I’ve been reading with interest the lengthening thread on the Thermoseal blog about the Window Energy Scheme and its impact on our industry.
It appears that there are many people concerned that the impending changes to the WER scheme in October will have a devastating effect on many small IGU fabricators, PVCu manufacturers and installers. Many of the comments refer to small businesses being pushed out of business and people being forced onto the dole.
I am becoming increasingly concerned myself that the industry is just not ready to replace U-Values with WERs as the only way to comply with building regulations in such a short time scale.
The whole thing seems badly thought out, and there seems to be a lot of confusion about what the changes will actually mean to individual businesses. There are even people questioning the validity of the science behind the rating system.
Our company has successfully been marketing energy rated windows for some time now, but I’m particularly frustrated with the amount of unnecessary bureaucracy it entails and the lack of flexibility we now have with sealed unit product supply.
So, I’m trying to fix up to have an interview on the website with Giles Wilson of the BFRC, although I’m yet to get a response to my request. I want to ask him for clarity on a couple of questions I need clarifying, but I would also like to hear any constructive questions you might like me to put to him.
Please submit your questions below, and then I’ll compile the best 8 or 10 and send them to him.
Tags: BFRC, building regulations for windows, Energy Rated Windows, GGF, Giles wilson, igu fabricators, PVCu installers, PVCu manufacturers, U-Values for windows, WERs
Loading ...
I would like to see a seasonal wer, as I am not convinced solar gain is a factor that should be used as an off set value. A wer rating for summer and winter may be more valuable in accessing energy savings. Also what is the calculation formula and how was it arrived at? Good luck
Good Luck
I have been having exchanges of letters with Giles for over 18 months concerning the implementation of the WERS.
You have systems with either a 65mm or 70 mm option – white or woodgrain , A or C – the permutations are almost endless – Don,t mention tilt n turns ( are they a window ? ) , woodgrain options , add -ons , trickle vents , customer choice restrictions , inflationary measures , relationship between the GGF and the not for profit BFRC ( owned by the GGF ) , unemployment , cost or renewals , how the scheme stops new better products being launched onto the market quickly as existing labels will need to be re-newed , how freedom of choice is almost eroded etc etc etc
Let us know how you get on
Giles is hopefully coming to our GGf meeting in Exeter many of the members have similar concerns.
Giles has been to many meetings and is fully aware of the concerns of the grass roots of the industry.
On an A rated window, u value 1.4 or better, when the customer wants georgian bar inserts, or leading, or trickle ventilation for new build, what effect does that have on the rating?
I cannot seem to get a straight answers to this one? Does anyone know ?
Matthew
I have tried to follow the Thermaoseal Blog but I am a little dissapointed at the lack of maintenance it gets , at the time of typing this, the last post was on the 2nd feb !! and I have dropped a couple in since then . It gets a little disheartening to see that it is not updated a litlle more often .
Ok for WER’s we could start here
http://renegadeconservatoryguy.co.uk/smoke-and-mirrors-bfrc-rating-scheme/
or here
http://renegadeconservatoryguy.co.uk/glazing-quiz/
I absolutely believe that the BFRC scheme is a fudge and that is why it seems to be causing the trouble it is. I do find it funny that individuals of the GGF & BFRC often make the claim of A rated windows gaining more heat than they lose , in contrast to their own guidance notes which say it is a comparison tool !!
Where did the solar gain claim of 218.6 come from ? that number is the crux of all the issues in this scheme and the BFRC cannot tell me the refernce source of the solar data it was derived from , as far as the industry is concerned the solar factor in the formula could have been made up to ………
I can fit a window of ( BFRC simulated ) 1.6 U value and it is WER D rated
I have seen windows ( BFRC simulated ) 1.8 U value achieve a C rating
Excessive solar gain my friends and enough of it to make a pilk K 1.6 U unit outperfom an SGG Ultra n 1.1 U value , does it make you wonder who run the GGF/ BFRC ?
Matthew
I contributed the Thermoseal blog after your original post but I thought long and hard before writing this reply. I too have grave concerns about many issue’s connected to the BFRC scheme and where it is heading and could probably get close to 10 questions on my own, but I have decided not to write them here.
But I do feel passionately that the basis and idea of the WER scheme and its simplicity, easily recognised label etc. can be a real benefit to this industry and how we carry the positive environmental message of energy efficient windows to the consumer.
My fear is if we continue to ‘air our dirty linen’ in public we are sending the wrong message to the consumer and then all could be lost.
I hope that the GGF/BFRC engage with all sectors of industry affected by WER’s very quickly and devise a workable scheme in time for planned changes to the building regulations.
A speedy General Election and possible delay in the implimentation of the Buliding Regulations amendments may be the last hope we have in buying the industry more time to get this sorted out.
Mark ,
The GGF/ Bfrc do not acknowledge a problem , are we all to sit back and allow them carte blanche to try and re-shape the domestic replacement window market? I don’t actually know their membership numbers at installer level ,but I’ll warrant they have a very low percentage and yet are trying to reshape the industry . Why, well I believe that commercial interest in the GGF has shaped the scheme for the purposes of profit and not of energy savings.
What is a workable scheme ? if HM government has committted to energy savings in existing buildings it has to reduce U values. simple and not really an issue , the issue is monitoring the products used. Whose problem is that , local councils have departments to do this but do not have the staff or resources, so why should we as installers pay some industry beaurocrats a fitting tax. The scheme is an extension and complication of bad government, and we are all falling over to try to please them. And just to try and make you feel guilty they wave the big climate stick at you , not that I know how relevant that is, but I resent the waving .
The delay in the regs is possibly down to the fact that they are looking into this very issue , the CLG was supposed to report its conclusions inj mid Jan ,but I am not sure that the final format has been produced yet. I think the industry may have just had it’s bubble burst on this issue , specifically for trying to take the p**s out of the CLG, Part L and worst of all the consumer.
Kevin
Interesting conspiracy theories, but I am convinced that the scheme’s original concept can help our industry deliver the energy saving benefits of our products to the consumer in a simple and understandable way.
Where we agree, (I think) is in its current format the scheme is not workable as potentially the only form of compliance for the replacement market.
If a rating scheme is based purely on U values then yes it would have some merit as it would simply show the best insulators at the top of the list .
All the solar gain rubbish in the formula does nothing but confuse the issue , existing housing stock cannot alter its orientation or remove neighbouring houses to take advantage of the stuff so why have it in the formula . Mrs jones does not want her 3mtr south facing multifold door with low iron furniture fading glass, she may want a good low U value glass with maybe a tinted outer pane ……sorry , that won’y comply to the regs , DOH ,
The only thing that the solar gain / low iron debate has highlited is that architects can now specify smaller windows that provide similar light levels to enable more insulating walls to replace the window portion, and how the hell is that supposed to benefit the window industry?
It has the occassional benefit of letting more light through existing small cottage windows, but let us see the consequences of allowing all the UV into the buildings .
We do agree that it is not workable as the only form of compliance, but I argue further, that as the formula is not based on facts and accurate data that it has no place in the building regs AT ALL .
If a realistic scheme were to tell a customer that a North facing window would only recieve 15Kwhr/sqmtr , 80 ish to east and west , and 180 to the south and at increments in between , less of course for shading of overhangs,deep external reveals, leads, georgian bars, trees, hedges and houses , I think that most would argue that the 218.6 average in the BFRC formula was a touch optimistic, whether it was supposed to be a comparative or an energy balance figure.
My figures are averages from ASHRAE data , extrapolation from sunshine data ( G Stanhill ) and sampling from Reading Uni Met centre ( being the only source of measured direct beam insolation I can currently find ) I know whose data is more accurate and it is NOT the BFRC
If you are building from scratch you can utilise every tool in the box , but when the parameters are set (orientation , size , even which windows need obscure glass in them,) then you cannot pretend that they are not.
Talking of which, has anyone rated an obscure glazed frame yet
. maybe it will be illegal to fit patterned glass any more 
Matthew , you’ll love this , I have done a quick guestimation for you, if you put pilks obscured in your window certificate it drops from an A of index 2 to an approximate C of index -14
. I don’t know what guidance the BFRC give you in this respect , but I dare say you cannot claim your bathroom windows to be A Rated 
else Mr Trading standards may have something to say , I guess it follows that bathroom windows will soon be illegal, especially if your standard clear window is only a C rating.
As an aside, it would appear pilks give all their tetured glasses exactly the same light and solar transmittance figures?? from the transparent Warwick thru to the sickly Everglade all have the same values , oh dear , just another fudge to add to the list
I understand That the BFRC inc Giles Willson are hosting a seminar at the ECO-Build exhibition on March 2nd
Is anyone considering attending to er ………………. listen to his presentation