Wood versus vinyl windows--new study

[Lily left the valley]

Treehugger posted about a new study that tells what some of us have already learned...vinyl isn't always better than old wood, and the older wood can be just as good as brand spanking new vinyl.

Obvious quote that needs to be repeated:

There has long been a debate, particularly in historic preservation circles, about whether old windows, particularly in century-old buildings, should be replaced or repaired. Shannon's study shows that restored windows can do the job.

The set up:

Two 1830s Georgian windows were purchased. One was restored by Furlan Conservation in Hamilton, Ontario. The other was restored by Paradigm Shift Customs in Brantford. Two new windows were purchased from Pollard Windows. One was a wooden sash window. The other was a vinyl casement. All four windows were installed by John Deelstra, Professor of Carpentry at Mohawk College. All windows were installed with foam insulation. To make a complete comparison, other considerations including ease of opening and access to air circulation were also considered. The restored windows had opening windows and storms that were hinged so that no lifting or access from the exterior was needed for air circulation.

Blower Test results:


The comments in the article range from hilarious to blood boiling, with more than a few insightful bits in between.

[Manalto]

Thanks for posting this article, Lily. I've seen so much lately about how tightly-sealed houses cause a build-up of toxic gasses, it makes me wonder if, failing the presence of a sophisticated air-exchange system, a little air leakage isn't such a bad thing. I may eat those words when winter rolls around, even in mild Alabama, in this house with no storm windows (yet). Does the vinyl in the windows themselves produce toxic gasses? I've also heard many reports of the rapid degradation of double-paned windows, which some commenters touted as a vast improvement over vintage windows, and a subsequent loss of clarity. (I'm sure there are exceptions with super-high-end products.) It isn't fair to compare a 100 year old window with one fresh off the shelves, which many commenters were doing. If the double panes fog and the vinyl cracks after five years, that insulating advantage is compromised, in my opinion.

I admit that my knowledge of vinyl windows is limited, but installing them means you're living in a house with plastic windows - yuck.

[GibsonGM]

I view a slight amount of air leakage as a GOOD thing. As manalto says, in absence of air exchange equp., who WANTS a super-tight house? With an old basement? (moisture...) It is the RATE that air leaks which determines a good vs. bad opening.

With interior storm panels, my ca. 1880 windows could easily compete with the new trash vinyl jobs. We have no drafts, the storms don't even frost.

To reach the quality of existing vintage windows, one must pay about $400-$600 or more per unit (think Marvin), not the chintzy trailer windows. To remove the old and install the new immediately triggers lead regulations - adding greatly to the cost and potential for exposure to lead dust. EACH window must be contained during replacement (tented, etc). Most carpenters won't bother, so now you've got that in your house and all over everything, forever. By the time you're done, those cheap windows just cost as much as, or more than, re-doing yours and using storm panels.

No way could I justify $14,000 for windows to save $50/year on heating, LOL!

[Mick_VT]

There have been previous studies that have shown the same thing. Properly restored and weatherstripped wood windows along with quality storms approach the efficiency of newer units. Enough to eliminate the new units' "cost savings" when you take into account lifespan... i.e. you will never come close to recouping the extra cost of the new units over their lifetime via energy savings

[vvzz]

I view a slight amount of air leakage as a GOOD thing. As manalto says, in absence of air exchange equp., who WANTS a super-tight house? With an old basement? (moisture...) It is the RATE that air leaks which determines a good vs. bad opening.

There's probably more than enough of leakage in other places, making windows as airtight as possible is a good thing. I recently read a study that even houses with foam insulation often have a lot of air leakage.

[phil]

efficiency Isnt' just about air leakage , its also about heat transfer. some of the better vinyl windows do have a channel that contains air as well as better seals and double panes. I do think they save energy but they aren't cosmetically as appealing. I think Micks point that if you look at the heat savings and transfer that into cost that they may not recoup that cost. the work to restore vs trash them is considerable and in most renos time is such a factor, that's why they get chucked.
now how much of your fuel budget goes to things like the brakes in your car and heating water in order to blow it out with the radiator on your car in order to cool the engine? compare that to the energy your windows waste. if energy savings is a factor at all we need better designed cars.

then everyone has to have a different car, so parts won't interchange and mechanics have to work for dealerships otherwise they cant' access the troubleshooting info and parts.. every year they design cars so the parts wont' fit from other old cars.. we have an extremely inefficient system to maintain cars and make them last. standardization would affect the cost of maintenance and repairs if everything wasn't designed to be throw away. It doesn't mean we need to all drive model T's but governments could do a lot to force automakers to comply to standardized parts and make them serviceable. that would make a massive difference to how wasteful we are as a society. the problem is that the automakers have such influence over governments that they can keep doing it. tha average joe cant' change it.. so he makes payments on a lease car. but take a moment to think about how much we spend for energy and how wasteful we are on materials and pollution just to all have different cars... to what end?.. we do this as consumers in order to make a fashion statement? we dont; have the technology to make cars that are backwards compatible and can last 30 years? of course we do!

anyone remember when headlights were round and you could buy one at the gas station and it didnt' cost much,, but now you have this specially shaped plastic part that is different from almost every car on the road.. and it's expensive! anyone price out a tail light lens from their dealer?

now it isn't just cars, can you get a part for your coffee pot? how come I'm seeing people trashing their washing machines after 2 years because the seals leak and the parts are expensive.. how about a stove than dies because it needs a certain PCB? or a new furnace? it's really nuts when you stop and think how much better we could do as a society if we really did care about wasting energy and materials.

so ...people go buy hybrid cars, yes wohoo!! look how efficient they are , but they are still not worth fixing after a few years and they go to the dump with all their plastic bits. oh they are outdated technology.. they cant' even standardize the battery sizes and connections.or even the wheels.. . what Im saying is it isn't getting fixed and it's not really about what consumers do.. the problem is our societies are so dependent on overproduction they they will crash if we slow down production. really ? would they? how many TV's wen tto the dump because they cant' recieve digital signals? we keep changing things not because they are better but because someone is making money. but we used to make TV's ourselves that could last 30 years. now as we get better at it they last what 5 years then some microcomponent blows and they can't be fixed because there is no standardization. oh the parts are too expensive so chuck the TV,, but really it's got one teeny issue with a little component and yeas we do have the technology to make them so you can replace that thing. why is this prevented?

I'd love to save the world but I don't know what to do so I leave it up to you.. but what can a consumer do to change things.. recognize the problems sure,, but make changes,, well that's too much to wrap your head around never mind where to start.. I dont' know..

ok sorry I got on a tangent but ok lets talk about windows.. How many windows does your car have? whats a reasonable expectation for their lifetime?
you know the car is good for 10 years - or so maybe... then its junk,, but we can't use the windows again.. no way , they wont' fit will they? how many car windows go in the garbage every year? when the car goes to the dump does it need new windows? how many car windows does the average consumer go through in a lifetime? can they be re-used or recycled? why?

we drive around in heated cars,, but why worry about the heat loss through your cars windows even in winter driving through freezing weather we are all pumping so much hot water through our radiators and outside to cool the engine that the heat loss in a car isn't even a logical factor! we could save heat by taking the hot water in the rad inside the house after we park every day!

[vvzz]

Those are all very good points Phil, but let me offer a different perspective. Most modern stuff like cars and appliances already lasts a very long time. Any modern car will easily go 100k miles or something like 10 years without any repairs at all(unless its a lemon) and probably even without maintenance(beside changing oil) And I personally wouldn't want to drive the same car for 30 years.

In the high tech field, obsolescence has long been outpacing lifespan of most devices. I still have my iPhone 2 in a drawer somewhere and it works just fine but it's pretty much useless today.

I bought a Bosch washer/dryer combo 7 years ago. It has been very reliable, but I'm almost hoping one of them dies in such a way that I can't fix it - I like some of the newer washers better because I like shiny buttons and lights which my Bosch washer lacks.

I own few rental units so I fix appliances quite often - and in my opinion things are actually quite standardized there(because there are only few major manufacturers anyways) I have fixed stoves, fridges, dishwashers. They all have fairly easily replaceable parts which can be bought cheaply on ebay. The problem is that most people just won't fix appliances themselves and the labor for the repairman is almost always almost as much as a new appliance(thats a globalization problem).

And the last thing I would ever want is government controlling this because they will screw it up no matter what.

[Manalto]

so ...people go buy hybrid cars, yes wohoo!! look how efficient they are , but they are still not worth fixing after a few years and they go to the dump with all their plastic bits. oh they are outdated technology.. they cant' even standardize the battery sizes and connections.or even the wheels.. .

I know this is straying off the topic, but please indulge me this one question, because I don't "get" hybrid/electric cars. What is the purpose? I know people boast about how little fuel they (hybrids) consume (is that their purpose?) but if we're talking about environmental concerns, don't hybrid/electric cars have huge toxic batteries that must be disposed of once they're exhausted?

[GibsonGM]

Yes, the batteries are toxic..the lithium they contain comes from strip mining...everyone's against coal fired plants, but they charge the batteries from there...they are against nuclear power, which is the cleanest technology...there are many examples of this good-feeling yet not doing anything 'green tech'. Sad. The purpose appears to make you think you're abstaining from some fossil fuel use, when you are actually using it behind the scenes, which you don't see so you don't have to feel bad about it. Like most industries, this one is no exception to marketing gimmicks. Maybe someday....but for now, these things aren't able to make a big impact.

VVZZ..if new spray-foamed houses have 'too much leakage'..count me out bud! LOL...mold-fests unless they are handled JUST right, which costs money and energy itself. I paint them frequently, and they tend to be 'dirtier' than our old houses. Not to argue, I suppose yes, fuel savings is good for many people...but I feel that my interior storms (which bow in and out with the external air pressure) are more than adequate, passing the "I feel no draft" test. That's good enough for me; but I heat with wood and therefore can control my fuel a lot better than nearly everyone who doesn't. Tho I burn my own BTUs in getting it, so I am a bit more careful with it, if you get the drift...

I'm not against 'green', but I worked as an environmental consultant for a number of years; the view is quite different from inside, when you get inside the zoo cages and can smell the...scat...ha ha...

[Lily left the valley]

so ...people go buy hybrid cars, yes wohoo!! look how efficient they are , but they are still not worth fixing after a few years and they go to the dump with all their plastic bits. oh they are outdated technology.. they cant' even standardize the battery sizes and connections.or even the wheels.. .

I know this is straying off the topic, but please indulge me this one question, because I don't "get" hybrid/electric cars. What is the purpose? I know people boast about how little fuel they (hybrids) consume (is that their purpose?) but if we're talking about environmental concerns, don't hybrid/electric cars have huge toxic batteries that must be disposed of once they're exhausted?

There's been a lot of talk about which is greener. There are also a lot of studies ongoing about different types of batteries that could replace the Li ones.

I still have my 2000 Honda Insight, which was the hatchback 2 DR variant with a 3 cyl. engine. So far...I have not had to replace the "back" batteries (as opposed to the motorcycle sized one that goes near the engine), but the IMA (Integrated Motor Assist) needs replacing, which means that the computer sometimes drains the wrong battery and I can't start my car. I know it's just a matter of time before they will need replacing, though.

There are also efforts as to better battery recycling, which I'm not sure if that's more green than "recycling" radiated waste from what I've read on both.

Battery storage is also the white elephant for solar night storage as well, which ties into the issue with electric vehicles since Tesla in particular is very big on solar recharging. (And let's not even get into how over 90% of all solar panels are made from petro chemicals still.)

There are oodles of sites that get into all the math for carbon footprints and whether the creation of a litho battery for a hybrid is better or worse than creating all the gas required for a non hybrid vehicle. Some lean one way, others the other.

Cost wise, between the federal and state tax credits available at the time, plus gas savings in 2000--the car pretty much paid for its sticker price brand new off the lot of $18,000 USD within the first year. Even driving it cross country, up crazy hills (including a wrong turn where we got stuck behind Winnebagos heading to the Grand Canyon) and more, lifetime average is 68 MPG. Granted, such tax credits have long gone the way of the dodo for consumers as far as I know.

I've not regretted the purchase ever, even if she does fishtail in light snow uphill if I haven't yet put extra weight in the well.