That debate in Engineering circles is actually a hilarious one to me. Concrete supporters will twist themselves in knots showing how concrete is cheaper than asphalt and asphalt supporters will do the same on lifespan. There are a lot of Engineer's that get to the point of only using one or the other. My general thought is that they are very different tools and it is essentially like deciding if your favorite tool in your toolbox is a hammer or a screwdriver.
Based on my experience with both, properly installed concrete will outlast a similar section of asphalt. We have 2 or 3 concrete roads across the state that are 100+ years old and still in service. That's not typical by any means, but shows the possibilities with well constructed concrete. On the other hand, asphalt is generally cheaper (can vary a lot based on oil prices) and has a significantly more options for low to moderate cost rehabilitations than concrete does. My office typically plans for 40-50 years out of new concrete roads and 25 +/- out of new asphalt before any significant maintenance, and that is based mostly on our records of past performance in this area. The big difference there is that the maintenance on the asphalt will potentially be quite a bit cheaper than what you have to do on the concrete. In my opinion, they both have their place depending on site conditions, current and future budget projections, traffic, weather, etc.
