Facebook | Double Glazing Jobs | Guest Contributions | Contact | Terms

Renegade Conservatory Guy

Join RenegadeClub and get FREE email updates from me...

Archive for the ‘Environmental Issues’ Category

Why I’ve decided to plant trees in Africa

Tuesday, March 16th, 2010

If you’re a regular reader you’ll know I’ve been grappling with the whole climate change issue for a while now.

Back in January 2009 I tried to set up a tree planting charity with a few other people from the industry, and actually went as far as creating  website called Trees4Windows.com.  At the time, I lost a bit of enthusiasm when I received negative feedback from some quarters, and then buried myself back into work commitments.  But, I never stopped thinking that I would at some point like to get involved with planting trees on a large scale.

Then, more recently I’ve been thinking about climate change a lot more, as a result of the post I wrote about whether humans are responsible for anthropogenic global warming.  The debate between John O’Sullivan and Canbanjo allowed me to research both the skeptic and ‘warmist’ points of view, and I’ve read a lot about the science supporting human induced global warming.

I have come to the conclusion that whether or not global warming is happening, the risks associated with not acting are greater than those associated with acting.  So, I am going to try cut my own personal CO2 emissions as much as I can, and try to reduce those of my company.  (By the way, I decided to order a BMW 318d rather than the Jag or the milk float, as the CO2 emissions are lowish, and fuel economy will save me money).

deforestation

I then started researching tree planting again.  Back in January 2009 I met up with the Woodland Trust to see if we could set up a deal with them for planting trees on a large scale, and with other companies from our industry taking part.  The problem for me was that to sponsor a tree is around £15 – which covers the cost of the tree, planting it, purchase of land, maintaining it over the coming years and a contribution towards the overheads of the charity.  To me, that’s not good value for money, and not enough trees could be planted.

So, I started researching dorestation and reforestion projects in the Amazon Rainforest.  There does seem to be a lot of focus on the Amazon Rainforest, and for very good reasons.  I found that the rate of deforestation in the area has slowed over recent years, so I then started researching deforestation in Africa, and found this website:

www.RippleAfrica.org

I was immediately impressed with the website and liked the feel of the charity, probably because it reminded me of Heal.  Ripple Africa is run by a husband and wife team, Geoff and Liz Furber, who are based in Buckingham.  They set up the charity around five years ago after purchasing a small property next to Lake Malawi and decided to start helping out the local community.

Malawi is one of the poorest countries in the world and the charity is involved in education, healthcare and environmental projects.  In particular, Geoff and Liz have put a lot of time and effort into setting up tree nurseries.

tree planting malawi

According to the website:

Trees in Malawi are being cut down at an alarming rate. An area of forest the size of a football pitch is cut down every 10 minutes. This tree planting project is centred in Nkhata Bay District, Malawi, Africa, an area of 4,000 sq.km which is about the size of Kent. Ultimately, we want to set up 400 community tree nurseries growing a total of 4 million trees per year.
Since 2006, we have helped 176 community tree nurseries to plant over three million trees, and we estimate that 3,000 people are working on this project. We are planting a combination of indigenous, exotic and fruit trees. The main aims of the project are to provide sustainable timber in woodlots for firewood, building, etc., to restore degraded land by planting indigenous trees, and to provide additional food using fruit trees and nitrogen-fixing trees. In addition to tree planting, we are also involved in environmental awareness training.

Trees in Malawi are being cut down at an alarming rate. An area of forest the size of a football pitch is cut down every 10 minutes. This tree planting project is centred in Nkhata Bay District, Malawi, Africa, an area of 4,000 sq.km which is about the size of Kent. Ultimately, we want to set up 400 community tree nurseries growing a total of 4 million trees per year.

Since 2006, we have helped 176 community tree nurseries to plant over three million trees, and we estimate that 3,000 people are working on this project. We are planting a combination of indigenous, exotic and fruit trees. The main aims of the project are to provide sustainable timber in woodlots for firewood, building, etc., to restore degraded land by planting indigenous trees, and to provide additional food using fruit trees and nitrogen-fixing trees. In addition to tree planting, we are also involved in environmental awareness training.

So, I made contact and went down to meet Geoff and Liz on Monday to find out more, particularly about the environmental side of their work.  I have to say, the passion and hard work that they put into this small charity is very inspiring, and they do it for free as volunteers.  The vast majority of the money they raise is sent to Malawi where they are now the largest employer in that area of Malawi.

They accept that it has not all been plain sailing, and they are still learning as they go, but they are making a real difference to the lives of very poor people.

I have decided to support the work of Ripple Africa, and particularly help fund their tree nursery projects.  We have agreed to fund 24 tree nurseries which will plant in the region of 72,000 trees per year.  We will promote the relationship with Ripple Africa through our Conservatory Outlet website.  The detail needs sorting out, but we will promote something like ‘For every conservatory we install, we will plant 50 trees in Malawi’.

I hate to use the term ‘carbon offsetting’ as the planting of trees in Malawi is more than just trying to help climate change.  Ripple Africa’s primar environmental objectives are to help local communities in Malawi to:

plant trees
reduce deforestation and land degradation
protect and manage the local environment
develop sustainable local livelihoods
alleviate poverty

I’m not for one minute suggesting that by partnering with Ripple Africa I’ll be making a massive contribution to fighting global warming.  The problem needs tackling head on by world leaders on a macro scale with a massive change in how we look at energy generation.

For me, I’m happy to be helping a small charity make a big difference.  I’ll finish this post by recommending you view the following video:

You can view other videos from Ripple Africa at:

http://www.youtube.com/user/rippleafrica#p/u 

If other companies are interested in helping Ripple Africa with their environmental projects, please contact me.  There is also the potential to resurrect the Trees4Windows concept with the focus on planting trees in Malawi.  I hope to visit Malawi in the Summer and see the tree nurseries in action.

In the meantime, I look forward to hearing your constructive thoughts…

Interview with Alan Fielder of Edgetech

Wednesday, March 10th, 2010

Alan Fielder small

How do you feel the impending changes to compliance with building regulations in October will affect the industry as a whole?

My feeling is it will have a tremendous affect on the entire industry. If the proposed Building Regulations are passed every single replacement window sold will have to have a C rating with the British Fenestration Ratings Council. This will impact on every business throughout the supply chain as suppliers will need to ensure they are supplying energy efficient alternatives, just as window companies will need to ensure they are using the most advanced technologies to meet legislation. 

Do you feel that companies in our industry are ready for these changes?

While there are forward thinking companies that embraced Window Energy Ratings as the differentiating opportunity they were early on, the majority of the market still hasn’t achieved a Window Energy Rating and if anything are as confused and worried about the process of getting one as they ever have been. They have had plenty of time but they haven’t taken any action. 

Even for those companies with Window Energy Ratings on their standard window – when they put fully reinforced (e.g. foiled) windows through the same process for example, will they still achieve a C rating? And if they do, will they be able to afford to put all of their combinations of windows through the process? 

It would also seem that there are numerous companies who believe that because their window achieves the perfromance required for a given rating, they are entitled to sell their products as energy rated. This is not the case. A window only has a BFRC Window Energy Rating when it has gone through the WER submission process, when it is registered at www.bfrc.org and when it carries the appropriate label. 

That’s why Edgetech has launched the ‘Journey to C’ initiative (www.journeytoc.co.uk) – the nationwide series of FREE workshops to help companies achieve the ratings they need. We recognise what a huge challenge this is for the industry and wanted to offer as much practical support for companies still daunted by the WER process or confused about how the proposed changes to Building Regulations will affect them.  

There seems to be a lot of concern about the real value of solar gain, which plays a major part in calculating a window’s energy rating. Do you feel U-Values are a better way of comparing different windows relative energy efficiency?

It would seem to me to be just as daft to ignore solar gain as it is to overrate it. Cleverer men than me have put their heads together to come up with a rating system that has the approval of government. I don’t really believe that CLG are adopting the BFRC Window Energy Rating scheme as the preferred method of Document L compliance because it is perfect but rather because it is there, it is functional and it is cost effective. To that end I prefer to get on with helping companies get on board with it, use it to their commercial advantage and get on with running their businesses. 

Personally, I’m concerned that having WERs as the only way of complying wit building regulations will stifle innovation, choice and create problems should any company in the supply chain cease trading. For example, what will an installer do if the company they purchase sealed units from ceases trading? Surely there needs to be a quick way for installers and fabricators to switch to an equivalent product from an equivalent supplier?

I understand your concern but there are provisions within the BFRC for licence submissions to include more than one supplier and the Licence of Addition option enables licence holders to use more than one supplier and more than one glazing combination in their WER offering. 

Following on from the above question, we currently have our energy rated windows tested with Swisspacer. Assuming Super Spacer is a similar Warm Edge product, what process would Conservatory Outlet and its installers have to go through to make such a minor alteration? How long would it take and what costs associated? 

Well of course I wouldn’t consider our unique Super Spacer product to be ‘similar’ to anything else! But for the purpose of your question, to make any product component changes; frame, mullion, sash, glazing bead, glass, spacer, glazing cavity fill, gasketry or even reinforcement requires a new thermal simulation report and possibly a new system air leakage report. This would then need a new BFRC submission and a new licence. This process need not take any longer than a week or two depending on the availability of the required technical reports and the workload at BFRC and your Independent Agent. The reports should be available from systems suppliers either free or at nominal cost, though if you have to get your own simulation reports done they will cost you somewhere between £500 and £1500 each. The change should be able to be incorporated into your existing IA audit regime so there should only be nominal costs involved here though this will need to be clarified with your IA. Current BFRC licence cost is £200 per product per annum. 

I understand there are currently around 300 companies in the UK with an energy rating but FENSA claim to have over 9000 companies in their scheme. Can the simulators simulate, the IAs audit and the BFRC register the rest of the industry by October? 

The simple answer is probably not. Before launching our ‘Journey to C’ initiative we considered very carefully the timing of the events and decided not to delay because if the proposed Building Regulations are approved in April, the industry would have even less time to prepare. ‘Journey to C’ will only scratch the surface of what needs to be done but at least we’re doing all we can to support our customers and potential customers meet up and coming legislation.  

Of course now we risk the Building Regulations not being passed or being changed, but in our view although this removes the urgency, the market will continue to move towards Window Energy Ratings and I honestly believe that companies without a rating will soon start to feel the pinch if they’re not already. 

Do you think that these proposed changes will ultimately force many smaller sealed unit manufacturers, PVC-U fabricators and installers out of business? 

I don’t think this will necessarily be the case but of course with any huge shift in legislation that let’s not forget costs a lot of money, this is a risk. All the more reason however to be prepared sooner rather than later. It’s the smaller companies that sit back and wait to see what happens with Building Regulations and how it will affect them, that will be caught short. Smaller companies that grab the bull by the horns have every chance of stealing a march on their competitors if they act sooner rather than later. 

While I understand that many people are fearful of the consequences of the proposed changes and nobody actually wants to see change for the sake of change, and I also understand that some sectors see current trends and proposed legislation as restrictive to their historic trading patterns, we are operating against a backdrop where the need to reduce emissions, provide ourselves with some energy security and conserve our fossil resources while we develop renewables, means that to just carry on as we are is no longer an option. 

In the bigger picture, governments the world over (I know there are some exceptions, but in the main) are looking to bring about fundamental changes in human behaviour on both individual and social fronts. Why should we be any different? A lot of the changes we will have to go through as individuals and as an industry may not be very comfortable but change we have to, and change we inevitably will.

——————————————-

For more information about Edgetech visit http://www.superspacer.co.uk/

Finally I’ve decided what car to buy

Saturday, March 6th, 2010

Back in July I asked for your help in deciding what type of car to buy.  To be honest, I’ve been dithering ever since, partly because I’ve been too busy thinking about other things, and partly because I’ve been wrestling with all this environmental stuff.

Anyway, when I flew over to Northern Ireland a month or so ago, on the way back I was browsing the inflight magazine and saw a pretty good write up for a Jaguar XF.  For those of you not particularly interested in cars (like me) this is what they look like:

jag xf

I decided this car looked quite nice, and the emissions were not too bad at 179 g/km.  I also quite liked the idea of driving a Jaguar as I am heading rapidly towards middle age.

But, just as I was about to order one, I asked the question on this website about whether humans are responsible for global warming.  As I gave the subject more thought, I started to harbour guilty thoughts about buying the Jag.

So, I went back to the drawing board to try find something more environmentally friendly.  I searched high and low and found that the best option for me is a Mega Electric Van. 

So, I think I’m going to buy this:

megavan

At home I use Good Energy as our electricity supplier which is 100% renewable energy.  So, by driving an electric vehicle I’ll actually be responsible for no CO2 emissions whatsover.  I’m going to get it sign written, and there’s plenty of space in the back for my sample windows.

There are a few disadvantages, such as a top speed of 30 mph and a maximum distance of 40-60 miles before needing a recharge.  As I’m keen to generate more dealers in the South of England I’m going to have to start going down the night before if I have a good lead (I don’t want to be late).

Also, I was wondering if any of you would mind me popping in when I need to recharge the battery.  I’ll just need to plug it into a standard socket for a couple of hours, then I’ll be on my way.

So what do you think?  Have I made the right decision here?

(Nb. I do have one other option I’m looking at as well, though. If this deal doesn’t come off, I might get a BMW 318d Business Edition with far lower emissions than the Jag at 120 g/km).

Is Anthropogenic Global Warming really a hoax?

Sunday, February 28th, 2010

When I suggested in a previous post that ‘Humans are responsible for Global Warming’ I wasn’t expecting the degree of debate the issue of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) would generate on my site.

The main debate involves ‘canbanjo’ an architect who stumbled upon my site while searching for information about the Part L requirements for small extensions, and John O’Sullivan, an experienced climate sceptic who believes global warming is history’s biggest scam.

John’s profile on his blogger webpage states that he is a:

British crime writer and legal advocate, John O’Sullivan was born in 1961 in Berkshire, England, the son of immigrant Irish parents. An avid scholar, John taught and lectured for twenty years at various schools and colleges in the east of England. He litigated, with his second wife, a former New York correction officer, in one of America’s longest and most extraordinary sexual harassment cases. He has gleaned a wealth of knowledge and experience in filing court petitions, motions, mandamus and appeals in the New York State Division of Human Rights, mandamus petitions in the New York State Supreme Court, as well as US federal court. John has also prepared analysis and arguments used in UK criminal court that concerned police officer malfeasance. He has written two ‘Cupboard 55′ novels including ‘Summit Shock’ based on his wife’s epic story. Among the author’s other published credits are; ‘The Jimston Journal’, ‘Invisible Ink,’ ‘The Secret Attic,’ ‘Big Ugly Review and’ ‘The Zip Book.’ John is a prolific writer with over 100 publishing credits relating to his analysis of the ‘Climategate’ data fraud scandal involving criminal conduct by an elite clique of climate scientists.

I find it very difficult to take John’s comments seriously, and if you read some of the nonsense on the ClimateGate.com website of which he is a contributor it is very worrying.  John contributes to many blogs on climate change – he must have ‘Google Alerts’ (or similar) set for terms like ‘global warming’ which allows him to easily identify relevant content where he can copy and paste from a library of tosh (whilst building links and traffic to the ClimateGate.com website at the same time).

Basically, John believes he’s in a battle against the ‘religion of settled science’.  According the the ClimateGate website:

The goal of Climategate.com is to provide a daily dose of information regarding the world’s greatest scam, climategate, and other information and news to help you in your battle against the Religion of Settled Science to dispute their views on Anthropogenic Global Warming, and in addition, to battle the one-world socialist agenda, which is the movement’s leaders’ real goal.

So, Climategate.com publishes material that they hope others will spread across the internet, creating as much confusion as possible so that the normal man or woman in the street is unsure about the real science.  I’ve never been one for conspiracy theories, and to suggest that 97.5% of the world’s climate scientists are conspiring to create a one-world socialist government seems so far fetched it sounds laughable.

An example of the desperate measures the ClimateGate.com team undertakes is when they supported Nick Griffin from the BNP stating he ‘tells it like it is’.  They later decided to pull the article when even their normally supportive followers pointed out they’d gone a bit too far this time.

John O’ Sullivan states that he is pleased that the BNP have chosen to support the idea that AGW is a hoax.  You can see his comment here.

Here’s Mr Griffin in full flow:

Well, I don’t think it was John O’ Sullivan’s intention, but the more I’ve looked at what he and his colleagues have to say, the less respect I have for their arguments.

A rather boring post with little controversy

Wednesday, February 24th, 2010

The last few posts I’ve added to the site seem to have ruffled a few feathers at times, and as I’m chilled out and half way through a bottle of Cabernet Sauvignon I thought I’d write a few thoughts which are unlikely to cause any controversy whatsoever.

[I guess at this point I've probably lost half of my readers].

6203 steps

This morning I was surprised to receive a gift from the marketing department at Profile 22. I’m not sure what they’re trying to tell me, but they have supplied me with a little device that clips on my belt and counts how many steps I take. Since around 10am this morning I have walked a massive 6203 steps.

Are you impressed? Well, I was really surprised and quite pleased with myself, but then I googled ‘average steps per day’ and found that the guidelines state I should be walking 10,000 steps per day! As I’m now sat on the couch with a glass of red wine, it’s unlikely I’m going to hit my target. (I have to confess also that I have actually fiddled the figures by finishing work early and taking the dogs for a long walk).

PIGS

No, don’t worry my wife has not gone out and bought some pigs to keep our donkeys company. No, I’m talking about the next Publicity in Glazing Society meeting next Thursday in London. The details are on the Glazine at this link.

Any excuse to socialise with industry professionals, I’ve booked train tickets and the hotel and am attending with our kid.

According to the press release:

Everyone who wants to socialise, network and yes, even talk business, is welcome to join editors, advertising, marketing, PR, event organisers and suppliers from the industry on Thursday 4 March.

If you’re going – I’ll see you there!

Huddersfield Town v Leeds United

I’m not sure if you’re aware but I’m a big fan of West Yorkshire’s best football team – Huddersfield Town. On Saturday we host local rivals Leeds United. It’s all set up to be a great game for the following reasons:

Huddersfield are unbeaten in the last 10 games
Huddersfield are the only team unbeaten at home this season
Huddersfield have won their last three games all away from home!
Leeds are in really poor form, although they won on Tuesday night
Of the last 4 times the two teams have played Town have won three and drawn one

With all this in mind, Leeds are bound to win!!! Conservatory Outlet and West Yorkshire Windows share a hospitality box at the Galpharm Stadium and we’ve got 5 town fans and 5 Leeds fans attending on Saturday. A few beers, friendly banter and hopefully a good game. I can’t wait!

Climate Change

I’ve enjoyed the debate on this website about whether climate change is human induced. I accept I need to do a lot more reading up, but at this stage having listened to all the arguments I’m becoming more and more convinced that global warming is happening.

But, if it isn’t then I think the following picture highlights why we should take action anyway:

climate change hoax

Humans are responsible for global warming

Tuesday, February 23rd, 2010

Following on from my previous post about whether humans are influencing climate change, I’ve been doing quite a lot of reading up on the subject.

An architect stumbled upon this site and added a number of links to resources which I have since looked at. I have also looked at a number of skeptic websites and tried to make my mind up as to whether humanity is responsible for global warming.

To me, the science appears to stack up and human activity is clearly affecting the global climate in a very worrying way.

I refer people to the Copenhagen Diagnosis Climate Science Report. This report covers the range of topics evaluated by Working Group I of the IPCC, namely the Physical Science Basis. This includes:

•an analysis of greenhouse gas emissions and their atmospheric concentrations, as well as the global carbon cycle;
•coverage of the atmosphere, the land-surface, the oceans, and all of the major components of the cryosphere (land-ice, glaciers, ice shelves, sea-ice and permafrost);
•paleoclimate, extreme events, sea level, future projections, abrupt change and tipping points;
•separate boxes devoted to explaining some of the common misconceptions surrounding climate change science.

For me, it is difficult to argue with the majority of scientists on this matter. I’ve also found reading the following website very informative:

http://www.withouthotair.com/

Without Hot Air is a free online book by a cambridge physics professor, who is currently government chief energy advisor, which seeks to outline the difficult energy problems we need to deal with urgently.

I also found a series of YouTube videos which helped me understand the topic in more detail, and dispel some of the arguments of the climate skeptics. Visit: http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer54?blend=1&ob=4

Potholer is a retired science correspondent, with a degree in geology, and argues a strong case that people should look at the real science, rather than listening to the various nonsense written in the media and blog sites. This is the first in a series of videos he has produced which are easy to understand and informative:

Interestingly, people have been voting on this blog for a couple of weeks now and providing me with feedback as to whether they believe humans are responsible for climate change and the results so far are:

climate change poll

Quite frankly, this is very worrying. If the majority of people don’t believe the science, or are unsure about the science, then it is unlikely that the politicians throughout the world will take the difficult decisions needed to radically overhaul the way we use energy in such a short period of time.

Interview with Giles Willson – BFRC

Friday, February 19th, 2010

In response to my previous post about the impending changes to affect the WER scheme, Giles Willson from the BFRC agreed to answer a few questions I put to him as follows:

Can you explain how the impending changes to the compliance with building regulations in October will affect the industry as a whole?

We will not know what the actual requirements for the revision to Approved Document L Conservation of fuel and power & Approved Document F Ventilation until they are published at the beginning of April 2010.

We know from the 2009 consultations that for England and Wales the proposal is WER band C for replacement windows and U value 1.8 for replacement doors. Regarding trickle ventilators within replacement windows these are going to be considered mandatory for all replacements. In addition conservatories are being considered to have the dispensation for compliance under ADL removed; this would mean conservatories would need to meet a thermal performance standard.

Therefore if you supply or fit replacement windows, doors or conservatories you will be effected; the actual details will be known in April – so watch this space.

There seems to be a lot of concern about the real value of solar gain in WER calculations. Wouldn’t we be better just setting tougher U Value requirements as part of the scheme?

The WER calculation takes into account the following:

Whole window U value
Solar gain
Air leakage

We all know that solar gain does make a difference to a building; the averaged constant used by the BFRC method simplifies the situation. Do you really want different window ratings for a North, South, East or West elevation, let alone a North, North East window?

The whole window U value is an element of the BFRC equation, it is important but WER’s reflects the solar gain aspect – a unique feature of glass compared to most other products used on the exterior elevation of homes.

Personally, I’m concerned that having WER’s as the only way of complying with building regulations will stifle innovation, choice and creates problems should any company in the supply chain cease trading. For example, what will an installer do if the company they purchase sealed units from ceases trading? Surely there needs to be a quick way for installers and fabricators to switch to an equivalent product from an equivalent supplier?

The WER Licence specifies the components used in a window; if these are no longer available the approved window is not a viable option, however the question did state that if your unit maker ceases trading what do you do. In these cases another unit maker, who can manufacture to the original specification (exact components etc.) can be used.

Regarding innovation; different components can be modelled within a simulation to check the overall effect on the rating – this is a very cost effective solution therefore we could argue we assist innovation.

I understand there are currently around 300 companies in the UK with an energy rating, but FENSA claim to have over 9000 companies in their scheme. Can the simulators simulate, the IA’s audit and the BFRC register the rest of the industry by October?

The number of companies stated are correct however, we do need to think about the supply chain. Many FENSA installers only undertake a few jobs, they use windows which have been bought in; these installers will buy in a window which is WER registered and install this as compliant with regulations.

You also have companies who fabricate and install – these companies need to get their own Licence or be part of the Authorised Retailer Scheme.

The authorised retailer scheme; this enables companies to use their frame supplier licence and either source their own units or buy from the frame supplier, and have their own BFRC WER Licence.

Therefore the number of additional Licences will increase if WER band C is made mandatory however, not all 9000 FENSA Registered businesses will require their own Licences.

Do you think that these proposed changes will ultimately force many smaller sealed unit manufacturers, PVC-U fabricators and installers out of business?

We do not believe that it is the Governments intention that any company goes out of business due to regulatory changes. However, regardless if the Building Regulations require WER or whole window U values these would need to be calculated for every combination of glass, unit and frame.

With the more demanding specifications, products do require verification; therefore companies who have undertaken the preparation and have data on their products should survive. Companies who have not undertaken a simulation or have data on the whole window U value or WER will be disadvantaged and could result in their failure.

For more information about the BFRC visit http://www.bfrc.org/

Are your windows unleaded?

Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010

Guest post by Roger Hartshorne in response to Martin Randall’s recent post

I agree with all of your comments and sentiments, and congratulations on your new appointment within the GGF. I have read this website over the last 12 months and noted the comments without a response, however I think now is the time to make one or two points.

lead-free-windows

One of the major developments in recent times must be Lead Free Profile. Some system companies have either avoided the change or just chose not to do it. Lead Free petrol was launched to reduce pollution, everyone who buys petrol now buys lead free because its the right thing to do, some systems companies still supply lead stabilised window profiles, why?????. The only reason can be commercial gain for short term profit. Just imagine if you had to put the green skull and crossbones on your adverts for windows and imagine the conversations to explain this to Joe Public.

The systems companies have been guilty of not supplying new products over the last 3 or 4 years due to the constraints of reccession. Innovation has stalled, but this has been fed by the fabricators just wanting to buy cheap. I have met numerous fabricators who know that the system they fabricate is outdated, lead stabilised, restricted in terms of thermal performance, but cheap. This just allows the system companies to avoid expensive change of either tools, raw materials or both. Ultimately, who will lose out?

If you look at other industries then change and improvement is driven by the customer, everyone now accepts that their new fridge has an energy rating, every one accepts that your new fridge is fully recyclable without any nasty gases inside, yet why oh why do some fabricators keep knocking old outdated windows with no energy rating, made with soon to be illegal metal inside? Come on lads rather than moan about the market, look forward and embrace change and help push it forward rather than being dragged along.

Regards
Roger Hartshorne
http://liniar.co.uk/

Worry about old timber windows, not uPVC!

Monday, February 1st, 2010

Guest Post by Martin Randall in response to this comment on a previous post

The timber industry is very active with spin about other materials but it would be best to stick with the facts.

PVC-U, UPVC or PVC does not give off fumes nor does it leach into the ground whether buried or not. PVC-U is a particularly inert material. Once it is manufactured into profile it lasts, and lasts, and lasts. Many of the windows installed in the 1980s by Local Authorities are being replaced with double glazed frames because they were single glazed to save money. Others are being replaced and upgraded so they are more secure or have better insulation, or because the hardware breaks down and is obsolete. But the PVC-U itself just goes on and on.

Early estimates of its lifetime have had to be revised upwards. PVC-U windows will clearly last 35 years with ease, but the material itself looks good for 70 years or more. It wouldn’t surprise anyone if, like concrete, it lasted much longer. The surface gets grubby and fades after a time, but that’s it. It resists burning and self extinguishes in fire. It doesn’t melt in normal fires. When it does burn, at very high temperatures, and long after timber has burned to a crisp, it does give off some fumes. All materials do. Timber for example gives off far more noxious dioxins than PVC-U which gives off just a trace.

The more we recycle the better. It’s just good house keeping. It’s a waste if we don’t, but buried PVC-U is not a hazard or danger to health.

Now if you are concerned about easily leached materials from the surface of window frames in landfill, consider the nasty materials from the coatings of old timber frames. Like PVC-U windows, timber windows can be recycled. They could be dismantled but you try scraping away the paint and breaking down the window into components. Most timber windows aren’t recycled as you can see from the contents of skips all around the country. Most replaced windows going into landfill are not PVC-U, they are timber. If you want to lie awake worried about window materials leaching into our water supplies, worry about old timber windows.

Martin Randall
Fighting Back With Facts
http://www.fightingbackwithfacts.com

Is global warming happening? And are humans causing it?

Sunday, January 31st, 2010

I think about climate change quite often.

I’m a natural born worrier and it bothers me that humans may be affecting the climate in such a way that it may have a catastrophic effect if it is actually happening.

I’ve listened to the arguments put forward by the large number of scientists who believe that human activity is responsible for a planet that is warming up rapidly. I’ve also read information from various climate sceptics who believe it’s all nonsense and we have nothing to worry about.

To be honest, I’m not sure which side to believe.

When I speak with friends, family and colleagues about man-made climate change few people seem overly concerned, and even fewer seem prepared to change their habits. It worries me that should the world be heading towards a big increase in temperature during this century, then attitudes will have to change or we’re doomed.

I’m interested to know whether people reading this blog believe that global warming is happening, or not. Or, is it more than just me who’s confused. Considering our industry has a vital part to play in helping the UK reduce its CO2 emissions, do we believe there is a problem in the first place.

I’ve added a poll to the right hand side to see what you all think. And please leave any thoughts below that might help me make my mind up :-)

  • Sponsors

  • image widget
  • image widget
  • image widget
  • image widget
  • image widget
  • image widget
© 2010 Renegade Conservatory Guy