Better Roofs Are Less Expensive
Article by Richard A. Boon, P.E., CCI
The ultimate question for roofing is: “What is the best roof?” The accountants
will tell you that the answer is simple: It is the roof that costs the least
over its life. It really does not matter what material is used or how the roof
is attached; the answer is the same. If the roof fails, then the cost of a new
roof is added to the cost.
When most owners look at roofing, they look at the materials and the systems,
and the only part of the cost they consider is the initial cost. But the cost to
install a roof is only a portion of the total cost of owning a roof.
The practice of examining the cost of owning a roof over its entire life is
called life-cycle cost analysis. This is the best way to truly compare the
cost/value of roofing systems. Something that is crucial is: How long do you
expect to own the building? If the answer is indefinitely, then the analysis
should be run for at least 20 years. Some people will use 30 years. The standard
depreciation for roofing is 39 years. There are very few systems that are
functional at the end of this life expectancy.
In a basic life-cycle cost analysis, there are several factors that need to be
considered. The study period has already been mentioned. The next consideration
is the changing value of a dollar over time. One common method for relating
future expenses to today's costs is to use the t-bill rate, minus the inflation
rate. A time value of approximately 5 percent is a reasonable number for use in
our analysis.
There are costs associated with other aspects of
roofing,
such as installation inspections, semi-annual inspections, the cost of
leak-related repairs, costs associated with making the warrantor live up to the
warranty, and so on. There are also routine maintenance expenses to consider,
such as cleaning the drains, recaulking the flashings and performing general
housekeeping.
With some systems, the costs of performing some of these items are covered by
the warrantor as a part of a comprehensive service package. They can also be
purchased from some contractors or roofing consultants for an annual service
charge. All of these costs need to be known or estimated for the term of the
study period.
The last item that needs to be known is the relative life expectancy of the
roofs in question. There are sources for this information. The most conservative
approach is to use the warranty life as the service life. This is generally
shorter than the real life, except where there is no routine maintenance done.
Then the life may well be shorter than the warranty.
Life-cycle Cost Scenario
Let's create a simple scenario that illustrates how these factors combine to
produce a life-cycle cost:
The roof in question is bid using two different systems. The first is a
commodity-grade roof with a 15-year warranty; the bid is $225,000. The second
system is a premium roof, and the bid is $300,000.
We are assuming that the owner is a public entity, so that taxes can be ignored.
We are using our 5 percent for the time value of the funds.
The cost to maintain the commodity-grade roof is at least $1,000 per year, to
cover the costs of the required inspections for warranty and the cost of a
consultant on the project during installation (many consultants are considerably
higher).
When that roof is replaced, in its 15th year, its present value cost is
$113,640, representing the initial cost adjusted by the time value of the funds.
When you add the continuing cost of maintenance, the total-ownership cost for
the commodity roof becomes $354,781.
With the second system, assuming that the premium roof is replaced in its 24th
year, the present value cost is only $97,671. Since the system supplier provides
the required inspections as a free service, there are no maintenance-related
costs for the first 15 years of the roof. Let's assume as much as $1,500 in
annual maintenance from years 15 through 23. Let's also assume roof replacement
in year 24, a conservative estimate for a roof that was warranted for 20 years.
Even with these conservative estimates, the total-ownership cost for the premium
roof is $346,273. As the federal interest rates drop, the difference in
total-ownership cost increases, making the premium roof an even better buy.
Since the premium roof has a manufacturer's rep on site during installation,
installation-related problems and add-on inspection costs are minimized. In
addition, on-site manufacturer observation provides the benefit of single-source
liability, should problems eventually occur.
The figures used in this illustration are in accordance with ASTM E-917,
Standard Practice for Measuring Life-Cycle Costs of Buildings and Building
Systems, which provides building owners with an excellent tool for comparing
roofing options on a sound financial basis.
Other Factors
There are other factors that can be included in a model. These include a simple
energy cost savings as well as the costs that are associated with any leaks in
the system. If a roof leaks, then the wet areas need to be fixed, as does the
damage done inside the building. The additional energy lost can be considered as
well.
There is also a cost associated with disrupting the facility to put a new roof
on. This should be added to the cost of the roof. How much does it cost to clean
up after a leak? This too, must be added.
It has been reported that the return on an initial investment of $10 to $12 can
be justified through the savings of a single dollar per year in maintenance.
So, which of these roofs saves the owner the most money? Clearly, the higher
up-front costs of premium roofing systems can be fully justified through
long-term savings.
By looking at more than just the initial cost of the roof, the owner is making a
better financial decision. This same analysis is useful for making a multitude
of construction-related purchasing decisions.
Are the published life expectancies of high-performance roofing products truly
achievable? There is no question that if someone knowledgeable looks at the roof
at least once a year (industry recommendation is twice a year), and the problem
areas are corrected promptly, most commercial roofs will last significantly
longer than their warranties. The exception is when defective materials cause
the roof to shrink excessively or to shatter.
Conclusion
Life-cycle cost analysis is the best way to discuss making roofing decisions
with financial people. The one that makes the final decision is the one that
signs the checks. Roofing people are great at providing technical information
but poor at providing the financial information that supports the right
decision.
Improve the quality of your data. Examine your own roofs or the roofs of others
in your area and find out what is working and what's not. This data can then be
used to better model the true life-cycle costs.
Roofing is often seen as a problem area in building construction and
maintenance. This perception is earned in part by the people who most often
complain about it. The designers and facility managers that choose their roofing
systems and contractors based on an assumption that the lowest bid for the least
expensive roof is going to provide satisfactory results. This assumption is
based on the idea that roofing specifications are performance based and that all
contractors are equally qualified to install all systems. This assumption is
false. Unfortunately, it remains a basic tenant for some in the industry.
About the Author: Richard A. Boon, P.E., is an independent roofing consultant
with Construction Support Services, Inc. of Littleton, Colorado. He is a past
director of The Roofing Industry Educational Institute and serves on Roofing
Contractor’s editorial advisory board.
If you are looking for A St. Louis roofing Contractor, please call us today at 636-447-8591 or complete our online request form. |