW makes it possible to achieve considerable savings on energy and...

show abstract

“…Roof age had varying effects on species richness: Short-term studies usually reported decreasing richness after the start of an experiment, e.g., for micro-arthropods in a nine-month study in London, UK [39] or for vascular plants over three years in Haifa, Israel [40]. Vascular plant richness first increased, then levelled off or decreased within six months on an experimental green roof in London [41]. With regard to long term-studies, spontaneous vascular plant richness increased with roof age in a chronosequence of conventional roofs in Knox County, Tennessee, US [42].…”

Section: Roof Characteristics Species Richness Species Abundance Funcmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biodiversity Impact of Green Roofs and Constructed Wetlands as Progressive Eco-Technologies in Urban Areas

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The total amount of sealed surfaces is increasing in many urban areas, which presents a challenge for sewerage systems and wastewater treatment plants when extreme rainfall events occur. One promising solution approach is the application of decentralized eco-technologies for water management such as green roofs and constructed wetlands, which also have the potential to improve urban biodiversity. We review the effects of these two eco-technologies on species richness, abundance and other facets of biodiversity (e.g., functional diversity). We find that while green roofs support fewer species than ground-level habitats and thus are not a substitute for the latter, the increase in green roof structural diversity supports species richness. Species abundance benefits from improved roof conditions (e.g., increased substrate depth). Few studies have investigated the functional diversity of green roofs so far, but the typical traits of green roof species have been identified. The biodiversity of animals in constructed wetlands can be improved by applying animal-aided design rather than by solely considering engineering requirements. For example, flat and barrier-free shore areas, diverse vegetation, and heterogeneous surroundings increase the attractiveness of constructed wetlands for a range of animals. We suggest that by combining and making increasing use of these two eco-technologies in urban areas, biodiversity will benefit.

show abstract

Using recycled aggregates in green roof substrates for plant diversity

Cited by 56 publications

References 38 publications

Designed habitat heterogeneity on green roofs increases seedling survival but not plant species diversity

Designed habitat heterogeneity on green roofs increases seedling survival but not plant species diversity

Application of inert wastes in the construction, operation and closure of landfills: Calculation tool

Biodiversity Impact of Green Roofs and Constructed Wetlands as Progressive Eco-Technologies in Urban Areas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About