Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Ecological Engineering
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecoleng
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 4 August 2012
Received in revised form 11 February 2013
Accepted 11 February 2013
Available online 11 April 2013
Keywords:
Green roofs
Sustainability
Recycled aggregate
Construction waste
Drainage
Slope stability
a b s t r a c t
Green roofs, dened as roofs of buildings that are partially or completely covered with vegetation planted
in a growing medium can provide multiple sustainability benets. There is potential to increase the
sustainability benets of green roofs by using recycled construction materials for green roof construction.
This study investigates the viability of using recycled aggregates in the substrate mix for extensive
green roofs where a carpet of plants is supported by lightweight growing media (substrate) overlying a
drainage layer. We investigated the adequacy of recycled inert construction waste as a growth medium,
the drainage properties of the substrate mix containing recycled materials as well as its susceptibility to
erosion and resistance to sliding when placed on a slope.
In this laboratory study we compared the establishment, development and performance of both grass
and sedum model green roofs under simulated rainfall and found that the substrate mix containing
recycled construction waste materials was adequate in supporting plant growth, was resistant to erosion and slippage and capable of providing good drainage. When vegetated, the green roof can provide
attenuation of the drainage water with magnitude depending on the type and percentage of vegetation
cover.
We attempt to put the results of this small scale laboratory investigation on extensive green roofs into
the wider perspective of sustainability benets offered by the green roofs.
2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
A green roof (sometimes referred to as living roof or vegetated roof) is a building roof that is partially or completely covered
with vegetation planted in a growing medium over a waterproof
membrane. Green roofs may include root barriers, drainage and
irrigation systems.
Green roofs serve several purposes, such as intercepting and
retaining rainwater, providing insulation, creating habitat for
wildlife, helping to lower urban air temperatures and combatting
the heat island effect (Grant et al., 2003; Dunnett and Kingsbury,
2004; Dunnett, 2006; CIRIA, 2007; Berndtsson, 2010). There are
two types of green roof: intensive and extensive. While the intensive green roofs are thicker and can support heavy plants including
trees, extensive green roofs usually have a carpet of plants supported by lightweight growing media overlying some form of a
2.2. Substrate
A mixture of calcareous (65% weight) and siliceous (35% weight)
aggregate from construction and demolition waste was sourced
from local waste management and disposal services (WasteCare
Ltd., Livingston, Scotland). The sourced coarse gravel- and cobblesized aggregate was crushed to <5 mm diameter to produce a
substrate expected to allow efcient drainage.
To provide the nal substrate mix for planting the crushed
aggregate (20% of the substrate mix weight) was mixed with inert
loam at eld wetness of approximately 20 gg1 (sieved from the
top 10 cm of a Stagnic Cambisol (FAO classication) at the James
Hutton Institute site at Invergowrie ((56.27N, 3.40W); 65%) and
compost directly from the compost bags (John Innes No. 3; 15%) to
provide the nal substrate for planting. The substrate was initially
mixed by hand before further mixing in a clean cement mixer, and
then stored in plastic boxes covered with plastic and left for 24 h
to equilibrate.
The particle size distribution of the substrate was determined
by dry sieving (BS 1377-2:1990). From the grading curve (Fig. 2)
the mix is a gravelly silty sand (19% gravel, 64% sand, 17% clay and
silt).
2.3. Packing procedure
To ensure consistent packing of all test trays used for planting,
we performed preliminary tests on packing repeatability. Empty
growth trays including the drainage channels and the drainage
100
90
80
Percentage smaller
707
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.01
0.1
10
Fig. 2. Particle size distribution of the substrate mix used for planting in this study.
708
layer were weighed, before the substrate was added in 10 mm layers and compacted. The weight of the full tray was recorded and
the test repeated three times for each tray.
After the preliminary tests, trays were lled producing 75 mm
thick substrate layer, using this established method. Each layer was
compacted after being laid with one passing of a concrete cylinder
with 50 mm diameter, 200 mm length and a mass of 3.5 kg.
2.4. Seeding, planting, and growth conditions
After packing, the trays were left to settle for 24 h before planting. Five trays were planted with Sedum lydium, an alpine plant
species commonly used in green roong. The plants were sourced
from established nursery stock (Sedum Supply Ltd., Welshpool,
UK) and were of uniform size (approximate radius 80 mm) when
planted in the trays. The planting density of the Sedum plants
was 6 plants per tray3 rows 2 columns, spaced equidistantly
between the tray edges. The remaining ve trays were seeded with
a standard grass seed mix (25% Perennial ryegrass Lolium perenne,
20% Creeping red fescue Festuca rubra, 30% Hard fescue Festuca
longifolia, 10% Smooth stalked meadow grass Poa pratensis, 10%
Brown top bent grass Agrostis capillarys, and 5% White clover Trifolium repens; Hogarths Ltd, Preston, UK) at 50 g/m2 rate. One tray
was packed using the method described above and left unplanted
to be used as a control.
All trays, including the control, were kept in a controlled environment glasshouse (day 20 3 C, night 14 3 C) and watered
regularly (approx. 300 ml of water per day per tray) over the subsequent 2 weeks. After the initial 14 day growth period, the water
supply was terminated for 7 days prior to each rainfall simulation
experiment taking place.
Digital photographs of each tray were taken on a daily basis.
These were used to determine the area of established vegetation (green area) as a proportion of the total tray area
using a freely available pixel-counting programme (ImageJ;
http://rsb.info.nih.gov/ij/index.html).
After 21 days the grass had grown to approximately 120 mm,
and the sedum plants expanded on average 40 mm in radius (Fig. 3).
2.5. Rainfall simulation experiments
To assess the ability of the green roofs to attenuate and retain
rainwater, as well as to potentially offset the peaks in rainwater
discharge, rainfall simulation tests were performed. A rainfall simulator comprising a closed line of 48 syringe needles (6 8 grid
forming a 500 500 mm frame) was used to supply mains water
dispersed over a ne wire mesh (Ball et al., 1999). An empty tray
under the mesh collected the rainfall for a set time to determine
the ow rate and the rainfall volume theoretically reaching the substrate. This procedure was replicated three times for each rainfall
duration: 15, 30, and 60 min. The replication, intensity and duration of the simulated rainfall were chosen to minimise variability,
ensure robust analysis and to focus on the comparable behaviour
of growth trays under different vegetation.
Before a rainfall simulation test, each tray was exposed to a dry
period of 7 days. After the dry period, each growth tray, including
the control, was placed in sequence in the test area of the simulator at a 10 slope, taking care that the simulator more than covered
the area of the tray and, thus, minimising any edge effects. For each
rainfall simulation test, surface runoff and basal drainage were collected and the volume (ml) was recorded. Once the pre-determined
rainfall duration was achieved, the growth tray was removed from
the rainfall simulator and placed onto a bench at the same angle,
taking care not to disturb the drainage ow that continued to be
Fig. 3. (a) Typical growth trays after planting/seeding with Sedum lydium (front
row) and grass (back row). Typical short and long grass samples (b), and typical
vegetation cover for Sedum lydium (c) after 5 weeks from seeding/planting.
709
tests were undertaken. A wet sieving method based on the principle that unstable soil-aggregates will breakdown and pass through
a 1 mm sieve more easily when gently agitated in water for
3 min. Samples (4 g dry weight equivalent) of each treatment were
assessed by standard procedure using an Eijkelkamp wet sieving
apparatus (Hermawan and Cameron, 1993).
2.7. Substrate shear strength
To assess the resistance of the substrate to slippage and to investigate the effect of the green roof vegetation on the shear strength of
the substrate modied standard (BS 1377-7, 1990) shearbox tests
were carried out.
Substrate mix was packed into 25 plastic drainage pipes using
the same procedure as outlined for the growth trays. The pipes had
150 mm inner diameter and 150 mm length. Each tube was pre-cut
at a shear depth of 75 mm from the surface to create two sections. To
maintain a gap between the plastic pipe faces, and so prevent locking surfaces during shear testing, 3-mm thick spacers were inserted
between the two sections of the pipe, before securing the sections
together using a strong adhesive tape. The bases of the pipes were
covered with a geotextile membrane to allow drainage and to retain
the soil. 15 of the pipes were seeded with the same grass mix and at
the same rate as outlined for the growth trays. After seeding, all 25
pipes were transferred to the glasshouse and kept under the same
growth conditions as the trays for 21 days. After this period and
immediately before testing, each sample was saturated with water,
mimicking the conditions when slips within the substrate are most
likely to occur, and then tested in shear using a purpose-built shear
apparatus (Mickovski et al., 2008) under no surcharge (3 seeded, 2
fallow samples) and under three different normal vertical loads
(BS 1377-7, 1990; 22 kPa, 35.6 kPa and 49.2 kPa; 3 seeded and two
fallow samples per each load). The samples were sheared at a constant rate of 1 mm min1 for maximum displacements of between
45 and 90 mm, while the force and horizontal displacement of the
sample were logged with a Campbell 21X data logger (Campbell
Scientic, UK). The angle of internal friction and the cohesion of
the non-vegetated and vegetated substrate were then calculated as
the slope and intercept, respectively, of the normal stress vs shear
stress plot, as a measure of the ability of the substrate to withstand
shear stress.
3. Results
2.6.4. Turbidity
To ascertain the quantity of dispersed clay within the substrate
mix, turbidity of an aqueous solution of the substrate mix was
measured using a light scattering method. Whilst larger material
will settle from water, colloidal material will remain as a sol. The
percentage light transmitted is inversely proportional to the concentration of ne particles in the sample. The absorbance, or optical
density, is directly proportional to the nes concentration (Hindell
et al., 1997a). The method used in this study was as described by
Hindell et al. (1997b).
The same method was used to determine whether dispersed
clay was present in the drainage water. The basal drainage water
from each tray was tested for turbidity after the 60 min simulated
rainfall. In addition, basal drainage water samples from one grass
and one sedum growth tray were tested for turbidity throughout
the duration of a 60 min rainfall by analysing samples collected
from the drainage water at 10 min intervals.
710
250
Long Grass
Short Grass
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
200
Sedum
150
100
50
Sedum lydium
10
0
1
15mins
30mins
60mins
Rainfall duration
Fig. 4. Increase in the vegetation cover over time in the experimental trays planted
with Sedum lydium and seeded with a standard grass seed mix.
Fig. 6. Average surface runoff volume collected for different treatments (long and
short grass, sedum) and different rainfall durations (15, 30, and 60 min).
Soil pH, and the pH of runoff water were not changed as a result
of changing rainfall duration (p > 0.05). Similarly, there were no
signicant differences between the pH of drainage/runoff water
between treatments, and rainfall durations.
from the grass tray increased throughout the rainfall duration, suggesting that the dispersed clay particles may have been more easily
removed from the growth medium containing grass roots
3.4. Turbidity
The presence of dispersed clay in the aqueous solution of the
substrate mix, as shown through the transmittance tests, ranged
from 21.4 to 83.5% (mean 66.8 5.0%) on average for all tested samples. Similarly, the absorbance caused by the presence of dispersed
clay in the solution ranged from 8% to 66% (mean 23.7 5.9%).
The transmittance of the basal drainage water from the grass
trays ranged from 88 to 97% (mean 94%) and for the sedum trays
from 86 to 93% (mean 91%), measured after the end of a 60 min
simulated rainfall. One-way ANOVA showed that there was no signicant difference in the transmittance of the drainage water from
the grass and sedum growth trays.
The transmittance of the basal drainage water from the sedum
tray increased in the rst stages of the 60 min simulated rainfall
before a decrease to an almost constant value at the later stages of
the rainfall event (Fig. 5) The transmittance of the drainage water
100
99
98
97
96
95
94
93
Grass
92
Sedum
91
0
10
20
30
40
50
Minutes after start of 60 min. simulated rainfall
60
70
Fig. 5. Transmittance of the basal drainage water from a sedum and grass tray
during a 60 min simulated rainfall.
711
70
8000
Long Grass
Sedum
6000
5000
4000
3000
50
40
y = 0.6418x - 1.7546
R 2= 0.9588
30
20
2000
vegetated soil
10
1000
non-vegetated soil
0
15mins
30mins
Rainfall duration
60mins
8.2
7.8
7.6
7.4
7.2
Short Grass
Long grass
Sedum
7
15 min
30min
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Fig. 7. Average basal drainage volume collected for different treatments (long and
short grass, sedum) and different rainfall durations (15, 30, and 60 min).
pH
y = 0.6981x + 8.0344
R 2= 0.9401
60
7000
Short Grass
60min
Rainfall duration
Fig. 8. Average pH levels measured for the basal drainage water from the growth
trays planted with long grass, short grass, and sedum after 15 min, 30 min, and
60 min rainfall simulation.
Fig. 9. Shear strength of vegetated (standard grass seed mix) and non-vegetated
substrate.
712
a range of substrates and under natural conditions with low rainfall and irrigation during the summer months have been reported
by Kolb (2004). In the US, on a range of roofs with minimal slope
(03 ) and substrates ranging in thickness between 50 and 100 mm
vegetated with a variety of species including Sedum, Moran et al.
(2004) and Liptan (2003) reported attenuation values of 85% and
1035%, respectively. Although the results from our tests fall within
the range reported in the literature, the direct comparison with
these studies is impossible due to the differences not only in the
growing conditions (glasshouse vs outdoors), but also vegetation
type, planting techniques, planting substrate characteristics, slope
angle, different antecedent dry weather periods before the rainfall
events, as well as the seasonal variations in vegetation potential
for evapotranspiration which would be evident over a longer time
period under natural conditions., Similar to the attenuation, surface runoff and basal drainage retardation was greater under better
developed foliage and root systems, such as for the long grass, that
intercepted the rainfall better with potential modication of the
precipitation distribution into lower throughfall and higher stemow (Dunnett et al., 2008). Although all test trays were subject to a
7-day antecedent dry period prior to being subjected to rainfall, it is
expected that the moisture content of the soil would not have been
the same between treatments and within a treatment due to differences in water consumption by the plants. This, combined with the
potential accumulation of water quantity from a longer-duration
rainfall, may explain the quicker onset of surface runoff for longer
rainfall events when compared to the shorter rainfall durations.
The soil-aggregate stability and turbidity results show that there
is little risk of the substrate breaking down and dispersed clay
entering the drainage and potentially prohibiting the use or disposal of the drainage water due to its turbidity. Turbidity results of
the runoff show water of low turbidity, while the measurements
during the course of a 60 min simulated rainfall suggest improving
transmittance with time for the grass growth trays. Low turbidity and the soil-aggregate stability data suggest that aggregates in
the mix are relatively stable, are unlikely to disperse and hence
are likely to resist erosion. Low turbidity of the drained water also
suggests that the drainage water harvested from the green roofs
could be used for non-potable purposes with minimum or no treatment with regards to turbidity. The growth and development of
ne roots through the substrate contributes to the aggregate stability by mechanically binding the soil particles and preventing all
but the nest fraction from dispersal and washout during a rainfall event. The grass has more numerous and ner roots than the
sedum (Daubenmire, 1941) and, hence, is better at stabilising soil
particles (Tisdall and Oades, 1982) leading to lower turbidity of the
drained water. On the other hand, sedum provides better surface
cover in the initial period after planting, minimising the early risk
of surcial erosion. Thus there is scope for the plants to be used in
synergy for erosion protection purposes.
The shearbox test showed that the substrate had an angle of
internal friction of 32 . Assuming a factor of safety of 1.5 for the stability of the substrate placed on a roof, the maximum angle of the
roof where the substrate can resist slip failures is 22 which compares to the minimum angle of 10 when slope stability calculations
are recommended for green roofs (FLL, 2002). This value does not
take into account the stabilising effect that the vegetation roots will
have on the green roof through the added cohesion (Mickovski and
van Beek, 2009), and is relevant to the initial stages of the green
roof installation when the vegetation cover is not established and
the substrate is exposed and most prone to slippage.
Green roofs alone cannot lower the risk of ooding from very
large (extreme) rainfall/storm events. However, their value may
lie within the source control domain of a more comprehensive sustainable drainage system approach which would include
713
measured, will contribute towards understanding of water ltration process through the substrate mix and the potential leaching
of nutrients or organic content into the harvested rainwater. High
values of DOC in the harvested rainwater may prohibit its use if
it is disinfected by chlorination, such disinfection could lead to
high concentrations of disinfectant by-products (Mendez et al.,
2010). Also, the leakage of pollutants into the drainage water
from non-inert recycled material used in substrates need to be
investigated.
The shortcoming of this study was the small scale of the experimental setup which was ideal for laboratory conditions but the
results of which may not be easily extrapolated to a large scale
deployment of green roofs particularly in colder climates. However, the objectives of this study warranted and the results justied
the scale of the experiment as a feasibility study and the rst step
into the investigation of the use of recycled construction waste
aggregates for green roof construction.
Acknowledging that different climates will have different
effects on growing media and vegetation (Stovin, 2010) this study
provided an accurate parametric investigation analysis on several sustainability and environmental benets of green roong.
Other environmental benets that may accrue from implementing
more sustainable green roofs will include amenity opportunities,
reduction in the urban heat island effect, biodiversity and ecological enhancements, as well as rain water quality improvement
through ltration and bio/phyto-remediation and storm water
runoff reduction. More large scale trials and monitoring through a
longer time period are needed on different substrate mixes as well
as vegetation mixes in order to ascertain the ecological advantages,
especially with regards to maintenance of the system. Furthermore,
monitoring of live green roofs needs to be carried out and recorded
for specic climate and vegetation conditions in order to realistically capture the establishment, development phases, and response
of green roof construction to different environmental conditions
such as seasonal and temporal changes in temperature, humidity,
insolation, and precipitation.
5. Conclusions
This laboratory study investigated the potential for use of
recycled construction waste in extensive green roofs substrate,
the investigation focussed on the establishment of vegetation, as
well as the drainage properties of such substrate under different
simulated rainfall events. Providing an accurate parametric investigation and analysis on several sustainability and environmental
benets of green roong, the main conclusions of this study are as
follows:
Grass and sedum can effectively establish on a relatively thin
and lightweight substrate mix comprising recycled construction
waste in laboratory conditions.
Substrate mix comprising recycled construction waste (20%
weight), inert loam (65%) and compost (15%), can provide
relatively free-draining properties (e.g. high coefcient of permeability; Bear, 1988), and also attenuation and drainage ow
retardation.
The material in the mix was relatively stable, unlikely to disperse
and hence likely to resist erosion.
The root permeated substrate had increased shear strength,
allowing even steeper roof slopes to be stable.
There is no evidence of detrimental quality of the water drained
through the substrate suggesting, subject to rainwater quality,
that green roof drainage may be appropriate for non-potable
purposes.
714
The use of recycled construction waste for green roof construction has wider environmental implications in terms of reducing
the amount of landll waste.
Acknowledgements
This research was funded by a Dundee University scholarship.
The help of Michael McNamara with the laboratory shear tests,
as well as the advice and guidance of Dr M.F. Bransby are greatly
appreciated. We thank the Scottish Government Rural and Environment Science and Analytical Services (RESAS) for funding from
the Sustainable AgriculturePlants Programme.
References
Ball, B.C., Scott, A., Parker, J.P., 1999. Field N2 O, CO2 and CH4 uxes in relation to
tillage, compaction and soil quality. Soil Till. Res. 53, 2939.
Bear, J., 1988. Dynamics of Fluids in Porous Media. Dover, New York.
Berghage, R., Jarrett, A., Beattie, D., Kelley, K., Husain, S., Rezaei, F., Long, B., Negassi,
A., Cameron, R., Hunt, W., 2007. Quantifying evaporation and transpirational
water losses from green roofs and green roof media capacity for neutralizing
acid rain. NDWRCP Research Project Report. The Pennsylvania State University,
State College, PA.
Berndtsson, J.C., 2010. Green roof performance towards management of runoff
water quantity and quality: a review. Ecol. Eng. 36, 351360.
BS 1377-7, 1990. Methods of test for soils for civil engineering purposes. Classication tests. Shear strength tests (total stress), British Standards Institution
(BSI).
Busey, P., Myers, B.J., 1979. Growth rates of turfgrasses propagated vegetatively.
Agron. J. 71, 817821.
Carter, T., Keeler, A., 2008. Life-cycle costbenet analysis of extensive vegetated
roof systems. J. Environ. Manage. 87, 350363.
CIRIA, 2001. Rainwater and greywater use in buildings: decision-making for water
conservation. Project Report PR80. CIRIA, London.
CIRIA, 2001b. Rainwater and Greywater Use in Buildings: BEST Practice Guidance.
Publication C539. CIRIA, London.
CIRIA, 2007. Building Greener: Guidance on the Use of Green Roofs, Green Walls
and Complementary Features on Buildings. Publication C644. CIRIA, London.
Daubenmire, R.F., 1941. Some ecologic features of the subterranean organs of Alpine
plants. Ecology 22, 370378.
Dixon, A., Butler, D., Fewkes, A., 1999. Water saving potential of domestic water
reuse systems using greywater and rainwater in combination. Water Sci. Technol. 39, 2532.
Dunnett, N., Kingsbury, N., 2004. Planting Green Roofs and Living Walls. Timber
Press, Cambridge, UK.
Dunnett, N.P., 2006. Green roofs for biodiversity: reconciling aesthetics with ecology. In: Proc. of 4th North American Green Roof Conference: Greening Rooftops
for Sustainable Communities, Boston, MA. May 2006. The Cardinal Group,
Toronto, pp. 221236.
Dunnett, N., Nagase, A., Booth, R., Grime, P., 2008. Inuence of vegetation composition on runoff in two simulated green roof experiments. Urban Ecosyst. 11,
385398.
Emilsson, T., Rolf, K., 2005. Comparison of establishment methods for extensive
green roofs in Southern Sweden. Urban For. Urban Green. 3, 103111.
Emilsson, T., 2008. Vegetation development on extensive vegetated green roofs:
inuence of substrate composition, establishment method and species mix. Ecol.
Eng. 33, 265277.
Fischer, P., Jauch, M., 2002. Substrate fuer einschichtige Extensivbegruenungen
Langzeitbeobachtungen. Dach+Gruen 11, 1923.
Gregoire, B.G., Clausen, J.G., 2011. Effect of a modular extensive green roof on
stormwater runoff and water quality. Ecol. Eng. 37, 963969.
Green Roof Organisation (GRO), 2011. The GRO Green Roof Code: Green Roof Code
for Best Pratice for the UK 2011. Groundwork, Shefeld, UK.
FLL, 2002. Richtlinie fr die Planung, Ausfhrung und Pege von Dachbegrnungen. Forschungsgesellschaft Landschaftsentwicklung. Landschaftsbau e.V, ISBN:
393448459x, pp. 99.
Grant, G., Englebeck, L., Nicholson, B., 2003. Green Roofs: their existing status and
potential for conserving biodiversity in urban areas. English Nature Research
Reports 498, 959.
Hazen, A., 1892. Some physical properties of sands and gravels, with special reference to their use in ltration. 24th Annual Report, Massachusetts State Board of
Health, Pub. Doc. No. 34, 539556.
Hermawan, B., Cameron, K.C., 1993. Structural changes in a silt loam under longterm conventional or minimum tillage. Soil Till. Res. 26, 139150.
Hindell, R.P., McKenzie, B.M., Tisdall, J.M., 1997a. Destabilization of soil during the
production of earthworm (Lumbricidae) and articial casts. Biol. Fertil. Soils 24,
153163.
Hindell, R.P., McKenzie, B.M., Tisdall, J.M., 1997b. Inuence of drying and aging
on the stabilization of earthworm (Lumbricidae) casts. Biol. Fertil. Soils 25, 27
35.
Kolb, W., 2004. Good reasons for roof planting green roofs and rainwater. International Conference on Urban Horticulture, Waedenswil, Switzerland. Acta Hort.
643, 295300.
Javed, M.T., 2011. Mechanisms behind pH changes by plant roots and shoots caused
by elevated concentration of toxic elements, PhD Thesis, Department of Botany,
Stockholm University, pp. 40.
Kolb, W., Trunk, R., Eppel, J., 2001. Recyclingbaustoffe zur Dachbegruenung.
Deutscher Gartenbau, 3235.
Kumar, R., Kaushik, S.C., 2004. Performance evaluation of green roof and shading
for thermal protection of buildings. Build. Environ. 40 (11), 15051511.
Lazzarin, R.M., Castellotti, F., Busato, F., 2005. Experimental measurements
and numerical modelling of a green roof. Energ. Buildings 37 (12), 1260
1267.
Liptan, T., 2003. Planning, zoning and nancial incentives for ecoroofs in Portland,
Oregon. In: Greening Rooftops for Sustainable Communities, Chicago, 2930
May, pp. 113120.
Liu, C., Evett, J.B., 1998. Soils and foundations. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River,
New Jersey.
Mendez, C.B., Afshar, B.R., Kinney, K., Barrett, M.E., Kirisits, M.J., January 2010. Effect
of Roof Material on Water Quality for Rainwater Harvesting Systems. Texas
Water Development Board, Austin, Texas.
Moran, A., Hunt, B., Jennings, G., 2004. A North Carolina eld study to evaluate greenroof quantity, runoff quality, and plant growth. In: 2nd Greening
Rooftops for Sustainable Communities Conference, Portland, 24 June, pp. 446
460.
Mickovski, S.B., van Beek, L.P.H., 2009. Root morphology and effects on soil reinforcement and slope stability of young vetiver (Vetiveria zizanioides) plants
grown in semi-arid climate. Plant Soil 324, 4356.
Mickovski, S.B., Hallett, P.D., Bengough, A.G., Bransby, M.F., Davies, M.C.R., Sonnenberg, R., 2008. The effect of willow roots on the shear strength of soil. Advances
in GeoEcology 39, 247262.
Newton, J., Gedge, D., Early, P., Wilson, S., 2007. Building greenER: Guidance on
the Use of Green roofs, Green Walls and Complementary Features on Buildings.
CIRIA, London, UK.
Odong, J., 2007. Evaluation of empirical formulae for determination of hydraulic
conductivity based on grain-size analysis. J. Am. Sci. 3, 5460.
Onmura, S., Matsumoto, M., Hokoi, S., 2001. Study in evaporative cooling effect of
roof lawn gardens. Energ. Buildings 33, 653666.
Quarry Product Association (QPA), 2007. Sustainable Development Report. QPA,
London.
Reynolds, W.D., 2008. Saturated hydraulic properties: ring inltrometer. In: Carter,
M.R., Gregorich, E.G. (Eds.), Soil Sampling and Methods of Analysis. , 2nd ed. CRC
Press, Boca Raton, pp. 10431056.
Roebuck, R.M., Oltean-Dumbrava, C., Tait, S., 2011. Whole life cost performance of
domestic rainwater harvesting systems in the United Kingdom. Water Env. J. 25,
355365.
Scrivens, S., 1980. Roof Gardens: construction. Architects Journal, 445449.
Shepherd, R.G., 1989. Correlations of permeability and grain-size. Ground Water
27, 633638.
Roth-Kleyer, S., 2001. Vegetationstechnische Eigenschaften mineralischer Substratkomponenten zur Herstellung von Vegetationstrag- und Draenschichten
fuer bodenferne Begruenungen. Dach+Grue n 10, 411.
Stovin, V., 2010. The potential of green roofs to manage urban stormwater. Wat.
Env. J. 24, 192199.
Thormark, C., 2006. The effect of material choice on the total energy need and
recycling potential of a building. Building Environ. 41, 10191026.
Tisdall, J.M., Oades, J.M., 1982. Organic matter and water-stable aggregates in soils.
Journal of Soil Science 33, 141163.
Van Seters, T., Rocha, L., MacMillan, G., 2007. Evaluation of the runoff quantity
and quality performance of an extensive green roof in Toronto, Ontario. In: 5th
Greening Rooftops for Sustainable Communities Conference, Minneapolis.
VanWoert, N.D., Rowe, D.B., Andresen, J.A., Rugh, C.L., Xiao, L., 2005. Watering
regime and green roof substrate design affect sedum plant growth. Hort. Sci.
40, 659664.
WRAP, 2006. The Sustainable Use of Resources for the Production of Aggregates in
England.
WRAP, 2011. Towards Resource Efciency WRAP Business Plan 200811: A Report
on Impact.