Glass Designed For Zone 5

Energy Star's proposed standards for upcoming years have added two more zones to the United States. The northern most zone is zone 5 which includes Minneapolis, St. Paul, Fargo, Green Bay, and many others. It is also the zone where u-factor is the most important rating you will see on the NFRC label.

What is the NFRC label? It is the label on every manufacturer's window that reports the independent test rating of five major components. Heat loss is the term most often tied to u-factor and that is really a function of the glass used in manufacturing the replacement window. Now you see why I say that u-factor is most important in zone 5.

When Energy Star published their proposed standards for upcoming years they made it clear that they want the Energy Star logo to mean something on windows. They are setting much higher and harder to achieve energy efficiency standards.

EnergyMaxx10 glass is the heart of what makes the Preservation Window the most energy efficient window on the market. EnergyMaxx10 has a number of key components that make it so energy efficient. It has the SST spacer system, krypton gas, two gas-filled chambers, and one inch of total glass space.

The SST spacer system is the heart of 'warm edge technology'. The specifications for the SST system clearly show why but here is the short list.

• Exclusive, patented tru warm edge.
• Patented double seal system.
• 54% more thermally efficient than windows made with conventional spacers.
• 950 times less conductive than aluminum spacers.
• 85 times less conductive than stainless steel spacers.
• Krypton gas has more than two and half times as much insulating value as argon.
• The chambers are larger than other glass types.

There are a few of the reasons for those of you in Zone 5 to go with Preservation Windows with EnergyMaxx10 glass.

Using Krypton In Window Glass

The use of krypton in high performance glass is becoming more and more popular. The question in most people's mind is whether or not it's worth it. The answer is yes, definitely.

Krypton and argon are both used in between the lites of glass in Low E and High Performance glass products. Both are inert gases that are not harmful to humans. Both have higher density than air.

Krypton is a better insulator because it's more than twice as dense as argon. Here is an easy analogy for you:

If you were looking at a swimming pool and it was empty, you could hop in and walk the full length of it quite easily. That's what air between the panes of glass is like. If the pool had water in it you would take longer and spend quite a bit more energy walking from one end to the other. That would be like argon. Now let's fill that pool with Jello, Jello symbolizing krypton gas.

I'm sure you get the drift. Krypton is a far better insulator than argon simply because of its density. Here is some more from Efficient Windows.Org if you're more of a technical person.

Vinyl Clad Wood vs. Insulated Vinyl Windows

The Efficient Windows Collaborative recently had an article that compared the various types of replacement windows. Their rankings of window types was very interesting, especially when they compared energy efficiency.

The only glass pack that rated above average was the triple pane, low e, insulated vinyl replacement window. The reason I bring this to your attention is simple. That rules out any of the windows manufactured by the "Big Three" window makers. Yes that includes Renewal By Andersen.

If you've read my stuff before you probably see that I have about four favorite windows and they are all vinyl. Preservation Windows stand out from the crowd though. When you start looking at replacement window products start with Preservation Windows and compare the features. You'll see what I mean!

Windows - Wood or Vinyl?

When someone asks me which type of window is better, wood or vinyl, I never hesitate to answer that vinyl makes a better window. It's almost like there is this little marketing war going on between the two types of window manufacturers. Most of what we hear is more urban myth than substance. I think it's simple to see that you can expect a vinyl window to last longer and be more energy efficient.

In the old days I used to think Andersen Windows were the standard because they were "the energy efficient window." If you don't already know, Andersen came out with vinyl clad windows and, at the time, they were the most innovative window on the market. The vinyl is PVC and it is like what the best vinyl windows are made of today. They used to be the prominent "vinyl clad" window in the whole world.

Now the same Andersen Windows are called wood windows. Funny, there hasn't been any structural change to the windows in 20 years. The Narroline windows are the same now as they were in 1975 except for the glass and other very minor changes. The only thing that's changed is perception. Vinyl clad was innovative back then so they were called vinyl clad windows. Now they are wood windows because natural wood is "in". Is it marketing or public perception?

My bias toward vinyl windows, especially replacement windows, is based on more scientific facts. For one, the good vinyl replacement windows have a Lifetime Warranty. Wood windows have a ten year warranty, at least the major ones like Andersen, Marvin, and Pella. Wood rots and that's just a fact. They can't possibly give a Lifetime Warranty or they would be out of business.

Vinyl is far more energy efficient than wood. The good vinyl windows have hollow chambers filled with foam insulation and offer a much higher r-factor than wood - even before the wood rots. The vinyl nowadays is uPVC (unplasticized polyvinyl chloride). Detractors often call them plastic windows because there is some kind of negative connotation about plastic. Note the "unplasticized" in uPVC. The virgin vinyl type will last a few human lifetimes without warping, cracking, or peeling. Vinyl never needs painting. Enough said about that.

I monitor one of the major window forums on the Internet and the most spirited argument I've ever seen was about warranties. One side argued that the lifetime warranty was better because it was forever. The other side countered that their windows, from the big three window makers, had a 10/20 warranty that was better than the lifetime warranty because they were still going to be in business to back the warranty. That was really interesting to me since the company that makes Preservation Windows has been in business for 68 years, has a solid reputation, and maintains solid earnings in tough economic times. They have a lifetime warranty that includes glass breakage and their u-factor rating was .19, twice as good as the big three. Nobody made that point and it didn't look like the type of argument I wanted to join. I was hearing banjo music in my head when I read some of the comments and it was very heated at times.

During that string of arguments someone mentioned Renewal By Andersen and their innovative material they call fibrex. Fibrex parts are only covered by a 10 year warranty. The material was developed in an effort to make the sawdust from Andersen's Bayport, Minnesota plant into something useful instead of burning thousands of tons of it every year. Fibrex is 40% reclaimed material. Since reground PVC has memory the polymers stretch and try to pull into their original form it's no wonder the warranty isn't longer. I'm not sold on fibrex until they prove that it's not the new "masonite". Do they seem confident with that 10 year warranty?

Preservation Windows has been named Energy Star Partner of the Year three times. They are more than twice as energy efficient as the big three and have a warranty that dwarfs theirs. Other good vinyl window makers with lifetime warranties include Simonton, Gorrell, and Milguard. My apology to any of the thousands of others who make really good vinyl windows. The two things the vinyl manufacturers have in common are energy efficiency and durability - none of them rot! And guess what, they don't expand and contract much either.

I think suffice is to say that vinyl windows, especially replacement windows, have too many important areas where their performance is far superior to wood. Please tell me what you think.