Texas Brushfires Rekindle Concrete-Vs.-Plastic Pipe Debate

Responding to the failure of high-density polyethylene drainage pipe that compromised the spring brushfire-driven evacuation of Stoneburg, Texas, ACPA contends: “Using combustible materials in high fire-risk areas or in evacuation routes for natural disasters could prove harmful to the health and safety of the American public.”

Source: American Concrete Pipe Association, Irving, Texas

Responding to the failure of high-density polyethylene drainage pipe that compromised the spring brushfire-driven evacuation of Stoneburg, Texas, ACPA contends: Using combustible materials in high fire-risk areas or in evacuation routes for natural disasters could prove harmful to the health and safety of the American public.

Exposed to a fire that spanned 25,000 acres, Stoneburg (pop. 100) recalls debate surrounding the use of certain drainage materials under roadways. The town was designed with only two thoroughfares for evacuation, FM 1806 and US 81. Three plastic culverts supporting sections of the former route collapsed after igniting and melting. That resulted in a construction truck crashing into a newly formed crater, and a fire truck lodging in the right of the way–leaving U.S. 81 as the sole evacuation route.

Fabricated from a combustible petroleum-based plastic, the HDPE pipe is sometimes substituted for conventional concrete culverts in roadway construction where storm water pipelines serve as underground support. Brushfires are common experiences to many Texans and occurring more closely to homes. Over the last two years, 85 percent of Texas Forest Service-recorded fires swept within two miles of a community.