[Greenbuilding] epdm vs. tar geen roof

Mon Aug 29 15:23:24 CDT 2011

Warranties are marketing tools not measures of performance. 
Torch down mod bits are WAY more durable.  
Not sure what roll on roofs are. 

Check out those warranty terms. How long does a shingle roof with 30 year warranty last?  And what do you get if it lasts "just" 20?  EPDM is not much different. 

Sent wirelessly from my BlackBerry device on the Bell network.

-----Original Message-----
From: Gennaro Brooks-Church - Eco Brooklyn <info at ecobrooklyn.com>
Sender: gennarobc at gmail.com
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 15:53:17 
To: <jfstraube at gmail.com>; Green Building<greenbuilding at lists.bioenergylists.org>
Cc: Rob Tom<Archilogic at yahoo.ca>
Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] epdm vs. tar geen roof

It is strange you all are saying that torch down rolls are the way to
go. I was always under the impression that EPDM lasted a lot longer. I
just called Allied Roofing and they confirmed that the manufacturers
warranty for roll down is about 20 years and EPDM is about 30 years.

Gennaro Brooks-Church

Cell: 1 347 244 3016 USA
www.EcoBrooklyn.com
22 2nd St; Brooklyn, NY 11231

On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 1:46 PM, John Straube <jfstraube at gmail.com> wrote:
> My experience with pricing is different John.
> Orifice choke valves on roof drains do a good job and are a couple hundred bucks per drain.
> The premium for a green roof is at least $10 per square foot plus any additional structure cost. That often shows up as a lot of money.
> Storm water management of parking lots is a different beast.
>
> Sent wirelessly from my BlackBerry device on the Bell network.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "JOHN SALMEN" <terrain at shaw.ca>
> Sender: greenbuilding-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
> Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 09:18:41
> To: 'Green Building'<greenbuilding at lists.bioenergylists.org>; 'Rob Tom'<Archilogic at yahoo.ca>
> Reply-To: Green Building <greenbuilding at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] epdm vs. tar geen roof
>
> I would agree about 2 ply bitumen as a decent option at least from
> durability and recycled content. I disagree about simpler methods for
> stormwater retention - which is probably one of the most redeeming features
> of a green roof (adding stormwater quality to that). Most other methods are
> ground invasive and require a different and costly level of engineering and
> technology (even a good porous parking lot is difficult to do well).
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: greenbuilding-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
> [mailto:greenbuilding-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of John
> Straube
> Sent: August-29-11 8:32 AM
> To: Rob Tom; Green Building
> Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] epdm vs. tar geen roof
>
> Practical experience with EPDM roofs is that they do not have great
> durability.  This is one reason they, and TPO, are almost never used in
> green roofs. I would also assume you would be specifying a protected
> membrane roof in any case you care about durability.  Worry about which
> membrane uses more or less oil or energy seems completely misplaced if there
> is a trade off with durability which there will be with roofing products.
> Pick the most durable, or nearly the most durable, roof membrane and save
> environmental impact on the life-cycle.
> Tar roof is not sufficiently specific to make judgements.  There are many
> types.
> I would always recommend either a two-ply modified bitumen roof, or liquid
> applied glass matt reinforced hot rubberized asphalt if all you cared about
> was durability.
>
> Speaking of cooking the books, Dr Lui's report, like most you will find,
> over sell the performance benefits of green roofs.  They do this by
> comparing an excellent green roof design with the dumbest low slope roof we
> know how to build (an exposed membrane black roof).   A fair comparison is
> to compare a green roof to a protect membrane roof (PMR) with white balast
> (pavers or river rock).  When this is done the energy savings and durability
> benefits of a green roof essentially vanish.  The benefits of dust removal,
> stormwater retention remain.  There are cheaper ways to retain stormwater
> than a green roof.  The reason for a green roof is mostly because they are
> beautiful to look at relative to the options, and in intensely urban areas
> they add to biodiversity (they don't do much in rural settings).
>
>
>
> On 2011-08-29, at 10:20 AM, RT wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 28 Aug 2011 23:13:45 -0400, Gennaro Brooks-Church - Eco Brooklyn
> <info at ecobrooklyn.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> So....over 30 years.
>>> Tar roof - $40, more petro chemicals consumed, more waster created.
>>> EPDM + green roof - $40,
>>
>>> Your thoughts? How do my numbers look?
>>
>>
>> I'd say that the numbers look like they were "cooked" by someone who might
> have done creative book-keeping for Tony Soprano et al.
>>
>> But aside from that, all or most of the benefits in the comparison are due
> to the Green Roof component and a Green Roof can be installed over any
> waterproof membrane and provide the same benefits.
>>
>> Without actually checking the actual numbers (not my job, eh ?) I have a
> gut feeling that the embodied-energy of a hot-mopped tar membrane is lower
> than that of an EPDM.
>>
>> But using Gennaro's numbers for life expectancy -- 30 years -- I'd say
> that that's pretty ?!$$-poor performance (PPPP or 4P).
>>
>> Any Greenie worth their chlorophyll would shun asphalt shingles as a
> sloped roofing option largely because of their short service life (30 years
> max) and their high waste factor (ie not recyclable for the most part) so
> it's curious that one would consider a 30-year tar or EPDM membrane as
> viable options for a flat roof.
>>
>> That is to say, perhaps third, fourth or fifth non-petro options might be
> considered for the membrane (the Green Roof being a "given" if for no other
> reason, because it extends the life of the membrane, like IRMAs).
>>
>> The other benefits are quantified in Dr. Karen Lui's report (if the IRC at
> NRC) which I've cited here numerous times in the past.
>>
>> --
>> === * ===
>> Rob Tom
>> Kanata, Ontario, Canada
>> < A r c h i L o g i c  at  Y a h o o  dot  c a >
>> (manually winnow the chaff from my edress if you hit "reply")
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>> Greenbuilding mailing list
>> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
>> Greenbuilding at bioenergylists.org
>>
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
>>
> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioener
> gylists.org
>
> Dr John Straube, P.Eng.
> Associate Professor
> University of Waterloo
> Dept of Civil Eng. & School of Architecture
> www.buildingscience.com
>
>
>_______________________________________________
> Greenbuilding mailing list
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
> Greenbuilding at bioenergylists.org
>
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioener
> gylists.org
>
>
>_______________________________________________
> Greenbuilding mailing list
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
> Greenbuilding at bioenergylists.org
>
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org
>_______________________________________________
> Greenbuilding mailing list
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
> Greenbuilding at bioenergylists.org
>
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org
>