TABLE 1
Costs for Radiant Barriers Installed by Contractors
Costs per Square Foot of Material* | ||
Type of Application | New Construction | Existing Home |
Attic Floor | $0.15 - 0.30 | $0.15 - 0.30 |
Roof: stapled to bottom or faces of rafters | $0.15 - 0.30 | $0.20 - 0.45 |
Roof: draped over rafters | $0.12 - 0.35 | ---- |
Roof: underside of roof deck | $0.12 - 0.30 | ---- |
*The cost figures in this table are the costs per square foot of radiant barrier. Since the total area of the roof and gables is larger than the area of the ceiling, roof applications will require about 7 to 50 percent more material than an attic floor application, depending upon the shape of the roof.
Source: Reflective Insulation Manufacturers Association.
Costs for Conventional Attic Insulation Installed by Contractors
R-Value | Cost per Square Foot |
R-11 | $0.27 - 0.30 |
R-19 | $0.38 - 0.47 |
R-22 | $0.48 - 0.51 |
R-30 | $0.54 - 0.68 |
R-38 | $0.68 - 0.95 |
Note: The higher the R-value, the greater the insulating power.
Source: Residential Construction and Utility Cost data base, developed by NAHB National Research Center, 1986.
TABLE 3
Present Value Savings for Dusty Radiant Barrier on Attic Floor
(Note: R-11, R-19, R-30, and R-38 refer to the existing level of conventional insulation.)
City | Present Value Savings, Dollars per Square Foot of Attic Floor | |||
R-11 | R-19 | R-30 | R-38 | |
Albany, NY
Albuquerque, NM Atlanta, GA Bismarck, ND Chicago, IL Denver, CO El Toro, CA Houston, TX Knoxville, TN Las Vegas, NV Los Angeles, CA Memphis, TN Miami, FL Minneapolis, MN Orlando, FL Phoenix, AZ Portland, ME Portland, OR Raleigh, NC Riverside, CA Sacramento, CA Salt Lake City, UT St. Louis, MO Seattle, WA Topeka, KS Waco, TX Washington, D.C. |
0.04-0.13
0.05-0.18 0.05-0.17 0.05-0.14 0.04-0.13 0.05-0.15 0.04-0.15 0.05-0.19 0.05-0.17 0.07-0.24 0.03-0.08 0.05-0.18 0.06-0.23 0.04-0.13 0.05-0.21 0.08-0.29 0.04-0.10 0.04-0.11 0.05-0.16 0.06-0.21 0.05-0.18 0.05-0.16 0.05-0.16 0.03-0.08 0.05-0.17 0.06-0.21 0.05-0.15 |
0.02-0.06
0.03-0.10 0.02-0.08 0.02-0.06 0.02-0.06 0.02-0.07 0.02-0.07 0.03-0.10 0.02-0.08 0.03-0.12 0.02-0.05 0.02-0.09 0.03-0.12 0.02-0.06 0.03-0.10 0.04-0.14 0.02-0.04 0.02-0.05 0.02-0.08 0.03-0.10 0.03-0.09 0.02-0.08 0.02-0.08 0.01-0.03 0.02-0.09 0.03-0.10 0.02-0.07 |
0.01-0.03
0.02-0.06 0.01-0.05 0.01-0.04 0.01-0.04 0.01-0.05 0.01-0.05 0.02-0.06 0.02-0.05 0.02-0.07 0.01-0.03 0.01-0.05 0.02-0.07 0.01-0.03 0.02-0.07 0.02-0.08 0.01-0.02 0.01-0.03 0.01-0.05 0.02-0.06 0.02-0.06 0.01-0.05 0.01-0.05 0.01-0.02 0.02-0.05 0.02-0.06 0.01-0.04 |
0.01-0.03
0.01-0.05 0.01-0.04 0.01-0.03 0.01-0.03 0.01-0.04 0.01-0.04 0.01-0.04 0.01-0.04 0.02-0.06 0.01-0.02 0.01-0.04 0.01-0.06 0.01-0.03 0.01-0.05 0.02-0.07 0.01-0.02 0.01-0.02 0.01-0.04 0.01-0.05 0.01-0.05 0.01-0.04 0.01-0.04 0.00-0.01 0.01-0.04 0.01-0.05 0.01-0.04 |
Note: Values represent range of savings due to variations in rate of dusting and to uncertainties in effect of dust on heat flows. This level of degradation would be typical over 25 years of exposure.
Figures in table are based on a radiant barrier that had an emissivity of 0.05 or less when clean. Savings are for a 25 year period.
TABLE 4
Present Value Savings for Radiant Barrier Attached to Bottoms of Rafters
(Note: R-11, R-19, R-30, and R-38 refer to the existing level of conventional insulation.)
City | Present Value Savings, Dollars per Square Foot of Attic Floor | |||
R-11 | R-19 | R-30 | R-38 | |
Albany, NY
Albuquerque, NM Atlanta, GA Bismarck, ND Chicago, IL Denver, CO El Toro, CA Houston, TX Knoxville, TN Las Vegas, NV Los Angeles, CA Memphis, TN Miami, FL Minneapolis, MN Orlando, FL Phoenix, AZ Portland, ME Portland, OR Raleigh, NC Riverside, CA Sacramento, CA Salt Lake City, UT St. Louis, MO Seattle, WA Topeka, KS Waco, TX Washington, D.C. |
0.17-0.19
0.24-0.27 0.21-0.25 0.18-0.20 0.17-0.19 0.19-0.22 0.19-0.22 0.23-0.28 0.22-0.25 0.30-0.36 0.11-0.12 0.23-0.27 0.28-0.36 0.18-0.19 0.26-0.32 0.36-0.43 0.14-0.15 0.14-0.16 0.20-0.24 0.27-0.37 0.23-0.26 0.21-0.24 0.21-0.24 0.11-0.12 0.22-0.26 0.26-0.31 0.20-0.23 |
0.08-0.09
0.12-0.15 0.10-0.13 0.09-0.10 0.08-0.10 0.10-0.12 0.10-0.12 0.12-0.15 0.11-0.13 0.15-0.19 0.06-0.07 0.11-0.14 0.15-0.20 0.08-0.10 0.13-0.17 0.17-0.23 0.06-0.06 0.07-0.08 0.10-0.12 0.13-0.17 0.12-0.14 0.10-0.12 0.10-0.13 0.05-0.05 0.11-0.13 0.13-0.17 0.09-0.12 |
0.04-0.05
0.08-0.10 0.06-0.08 0.05-0.06 0.05-0.06 0.06-0.08 0.06-0.08 0.07-0.10 0.07-0.09 0.09-0.12 0.04-0.05 0.07-0.09 0.09-0.13 0.05-0.06 0.08-0.12 0.10-0.14 0.03-0.04 0.04-0.05 0.06-0.08 0.07-0.10 0.07-0.10 0.06-0.08 0.06-0.08 0.03-0.03 0.07-0.09 0.08-0.11 0.06-0.07 |
0.03-0.04
0.06-0.08 0.05-0.07 0.04-0.05 0.04-0.05 0.05-0.07 0.05-0.07 0.05-0.08 0.05-0.07 0.07-0.10 0.03-0.04 0.06-0.08 0.07-0.10 0.03-0.04 0.07-0.10 0.08-0.12 0.03-0.03 0.03-0.04 0.05-0.07 0.06-0.08 0.06-0.08 0.05-0.07 0.05-0.07 0.02-0.02 0.05-0.07 0.06-0.09 0.05-0.06 |
Note: First value applies to houses with no air-conditioning ducts in attics. Second value appliesto houses with air-conditioning ducts in attics.
Figures in table are based on a radiant barrier with an emissivity of 0.05 or less, with the radiant barrier covering the insides of the gables. Savings are for a 25 year period.
TABLE 5
Present Value Savings for Radiant Barrier Draped over Tops of Rafters or Attached to Roof Deck
(Note: R-11, R-19, R-30, and R-38 refer to the existing level of conventional insulation.)
City | Present Value Savings, Dollars per Square Foot of Attic Floor | |||
R-11 | R-19 | R-30 | R-38 | |
Albany, NY
Albuquerque, NM Atlanta, GA Bismarck, ND Chicago, IL Denver, CO El Toro, CA Houston, TX Knoxville, TN Las Vegas, NV Los Angeles, CA Memphis, TN Miami, FL Minneapolis, MN Orlando, FL Phoenix, AZ Portland, ME Portland, OR Raleigh, NC Riverside, CA Sacramento, CA Salt Lake City, UT St. Louis, MO Seattle, WA Topeka, KS Waco, TX Washington, D.C. |
0.16-0.17
0.21-0.24 0.19-0.22 0.17-0.18 0.15-0.17 0.17-0.19 0.17-0.20 0.20-0.25 0.19-0.22 0.27-0.32 0.10-0.11 0.20-0.24 0.25-0.31 0.16-0.18 0.23-0.28 0.31-0.38 0.13-0.13 0.13-0.14 0.18-0.21 0.24-0.33 0.20-0.23 0.19-0.21 0.18-0.21 0.10-0.11 0.20-0.23 0.23-0.28 0.18-0.21 |
0.07-0.08
0.11-0.14 0.09-0.12 0.08-0.09 0.07-0.09 0.09-0.10 0.09-0.10 0.10-0.14 0.10-0.12 0.14-0.17 0.06-0.06 0.10-0.13 0.13-0.18 0.07-0.09 0.11-0.15 0.15-0.20 0.06-0.06 0.06-0.07 0.09-0.11 0.11-0.15 0.10-0.13 0.09-0.11 0.09-0.11 0.04-0.05 0.10-0.12 0.11-0.15 0.08-0.10 |
0.04-0.05
0.07-0.09 0.06-0.07 0.05-0.06 0.04-0.05 0.05-0.07 0.05-0.07 0.06-0.09 0.06-0.08 0.08-0.11 0.03-0.04 0.06-0.08 0.08-0.11 0.04-0.05 0.07-0.10 0.09-0.13 0.03-0.03 0.04-0.04 0.06-0.07 0.07-0.09 0.06-0.08 0.05-0.07 0.05-0.07 0.02-0.03 0.06-0.08 0.07-0.09 0.05-0.06 |
0.03-0.04
0.06-0.07 0.04-0.06 0.03-0.04 0.03-0.04 0.05-0.06 0.05-0.06 0.05-0.07 0.05-0.07 0.06-0.09 0.03-0.04 0.05-0.07 0.06-0.09 0.03-0.04 0.06-0.09 0.07-0.11 0.02-0.03 0.03-0.04 0.04-0.06 0.05-0.07 0.06-0.07 0.04-0.06 0.04-0.06 0.02-0.02 0.05-0.06 0.05-0.08 0.04-0.05 |
Note: First value applies to houses with no air-conditioning ducts in attics. Second value applies to houses with air-conditioning ducts in attics.
Figures in table are based on a radiant barrier with an emissivity of 0.05 or less, with the radiant barrier covering the insides of the gables. Savings are for a 25 year period.
TABLE 6
Present Value Savings for Additional Insulation
City | Present Value Savings, Dollars per Square Foot of Attic Floor | |||
R-11 + R-8* | R-11 + R-19 | R-19 + R-11 | R-19 + R-19 | |
Albany, NY
Albuquerque, NM Atlanta, GA Bismarck, ND Chicago, IL Denver, CO El Toro, CA Houston, TX Knoxville, TN Las Vegas, NV Los Angeles, CA Memphis, TN Miami, FL Minneapolis, MN Orlando, FL Phoenix, AZ Portland, ME Portland, OR Raleigh, NC Riverside, CA Sacramento, CA Salt Lake City, UT St. Louis, MO Seattle, WA Topeka, KS Waco, TX Washington, D.C. |
0.76
0.53 0.50 0.90 0.69 0.64 0.33 0.31 0.53 0.47 0.22 0.52 0.22 0.80 0.25 0.53 0.73 0.50 0.50 0.49 0.44 0.65 0.63 0.52 0.61 0.41 0.60 |
1.10
0.80 0.71 1.35 1.02 0.96 0.48 0.49 0.78 0.70 0.33 0.74 0.34 1.21 0.37 0.77 1.09 0.77 0.72 0.70 0.65 0.97 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.62 0.88 |
0.35
0.28 0.21 0.45 0.33 0.32 0.15 0.18 0.24 0.23 0.11 0.22 0.11 0.42 0.12 0.24 0.37 0.27 0.22 0.21 0.22 0.32 0.29 0.28 0.31 0.21 0.28 |
0.48
0.37 0.29 0.61 0.45 0.44 0.20 0.24 0.34 0.32 0.15 0.31 0.15 0.57 0.17 0.33 0.50 0.36 0.31 0.29 0.29 0.44 0.40 0.37 0.42 0.28 0.38 |
*Denotes existing level of conventional attic insulation (for example, R-11), and additional amount (for example, R-8). Savings are for a 25 year period.
TABLE A1
Average Reductions In Ceiling Heat Flow Due To Addition of Radiant Barrier to R-19 Attic Floor Insulation
SUMMER COOLING CONDITIONS
Radiant Barrier Location | Whole House Tests | Test Cell Tests | ||
MIMA | ORNL | FSEC* | TVA | |
Roof: attached to roof deck | ---- | ---- | 36 - 42% | 16% |
Roof: draped over rafters | 20%** | ---- | ---- | ---- |
Roof: stapled between rafters | ---- | ---- | 38 - 43% | ---- |
Roof: stapled under rafters | 24% | 25 - 30% | ---- | 23 - 30% |
Attic Floor*** | 35% | 32 - 35% | 38 - 44% | 40 -42% |
*Tested at attic air space ventilation rate of five air changes per hour. Typical average ventilation rates are somewhat lower.
**Test was a simulation of draped configuration. The radiant barrier did not extend over the rafters, but was stapled near the joints between the rafters and the roof deck.
***Values are for new and undusted radiant barrier installations; percentages will be lower for aged radiant barriers.
TABLE A2
Average Reductions in Ceiling Heat Flow Due to Addition of Radiant Barrier to R-19 Insulation
WINTER HEATING CONDITIONS
Radiant Barrier Location | Whole House Tests (ORNL) | Test Cell Tests (TVA) |
Roof: attached to roof deck | ---- | 4% |
Roof: draped over rafters | ---- | ---- |
Roof: stapled between rafters | ---- | ---- |
Roof: stapled under rafters | 5% to 8% | 8% |
Attic Floor | 1% to 19% | 15% |
Notes for Tables A1 and A2:
Caution: These % values do not represent utility bill savings and cannot be represented as such.
NOTE: All measurements represent average heat flows through the insulation path, and do not include effects of heat flow through framing.
Key to Abbreviations:
FSEC: Florida Solar Energy Center
ORNL: Oak Ridge National Laboratory
MIMA: Mineral Insulation Manufacturers Association
TVA: Tennessee Valley Authority
TABLE X
Equipment Efficiencies
Low | Medium | High | Very High | |
Gas Furnace (AFUE) | 0.50 | 0.65 | 0.80 | 0.90 |
Oil Furnace (AFUE) | 0.50 | 0.65 | 0.80 | 0.90 |
Heat Pump (COP)
Heating/Cooling |
1.6/2.1 | 1.9/2.6 | 2.2/3.1 | 2.5/3.4 |
Air Conditioner (COP) | 1.8 | 2.3 | 2.9 | 3.5 |
Electric Furnace | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
Electric Baseboard Heating | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
TABLE Y1
Cooling Load Factors for Radiant Barriers
(Note: R-11, R-19, R-30, and R-38 refer to the existing level of conventional insulation.)
City | R-11 | R-19 | R-30 | R-38 |
Albany, NY
Albuquerque, NM Atlanta, GA Bismarck, ND Chicago, IL Denver, CO El Toro, CA Houston, TX Knoxville, TN Las Vegas, NV Los Angeles, CA Memphis, TN Miami, FL Minneapolis, MN Orlando, FL Phoenix, AZ Portland, ME Portland, OR Raleigh, NC Riverside, CA Sacramento, CA Salt Lake City, UT St. Louis, MO Seattle, WA Topeka, KS Waco, TX Washington, D.C. |
876
1598 1673 706 960 1020 1232 2162 1597 2535 429 1832 3090 769 2575 3308 297 551 1440 1999 1592 1286 1466 223 1523 2371 1221 |
409
851 832 388 475 550 636 1120 823 1210 256 907 1631 418 1299 1595 120 299 738 931 849 651 757 119 790 1175 622 |
259
522 516 245 284 357 405 672 517 703 168 555 938 257 832 942 82 178 460 556 542 409 479 80 512 713 386 |
211
426 405 191 229 294 351 521 411 539 148 440 727 204 662 738 62 147 359 448 445 332 369 65 397 552 301 |
Figures in table are based on a radiant barrier with an emissivity of 0.05 or less when clean.
TABLE Y2
Heating Load Factors for Radiant Barriers
(Note: R-11, R-19, R-30, and R-38 refer to the existing level of conventional insulation.)
City | R-11 | R-19 | R-30 | R-38 |
Albany, NY
Albuquerque, NM Atlanta, GA Bismarck, ND Chicago, IL Denver, CO El Toro, CA Houston, TX Knoxville, TN Las Vegas, NV Los Angeles, CA Memphis, TN Miami, FL Minneapolis, MN Orlando, FL Phoenix, AZ Portland, ME Portland, OR Raleigh, NC Riverside, CA Sacramento, CA Salt Lake City, UT St. Louis, MO Seattle, WA Topeka, KS Waco, TX Washington, D.C. |
929
931 605 1192 842 989 792 387 725 774 738 630 99 1062 275 606 1112 937 741 892 821 906 738 904 868 477 912 |
400
476 282 513 377 473 378 182 337 438 390 304 47 447 130 321 490 427 342 422 397 415 324 364 379 225 386 |
193
299 163 293 210 277 242 108 206 277 227 180 28 223 77 191 253 238 219 248 236 223 169 197 219 138 212 |
140
238 137 206 144 236 197 80 164 227 188 164 26 154 62 162 194 186 162 189 192 187 136 133 176 119 182 |
Figures in table are based on a radiant barrier with an emissivity of 0.05 or less when clean.
TABLE Y3
Cooling Load Factors for Additional Insulation (Note: R-11, R-19, R-30, and R-38 refer to the existing and addition levels of conventional insulation.)
City | R-11 to R-19 | R-19 to R-30 | R-30 to R-38 |
Albany, NY
Albuquerque, NM Atlanta, GA Bismarck, ND Chicago, IL Denver, CO El Toro, CA Houston, TX Knoxville, TN Las Vegas, NV Los Angeles, CA Memphis, TN Miami, FL Minneapolis, MN Orlando, FL Phoenix, AZ Portland, ME Portland, OR Raleigh, NC Riverside, CA Sacramento, CA Salt Lake City, UT St. Louis, MO Seattle, WA Topeka, KS Waco, TX Washington, D.C. |
1171
1100 1649 695 1061 715 854 1310 1476 1960 214 1797 1694 471 1435 3175 392 368 1375 1983 1145 966 1482 169 991 1606 1210 |
258
689 508 226 293 344 384 945 527 997 122 584 883 259 691 1334 66 316 434 713 582 462 444 73 465 819 392 |
87
189 184 84 99 117 123 247 193 369 25 219 315 90 284 488 27 60 153 241 194 159 186 23 193 317 138 |
TABLE Y4
Heating Load Factors for Additional Insulation(Note: R-11, R-19, R-30, and R-38 refer to the existing and addition levels of conventional insulation.)
City | R-11 to R-19 | R-19 to R-30 | R-30 to R-38 |
Albany, NY
Albuquerque, NM Atlanta, GA Bismarck, ND Chicago, IL Denver, CO El Toro, CA Houston, TX Knoxville, TN Las Vegas, NV Los Angeles, CA Memphis, TN Miami, FL Minneapolis, MN Orlando, FL Phoenix, AZ Portland, ME Portland, OR Raleigh, NC Riverside, CA Sacramento, CA Salt Lake City, UT St. Louis, MO Seattle, WA Topeka, KS Waco, TX Washington, D.C. |
5358
3460 2660 7072 4923 4765 1977 1358 3145 2114 1706 2711 254 6399 712 1444 5870 3980 2977 2302 2651 4623 4010 4328 4297 1966 3999 |
2751
1697 1332 3610 2569 2450 923 632 1584 1042 814 1359 121 3323 390 744 3096 1992 1489 1121 1294 2321 2038 2295 2199 968 2014 |
1030
626 497 1369 952 872 336 242 599 375 295 489 38 1239 125 318 1137 738 606 406 467 858 759 831 802 353 731 |
TABLE Z
Discount Factors Adjusted for Average Fuel Price Escalation (Based on 7 percent discount rate and 25 year life.)
Census Region | Electricity | Fuel Oil | Natural Gas |
1
2 3 4 U. S. Average |
11.68
11.37 11.50 12.12 11.56 |
15.33
15.56 15.33 15.58 15.41 |
13.85
14.42 14.36 4.46 14.33 |
Region 1: Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania
Region 2: Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas
Region 3: Delaware, Maryland, District of Columbia, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas
Region 4: Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Nevada, Washington, Oregon, California, Alaska, Hawaii
Source: "Energy Prices and Discount Factors for Life-Cycle Cost Analysis 1988," NISTIR 85-3273-3, U. S. Department of Commerce, November 1988.