This research draws on and expands previous studies that have quantified the costs and benefits associated with conventional roofs versus green roofs. Using parameters from those studies to define alternative scenarios, we estimate from a private, public, and social perspective the costs and benefits of installing and maintaining an extensive green roof in Atlanta, GA. Results indicate net private benefits are a decreasing function of roof size and vary considerably across scenarios. In contrast, net public benefits are highly stable across scenarios, ranging from $32.49 to $32.90 m(-2). In addition, we evaluate two alternative subsidy regimes: (i) a general subsidy provided to every building that adopts a green roof and (ii) a targeted subsidy provided only to buildings for which net private benefits are negative but net public benefits are positive. In 6 of the 12 general subsidy scenarios the optimal public policy is not to offer a subsidy; in 5 scenarios the optimal subsidy rate is between $20 and $27 m(-2); and in 1 scenario the optimal rate is $5 m(-2). The optimal rate with a targeted subsidy is between $20 and $27 m(-2) in 11 scenarios and no subsidy is optimal in the twelfth. In most scenarios, a significant portion of net public benefits are generated by buildings for which net private benefits are positive. This suggests a policy focused on information dissemination and technical assistance may be more cost-effective than direct subsidy payments.