Quote:
Originally Posted by Xringer
Since the nanny-state government is the driving force behind power conservation,
(trying to save us from ourselfs) they will need to stand firm against rate-hikes
from those fat-cat billionaire power company stock holders!
|
I called my local building inspector with a question yesterday after reading one of the threads on this board. I can buy insulated roll shutters for less money than I can buy new windows which meet the new energy-conservation related mandates in the building code. I wanted to know if the combination of recycled aluminum double-paned windows in conjuction with insulated roll shutters would pass the building code threshold. No dice says the building inspector because those recycled windows don't have a thermal break and it doesn't matter that the roll shutters+windows surpass the performance of new windows by themselves.
Those (&#(&*%^ Nannies in government are using laws to control behavior of people in their own homes by restricting their choices. The above is just one example. The inspector told me that he'd be concerned that the performance couldn't be guaranteed because people might not roll down their shutters. I countered that an insulated window isn't very effective if it is popped open and allows heat to escape the building. Then stymied he countered with the old windows are a unit and that the lack of a method to break the thermal bridge is really the crux of the problem. I countered with the fact that the windows/shutters are also a system and the air space between window and shutter is the break in the thermal bridge.
My position is simply this - these nannies have no business mandating performance targets in home construction. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. There is no net benefit created by allowing a Hummer driver to drive his Hummer all about town while his home has high performance windows, or allowing a Greenie to live with his high performance windows as he regularly flies thousands of miles many times per year so that he can go skiing in the Rockies, hiking the Appalachian Trail, kayak the Galapagos, etc while denying another person the freedom to put recycled windows into his home while that person might be a bike rider and an otherwise stinchy energy user. (This person isn't me but I'm sure that there are such people out there.) Energy prices are a better sorting mechanism to drive reform, not centrally planned restrictions on consumer choices.
I can't see a reason why the windows+shutters combination shouldn't be allowed. In fact, I don't see a reason why Nannies need to be involved at all. If people want to make the personal decision to save money on the front end purchase of windows and pay for increased monthly heating expenses, then it's their money to spend. Mandating higher installation costs pushes housing costs, on the margin, ever higher, and again on the margin, shuts people out of the housing market. How is a person better off not being able to buy a home than buying a home which is less energy efficient that some target held in the minds and wishes of these Big Government Nannies?
Hey, how did I end up standing on this soapbox? Whoops, I better step off. Sorry for the rant.