Opinion
When black roofs cost more and most negatively affect our health, why are we installing them?
We are into construction season and summer and the heat is starting to be an issue. We will have some heat waves and we will notice the “Urban Heat Island Effect”.
The city will seem hotter than the county, but we will also notice differences in temperature between light coloured vehicles and darker coloured vehicles, and even the coolness of a white fence.
During heat waves some of the most vulnerable people are those living on the top floor of a building with a black roof.
My biggest question is why are we still putting black roofs on our buildings? Black roofs do not absorb heat in the winter under a foot of white snow. They absorb heat during the hot days making it hotter.
Let’s start at the beginning, by hitting the Google button.
What is the Heat Island Effect?
The elevated temperature in urban areas as compared to rural, less developed areas is referred to as the urban heat island effect. As cities grow and develop, more buildings and people are added. The process of urban development leads to this phenomenon.
What are the Implications of Heat Islands?
Heat islands are considered a form of local climate change as opposed to global climate change. The effects of heat islands are confined to specific areas, and do not have a larger impact on climate change. Despite being confined to a certain locality, heat islands can still make a significant impact.
Of course, one of the most noticeable impacts on urban dwellers is an increase in hot, summer weather. On particularly clear and hot days, when the heat island effect is at its worst, inhabitants of larger cities will notice hotter and more uncomfortable temperatures. When people are hot, they often crank up their air conditioners. Increases in air conditioning use not only results in more heat being released into the air, this also contributes to air pollution, as more greenhouse gas emissions are discharged. This negatively impacts air quality and can also lead to a surge in urban smog.
How Can We Reduce the Heat Island?
Since the impact of heat islands is mostly negative, scientists and researchers are searching for ways to reduce and reverse the effects. Dark roof surfaces are one of the major culprits of temperature increases. One popular technique for combating the heat island effect is installing green roofs on urban buildings. Green roofs, which are lined with soil and certain types of vegetation, can actually help cities regain some of the cooling and evaporative effects that the natural landscape once provided. As this idea becomes more popular, there is more and more scientific evidence that green roofs can reduce heat in urban areas.
Dark building surfaces that absorb more heat account for some of the rising temperatures in urban areas. One simple method for reducing this effect is to paint buildings with light or white colors that do not absorb nearly as much heat. Some cities are also using paint treatments that reflect light to combat the heat island effect. White, Green or Black Roofs? Berkeley Lab Report Compares Economic Payoffs
Looking strictly at the economic costs and benefits of three different roof types—black, white and “green” (or vegetated)—Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) researchers have found in a new study that white roofs are the most cost-effective over a 50-year time span. While the high installation cost of green roofs sets them back in economic terms, their environmental and amenity benefits may at least partially mitigate their financial burden.
A new report titled “Economic Comparison of White, Green, and Black Flat Roofs in the United States” by Julian Sproul, Benjamin Mandel, and Arthur Rosenfeld of Berkeley Lab, and Man Pun Wan of Nanyang Technological University in Singapore, provides a direct economic comparison of these three roof types. The study will appear in the March 2014 volume of Energy and Buildings and has just been published online. “White roofs win based on the purely economic factors we included, and black roofs should be phased out,” said study co-author Rosenfeld, a Berkeley Lab Distinguished Scientist Emeritus and former Commissioner of the California Energy Commission
The study analyzes 22 commercial flat roof projects in the United States in which two or more roof types were considered. The researchers conducted a 50-year life cycle cost analysis, assuming a 20-year service life for white and black roofs and a 40-year service life for green roofs.
A green roof, often called vegetated roofs or rooftop gardens, has become an increasingly popular choice for aesthetic and environmental reasons. Rosenfeld acknowledges that their economic analysis does not capture all of the benefits of a green roof. For example rooftop gardens provide storm water management, an appreciable benefit in cities with sewage overflow issues, while helping to cool the roof’s surface as well as the air. Green roofs may also give building occupants the opportunity to enjoy green space where they live or work.
Berkeley Lab Distinguished Scientist Emeritus Art Rosenfeld
“We leave open the possibility that other factors may make green roofs more attractive or more beneficial options in certain scenarios,” said Mandel, a graduate student researcher at Berkeley Lab. “The relative costs and benefits do vary by circumstance.”
However, unlike white roofs, green roofs do not offset climate change. White roofs are more reflective than green roofs, reflecting roughly three times more sunlight back into the atmosphere and therefore absorbing less sunlight at earth’s surface. By absorbing less sunlight than either green or black roofs, white roofs offset a portion of the warming effect from greenhouse gas emissions.
“Both white and green roofs do a good job at cooling the building and cooling the air in the city, but white roofs are three times more effective at countering climate change than green roofs,” said Rosenfeld.
White roofs are most cost-effective
The costs and benefits difference stack that has the highest net present value shows the roof type that is most cost-effective.
The 50-year life-cycle cost analysis found that even the most inexpensive kind of green roof (with no public access and consisting of only sedum, or prairie grass) costs $7 per square foot more than black roofs over 50 years, while white roofs save $2 per square foot compared to black roofs. In other words, white roofs cost $9 per square foot less than green roofs over 50 years, or $0.30 per square foot each year.
The researchers acknowledge that their data are somewhat sparse but contend that their analysis is valuable in that it is the first to compare the economic costs and energy savings benefits of all three roof types. “When we started the study it wasn’t obvious that white roofs would still be more cost-effective over the long run, taking into account the longer service time of a green roof,” Mandel said.
Furthermore while the economic results are interesting, it also highlights the need to include factors such health and environment in a more comprehensive analysis. “We’ve recognized the limitations of an analysis that’s only economic,” Mandel said. “We would want to include these other factors in any future study.”
Black roofs pose health risk
For example, black roofs pose a major health risk in cities that see high temperatures in the summer. “In Chicago’s July 1995 heat wave a major risk factor in mortality was living on the top floor of a building with a black roof,” Rosenfeld said.
For that reason, he believes this latest study points out the importance of government policymaking. “White doesn’t win out over black by that much in economic terms, so government has a role to ban or phase out the use of black or dark roofs, at least in warm climates, because they pose a large negative health risk,” he said.
Rosenfeld, who started at Berkeley Lab in the 1950s, is often called California’s godfather of energy efficiency for his pioneering work in the area. He was awarded a National Medal of Technology and Innovation by President Obama in 2012, one of the nation’s highest honours.
Rosenfeld has been a supporter of solar-reflective “cool” roofs, including white roofs, as a way to reduce energy costs and address global warming. He was the co-author of a 2009 study in which it was estimated that making roofs and pavements around the world more reflective could offset 44 billion tons of CO2 emissions. A later study using a global land surface model found similar results: cool roofs could offset the emissions of roughly 300 million cars for 20 years.
So if black roofs are detrimental to our health, contribute to the issue of Urban Heat Island Effect and costs more, why are we still building black roofs?
Media
Reporters determined to drive their industry and its reputation into the abyss one Tweet at a time
Last week, my column for The Hub was about why journalists, for the sake of journalism, should avoid posting on Twitter/X.
It took mere hours for my advice to be wrapped up in a ball and shoved right back at me when Robert Fife, a reporter of many years experience (he’s even older than I am) and the Globe and Mail’s Ottawa bureau chief, posted in response to the House of Commons’ vote on a Conservative motion to approve pipelines that:
“Conservatives persist with cute legislative tricks, while the government tries to run a country.”
The Rewrite is a reader-supported publication.
To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
While he’s free to do so and obviously views things differently, it is quite beyond me why the bureau chief of a distinguished journalism organization would expose himself so casually to accusations of bearing a bias – particularly given public concern about government funding of media – and so I responded by sharing Fife’s post with the comment:
“I’m old-fashioned enough to think reporters shouldn’t be blatantly stating biases. Not a great way to retain public trust.”
Now, I was aware that Fife was sharing a headlined opinion column by a colleague, Robyn Urback. But Urback is perfectly capable of promoting her own work and if Fife’s sole motivation was to neutrally share her column, it would’ve been fine if he had posted something like: “Here’s one perspective on yesterday’s House of Commons vote.”
Some people suggested the post was OK because it was only sharing someone else’s viewpoint and a headline. But Fife’s appearance on CBCNN’s Power and Politics – in which he enthusiastically described the Opposition as “childish” and criticized it for criticizing the government – made it appear the Tweet was otherwise motivated. Not everyone in today’s newsrooms shares my view that reporters should do everything in their power to be viewed as objective. Fair enough. While the aspiration remains popular with the public, it is no longer favoured by many, maybe even most, modern journalists.
Fife’s been a good reporter for decades going back to long before Twitter. He’s been announced as the 2026 recipient of the Public Policy Forum’s Hy Solomon award for excellence in public policy journalism. There are also some exceptionally good reporters at the Globe and Mail such as Grant Robertson, who has won nine National Newspaper Awards – more than anyone, ever, and eight more than me. There is no evidence I can find that Robertson, like a lot of other very good journalists, even has an account on X/Twitter. I have absolutely no idea or suspicions concerning what he thinks about anything going on in the world and I think that is how journalists should aspire to be perceived. But when social media posts by other reporters bring into question journalists’ reputations as fair brokers of the events of the day, his prudent behaviour isn’t enough to keep the entire craft from suffering reputational damage. As the old saying goes, newspapers don’t report when airplanes land safely – a phrase that applies equally to reporters, of which, according to the latest Global Media and Internet Concentration Project report, there were 1,600 fewer in Canada last year.
All that said, I don’t think anyone cares enough to do anything about it. Despite considerable evidence detailing journalism’s decline as a trusted institution, the overwhelming majority of its practitioners appear to me to have no intention whatsoever of altering course.
It looks like time has passed me by. As Leonard Cohen sang, “I’m old and the mirrors don’t lie.” So I will just continue to tilt at windmills for a little longer and then decide if there aren’t more rewarding things to do.
So Tweet away, journos, Tweet away. Tweet all the way into the abyss.
The colloquial nature of many newsrooms continues to fascinate, the latest example being treatment of Bill C-9, which expands the powers of Canada’s hate criminal speech legislation. Already problematic from a free speech perspective, the deal Justice Minister Sean Fraser struck with the Bloc Quebecois to ensure its passage has alarmed both the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops and the National Council of Canadian Muslims.
That’s because in exchange for the Bloc’s support, Fraser will amend C-9 so that it removes the exemption given to statements made based on sincerely held religious beliefs. The exemption states: “if, in good faith, the person expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text.”
But, just as our media refuse to acknowledge developments beyond our borders on trans issues and health care models, they remain rube-ishly reluctant to look at what happens when quoting from the Bible becomes a police matter. I wrote about it elsewhere and, given that I am planning a Christmas break, will re-post that piece next week. In the meantime it will be interesting to see if any Canadian media or commentators pick up on the case of Päivi Räsänen, a medical doctor and Member of the Finnish Parliament. She and Bishop Juhana Pohjola of the Evangelical Lutheran Mission Diocese of Finland, twice acquitted, are awaiting the outcome of their third trial on allegations of criminal hate for quoting passages of the Bible regarding a church Pride event. If found guilty, they will face up to two years in prison, the same as in Canada.
The bad news for journalists working within traditional media structures continues.
The Nieman Lab predictions for 2026 forecast that Artificial Intelligence will continue to grow as a source of information for the public.
The good news?
“Tech companies will face pressure in the year ahead to bolster the information ecosystem.”
The bad news?
“Tech companies will realize they don’t need journalism to give people the answers they need.”
The conclusion?
“The threats we (journalists) face are existential, but we can reframe them as opportunities.”
Postmedia columnist Brian Lilley is definitely playing journalism with his elbows up these days.
Last week, he challenged his colleagues in the industry to question the activist group Coastal First Nations on its funding by US interests.
“Here’s an open challenge to the Parliamentary Press Gallery who will be covering the CEO of Coastal First Nations appearing in Ottawa,” he posted on Twitter. “Ask them what rights and title they hold to any of the land in question.
“Ask them about American funding.”
Near as I could tell, he didn’t get any takers and the industry will continue to present the anti-pipeline group as organic. But, just in case, I checked and Lilley’s response was “Hahahahahahhaha!”
Earlier, he firmly put CBCNN Power and Politics host David Cochrane in his place with a Facebook post stating “I’ve never seen an anchor in any country, on any network, push left-wing Liberal talking points as hard as Cochrane.”
Whew! Brian won’t be popular at parties.
Finally, a bouquet to Peter Mazereeuw of The Hill Times for the literary flourish with which he described the anonymous sources so routinely used by press gallery journalists who pretend they aren’t authorized to speak.
Justice Minister Sean “Fraser is currently in a bit of hot water with the PMO, which sent forth some of its anonymous flying monkeys yesterday to tell the CBC that he had not gotten its approval for his deal with the Bloc Québécois ….”
Remember that term.
Happy Hannukah. May your candles burn bright.
Readers will notice a new DONATE button has been added. Please consider making use of it and help us save journalism from bad journalism.
(Peter Menzies is a commentator and consultant on media, Macdonald-Laurier Institute Senior Fellow, a past publisher of the Calgary Herald, a former vice chair of the CRTC and a National Newspaper Award winner.)
The Rewrite is a reader-supported publication.
To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Crime
Hero bystander disarms shooter in Australian terror attack
Insane footage shows a bystander attacking and disarming one of the terrorists, who appears to have been armed with a long rifle, during today’s shooting attack on an event celebrating Hanukkah at Bondi Beach in Sydney, Australia. pic.twitter.com/mJceco22bJ
— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) December 14, 2025
The chaos that struck Australia on Sunday night produced one moment of astonishing courage: a Sydney shopkeeper, armed with nothing but instinct and grit, charged a gunman at Bondi Beach and wrestled the rifle out of his hands as terrified families ran for cover. Authorities say the act likely prevented even more deaths in what officials have already called an antisemitic terror attack that left 12 people dead and dozens wounded during a Hanukkah celebration along the water.
The hero has been identified as 43-year-old fruit shop owner Ahmed Al Ahmed, a father of two who happened to be nearby when gunfire erupted at the beachfront event “Hanukkah by the Sea,” which had drawn more than 200 people. Footage captured the moment he marched toward the shooter, grabbed hold of the rifle, and overpowered him in a brief, violent struggle. As the gunman hit the pavement, Al Ahmed momentarily pointed the weapon back at him but didn’t fire, instead placing it against a tree before another attacker opened up from a bridge above. He was hit in the hand and shoulder and is now recovering after emergency surgery.
A relative told Australia’s Channel Seven that Al Ahmed had never handled a gun in his life. “He’s a hero — he’s 100 percent a hero,” the family member said. New South Wales Premier Chris Minns echoed the praise, calling the scene “unbelievable,” adding, “A man walked up to someone who had just fired on the community and single-handedly disarmed him. Many people are alive tonight because of his bravery.”
Police say two shooters stepped out of a vehicle along Campbell Parade around 6:40 p.m. and began firing toward the beach. One gunman was killed, the other is in custody in critical condition. Detectives are also investigating whether a third attacker was involved, and bomb units swept the area after reports that an explosive device may have been planted beneath a pedestrian bridge. The toll is staggering: 12 dead, including one shooter, and at least 29 wounded — among them children and two police officers.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese condemned what he called “a targeted attack on Jewish Australians on the first day of Hanukkah,” saying, “What should have been a night of joy and peace has been shattered by this horrifying evil attack.” Emergency crews flooded the beach as hundreds of panicked people sprinted away from the gunfire. Video shows one attacker firing down toward the sand from the bridge behind Bondi Park before being shot himself in a final standoff captured by drone footage. Both gunmen appeared to be carrying ammunition belts, with witnesses estimating up to 50 rounds were fired.
Australian police have cordoned off properties linked to the suspects and continue to canvass Bondi for additional threats. What remains clear is that Sunday’s attack was met with extraordinary acts of self-sacrifice, none more dramatic than a shopkeeper from Sutherland who walked into gunfire to stop further slaughter.
-
Alberta1 day agoThe Recall Trap: 21 Alberta MLA’s face recall petitions
-
Business2 days agoHigh-speed rail between Toronto and Quebec City a costly boondoggle for Canadian taxpayers
-
illegal immigration1 day agoUS Notes 2.5 million illegals out and counting
-
International1 day agoTyler Robinson shows no remorse in first court appearance for Kirk assassination
-
Business2 days agoThe world is no longer buying a transition to “something else” without defining what that is
-
Energy2 days agoCanada’s future prosperity runs through the northwest coast
-
Daily Caller21 hours ago‘There Will Be Very Serious Retaliation’: Two American Servicemen, Interpreter Killed In Syrian Attack
-
illegal immigration2 days agoEXCLUSIVE: Canadian groups, First Nation police support stronger border security



