"P2000" EPS insulation w/foil backers - truth or fiction?

Kevin K · February 14, 2007, 10:36:43 AM

http://www.p2000insulation.ca/product.php

I'm extremely skeptical about this stuff, anyone else have any input or experience with this or similar products?

http://www.p2000insulation.ca/testing/Suderman/EnerGuide%20Report.pdf
(Energy Efficiency Evaluation Report by the local power company, Manitoba Hydro)

http://www.p2000insulation.ca/testing/testresults.php
(Test results)

Raphael · February 14, 2007, 11:33:22 AM

It's the truth provided you install it correctly.
Most of that R value they report is from the radiant barrier, so an air gap in front of the foil is critical to it's performance.

Norwiscutter · February 14, 2007, 12:16:33 PM

I just got off the phone with the distributor who said the 2 inch foam has an R value of 48. That means it could be used as a single layer ceiling insulation system. I asked them if they had the documentation to back it up and they said yes. I can just see the look on the inspectors face when I tell him that I am using 2 inches of foam for the ceiling insulation and that is it. The prices seemed reasonable considering the insulation values they are claiming. It sounds like it would make a good product for under the concrete applications.

slowzuki · February 14, 2007, 12:27:25 PM

I'm skepitical, radiant barriers have to stay very clean and maintain the air gap to be effective. That foil bubble wrap stuff has been disproved many times and I believe there are some lawsuits related to it.

The winnipeg thing is just an energuide audit, they do not in anyway test the walls insulation value from my understanding.

Norwiscutter · February 14, 2007, 01:59:34 PM

The distributor just called me back and is going to drop off an information packet for me tomorrow. They are also going to bring the few samples so that I can check it out. I am surprised they are willing to go out of their way to bring me a sample just because I called to request information. This distributor is three hours south of me, although he said he was coming up this way tomorrow anyhow. They said the 3/8 insulation carried an r value of around 10 for under slab insulation. Although I am pretty skeptical. It does say a lot about the distributor, if they are going to drop it off here at my house. Hopefully their claims are true, because it would seem to offer some nice options for some of the stuff I'm doing.

logwalker · February 14, 2007, 02:55:20 PM

On the website they make the claim: "Independent laboratory tests proved that 5/8" of P2000 outperforms 6" of fibreglass insulation plus vapour barrier."
As I read the R-value evaluation report on the website Even 1" P-2000 falls short of a 6" R-19 fiberglass wall system. That is an interesting claim. Joe

Raphael · February 14, 2007, 05:17:56 PM

The key word there is "outperforms", they are getting a small (5/8" EPS) whole wall benefit and a major air cavity boost to their total performance score.

Kevin K · February 14, 2007, 05:49:48 PM

Now for the $1400 question...

Would you use it?

Raphael · February 14, 2007, 06:29:33 PM

If I didn't already have an extra roll of double bubble foil I'd use it or something like it (I think I'd want a more ridgid product) in my ceiling but I'd still have 8" of cotton batting above it. ;)

Don P · February 15, 2007, 10:54:46 PM

This is a link to the only code ES report (approval) I could find in a quick search for radiant barrier approval with them. It does seem to give some R numbers.
http://www.icc-es.org/reports/pdf_files/SBC/2133A.pdf

I think the FTC has not too long ago cautioned the radiant barrier folks to tone it down on the claims. I think there is truth somewhere amongst some fiction.

Kevin K · February 16, 2007, 05:52:29 PM

I spent some time on the phone today, and have the name of a timber framer in Nova Scotia who has been using the P2000 insulation a fair amount (2 layers of 1" I believe) on the timber frames he builds.

I will send him an email this weekend and report back here.

Kevin

NH Builder · April 20, 2009, 11:04:10 AM

I know this topic has not had any recent posts but upon, finding it I was so shocked at some of the claims I joined the forum just to set things straight. Since the last Post P2000 has passed the ICC code and has an R-value of 10.2 per inch. For a distributor to claim that 2 inches is R-48 is horrible. It is illegal to make false R-value claims and P2000 cooperate does not tolerate blatently exaggerated claims such as that. However in real world conditions 2 inches will perform as good as r-50 this is not code and will not pass inspection as r-50.
The other incorrect thing I read on this forum is that its foil depends on an air barrier to work correctly. This is 100% FALSE! P2000's reflective facing is not foil. It's composition is a company secret but it is not foil. Foil becomes a conductor with the lack of an air barrier. The facing of P2000 reflects when pressed up against a solid object. I know those of you who understand physics are saying to yourself thats impossible, but it is a fact. All you have to do is hold your hand against the product and you can feel your own heat reflecting back at you. Sandia Labs a Lockheed Martin Company, is presently participating as a third party in a test house in New Mexico to find out how this is actually possible, but we will have to wait till the end of the next winter to hear their results.
Do not believe what you read about p2000 on the Internet unless you go to their site www.p2000insulation.com . For the ICC report read ICC ES-2222 available in PDF format on the web.

slowzuki · July 16, 2009, 04:21:15 PM

I'd caution anyone from believing the manufacturers claims without being skeptical. It is indeed a foil or mylar product on the P2000. Of course it feels warm when touching it as it is backed by insulation. Radiant products do need at least some airspace to perform correctly. They can act a bit on trapped air in other insulation.

Jasperfield · July 17, 2009, 12:50:39 AM

I used it in my house. I questioned it just as all of you have. I'm here to tell you that it's exactly as the manufacturer says it is.

It's thin, light, etc.

It works!

I'm a believer. I've seen it! I'm using it.

I live at 4000' on the spine of the high Appalachians in WNC where this past winter was
-10F on 3 mornings.

If posting photo's wasn't so difficult here I'd post them. I'll gladly send them to any private email.

shinnlinger · July 17, 2009, 08:57:33 AM

Hi,

R-10 per inch is still pretty good. I have just stuck 3- 2inch (6 inches total) layers of Poliyiso foam on top of my timber frame for a supposed R-36 or so . I am considering putting another inch or so between the purlins on the inside. and then covering with D-wall. What do you think?

slowzuki · July 22, 2009, 01:02:44 PM

Polyiso has a high r-value, and continuous sheets have a much better r-value than an assembly with joists in it. I'd not bother with the insultation on the inside. We have 6" purlins insulated with batts and 1.5" XPS on top with taped joints and it is fine. The windows in our house far exceed any other heat loss and I need to build movable insulation.

Quote from: shinnlinger on July 17, 2009, 08:57:33 AM
Hi,

R-10 per inch is still pretty good. I have just stuck 3- 2inch (6 inches total) layers of Poliyiso foam on top of my timber frame for a supposed R-36 or so . I am considering putting another inch or so between the purlins on the inside. and then covering with D-wall. What do you think?