Ali Heshmati of Henning Larsen Architects left a long comment on LinkedIn that I thought should be published here:
Lloyd Alter, I enjoyed your article on "What is the purpose of a Window?" on Carbon Upfront! Especially when it came to the history of window and glass itself. I do however, as an architect and a researcher on the impact of light on human health take issue with two parts of your article. This is with outmost respect for what you have been doing and that I am a follower of yours and respect your ideas.
In any case, in the "Light" portion of your article you mention that we could get away without as LED these days can provide sufficient light. I am of course, paraphrasing! Later in "Circadian Rhythms" part you passingly mention the impact of light on circadian rhythms and ultimately health which is greatly appreciated. I also understand that Carbon Reduction is your main preoccupation which we share.
I respectfully but strongly want to disagree with you on size of windows and the amount of natural versus LED light we need and can use.
Most of chronobiological, neurobiological, and neuroscience studies in the last 25 years, show that almost all built environment is overly dim during the day and overly bright at night. Now, this is due to the fact that we did not know about the mechanism of photoentrainment of the circadian system which needs intense light at early hours of the day and almost total darkness at night. Most of our light environments, today, are designed for vision. Visual photoreceptors need very little light and can process that light in milliseconds. Take moonlight for example, one can see one's shadow walking in the moonlight which has intensity of less thank one lux of light. Now, consider our evolutionary conditions of solar irradiance of 100,000 lux by midday and almost total darkness at night. These are conditions that gave birth to our biology. So, the scientific recommendations today for light for health is around 250 MEDI or Melanopic lux which is around 800 lux from some other source of light. Now even the plane glass cuts 30% of incoming light. Add number of codings and shading devices we use in architecture, even when we have full glass walls, we get very little light inside.
If a fire is at an exterior door, wouldn't a window in the same location be even worse? There are plenty of doors, but not too many windows, with rated fire resistance.
What hyperbole? We're talking about possible features on a hypothetical house, not ones that already exist. In other words, an "ought", not "is" question.
OK, but you portray a ridiculous theoretical. The OP was asking about fire escapes IN BEDROOMS—no homes with below grade living space or multi-story apartments/condos have fire escapes through exterior doors, especially via bedrooms. Commercial spaces? Sure, but that's retail space; we're talking housing here. So yeah, in the context of the OP your comment about fire at an exterior door is, in fact, hyperbole.
Interesting article. The question asked upfront got my attention. That anyone would question whether we need windows in our homes seemed to me absurd. Even before I started reading I was preparing in my mind a scathing review should the article simply advocate letting energy efficiency trump the need for windows. I was relieved that the your examination of the topic was more nuanced. The potential cost in terms of energy loss if windows are poorly designed is obvious. Poor planning in their placement can also significantly undermine efforts to make buildings more energy efficient. That said, the feel of an indoor space created by the entry of natural light and the connection to outdoor space that windows allow is almost always the first thing that strikes me, positively or negatively, when I enter any living or working space. Done well it can transform my mood positively instantly upon entering a room. Done poorly and I will spend my entire time in the space planning my escape into the light. No attempt at replacing the impact of natural light and or a view using full spectrum artificial lighting or other design techniques to recreate that feel has, in my experience, come remotely close. They always conjure up a visceral feeling of living in a dystopian world where we have been forced underground or into space by the destruction of the natural world. I am a creature of sunlight. I will turn down my heat and bundle up, I will shutter my windows at night, I will install thermal shades or curtains and do a thousand other things to limit the amount of energy I consume but I will not give up my windows.
It is worthwhile asking what purpose we make of rooms and this influences the value of windows. Bedrooms are multi purpose with uses beyond sleeping and private moments, it’s worth remembering in these post pandemic times that they can also be sickrooms whose residents will often find relief in a good view. Bedrooms in smaller dwellings can also find themselves redefined as part time work spaces when every resident of the space is working from home.
"Solutions: 1. Frame the windows" I do like the first photo quite a bit as it turns the building into something "interesting and pleasing to the eye" - something that should ALWAYS be part of designing a building. The second photo is also interesting - reminds me of the addition that the Manchester (NH, USA) Community College put on that fronts to the highway that splits the city.
I heartily disagree with you "Rethink our standards of beauty" - that's how we got the ugly Bauhaus (and every time I see "Bauhaus", I think of the ugliest building in Washington DC - the FBI building). No and unacceptable. Boxy But Beautiful is a forcing to believe that only efficiency is only measure of "beauty". Sorry, Lloyd, but let me fix that for you: Boxy is Boring. Not interesting at all.
Great article. Windows are so ubiquitous that they seem absolutely necessary. I worked in a couple windowless workplaces, and it was disorienting, that lack of connection to the outside world.
Beautiful to go into details, window details specifically ! We do need windows for exactly those reasons mentioned. In Germany it is impossible to have an office in a commercial building in the basement without a window for example. Workplace By-Laws require a view to the outside. A cook in a restaurant must have a window in their place of work. The walk in freezer or garbage room are exceptions, as you would not spend 8 hours in those spaces. (Arbeitsstaettenrichtlinien). I think we are too far removed from nature as it is and while we can produce LED lights with the perfect wavelength to mimic sunlight, trigger melatonin production or even prepare us for a 20.000km trip to Asia with a much reduced jet lag effect. The window is a must have ! Studies have proven that people in a light filled hospital bed get well faster (Linen sheets and bandages are an added bonus with the frequencies of hemp fibre). One last bit on windows: The name comes from the Norse "Ow" for "Eye" or "Auge" and where the winding stops in the wall or possibly where the wind comes in at the wall. Old windows are beautiful, coincidentally drafty and allow for natural ventilation even when closed. Some German Passivhaus Windows are so tight and efficient now that they have their own ventilation included, provided with an internal heat exchanger to minimize energy loss.
We all should also have the German supply situation on windows. Oh, to be able to walk to a random Home Depot or Lowe's and order triple pane tilt-turns...
“The rules haven't changed in 500 years: Keep the windows as small as you can get away with and still let in the light and views you want, with an eye for proportion and scale. And keep it simple.”
So where's the problem? If a client wants huge windows for the views and light they provide, then that's exactly what they get. A house from 1810 still had plenty of windows, albeit not floor to ceiling ones, but they weren't port holes either. Old 18th century homes in New England all have that same look, and it's aesthetically pleasing. Those modern, boxy, obnoxious creations shown above? They're reminiscent of old Soviet khrushchevka—and only slightly more appealing.
Just install quality windows, period. There are other things to concern one's self over.
Great dive into the subject! I've just finished a reno to a townhouse with views on Lake Ontario. I'd suggested removing a leaky & unsound bow window in the 3rd storey master bath with a smaller window. The client who insisted on a very expensive fix/replacement and the bathtub placed in this window bay, is upset that people on the lakeside path can see into the bathroom & how cold it is to sit in the tub, next to 3 large windows that are subject to wind off the lake. If I were on the building code commission, I'd make things like this impossible!
I have been considering it for weeks. I have already set up an account on Buttondown, but they do not have a comments feature, which I think is problematic. I support a lot of other writers with paid subscriptions and worry about what is going to happen to many of them if this site fractures.
There are creeps on every platform; even on LinkedIn, their algorithm delivers oil company ads and climate arsonists to my feed. I never knew there were nazis and transphobes here until these articles started coming out; there are no ads and no algorithmic feed to put them in my face.
But I am Jewish and have a trans daughter, so nazis and TERFs are a problem for me. Like Taras at Straphanger, I am looking at my options. I am also hoping against hope that Substack will change their minds- there is a difference between promoting freedom of speech and a site covered in Nazi regalia.
In the FWIW and context dept (Substack, Axios, and Hot Air):
Hi Casey,
"Thank you for the list of publications you sent in for review on Thursday evening.
We have completed an investigation and found that five out of the six publications you reported do indeed violate our existing content guidelines, which prohibit incitements to violence based on protected classes. We have removed those publications from Substack.
None of these publications had paid subscriptions enabled, and they account for about 100 active readers in total."
"Six publications. Zero paid subscribers. 100 Readers total. That’s the scope of the Nazi problem at Substack.
To put that in perspective, earlier this year Axios reported there were 17,000 writers who were earning money on Substack (and presumably many thousands more who are not earning anything). The total number of subscribers to various sites hosted on Substack at the time was 2 million."
Now me: in this time of Jew and Israel bashing by the Left/Pro-Palestinians, I stand with Israel whole heartedly. Not only as an Evangelical Christian but as a political blogger that is MORE than tired of those two groups distorting our common language by deliberate usage, malfeasance concerning established word definitions, and portrayals of "reality" that only exist in the fevered minds of a few (and too many ideologues promoting a Narrative). Truth is truth and no amount of distortion or intimidation can change it.
It's what I fight every day.
Lloyd, someone coming after online you and yours concerning this, send me the links/info.
Thank you. I really appreciate the mixture of current technical concerns joined with historical context pushed up against what we need to have connection with others and nature.
Ali Heshmati of Henning Larsen Architects left a long comment on LinkedIn that I thought should be published here:
Lloyd Alter, I enjoyed your article on "What is the purpose of a Window?" on Carbon Upfront! Especially when it came to the history of window and glass itself. I do however, as an architect and a researcher on the impact of light on human health take issue with two parts of your article. This is with outmost respect for what you have been doing and that I am a follower of yours and respect your ideas.
In any case, in the "Light" portion of your article you mention that we could get away without as LED these days can provide sufficient light. I am of course, paraphrasing! Later in "Circadian Rhythms" part you passingly mention the impact of light on circadian rhythms and ultimately health which is greatly appreciated. I also understand that Carbon Reduction is your main preoccupation which we share.
I respectfully but strongly want to disagree with you on size of windows and the amount of natural versus LED light we need and can use.
Most of chronobiological, neurobiological, and neuroscience studies in the last 25 years, show that almost all built environment is overly dim during the day and overly bright at night. Now, this is due to the fact that we did not know about the mechanism of photoentrainment of the circadian system which needs intense light at early hours of the day and almost total darkness at night. Most of our light environments, today, are designed for vision. Visual photoreceptors need very little light and can process that light in milliseconds. Take moonlight for example, one can see one's shadow walking in the moonlight which has intensity of less thank one lux of light. Now, consider our evolutionary conditions of solar irradiance of 100,000 lux by midday and almost total darkness at night. These are conditions that gave birth to our biology. So, the scientific recommendations today for light for health is around 250 MEDI or Melanopic lux which is around 800 lux from some other source of light. Now even the plane glass cuts 30% of incoming light. Add number of codings and shading devices we use in architecture, even when we have full glass walls, we get very little light inside.
Therefore Daylight and window size matter.
What about fire escape? Even in modern houses, tragedies happen and an egress in a bedroom can be the only option.
This is an important point, thanks for reminding me of it.
Doors can serve the same function.
Sure can’t if the fire is at the door.
If a fire is at an exterior door, wouldn't a window in the same location be even worse? There are plenty of doors, but not too many windows, with rated fire resistance.
No bedroom without windows is ever going to exit to the exterior. Your hyperbole is misplaced. Re-read Lee Sim’s original comment.
What hyperbole? We're talking about possible features on a hypothetical house, not ones that already exist. In other words, an "ought", not "is" question.
OK, but you portray a ridiculous theoretical. The OP was asking about fire escapes IN BEDROOMS—no homes with below grade living space or multi-story apartments/condos have fire escapes through exterior doors, especially via bedrooms. Commercial spaces? Sure, but that's retail space; we're talking housing here. So yeah, in the context of the OP your comment about fire at an exterior door is, in fact, hyperbole.
Or were you hinting at something else entirely?
Interesting article. The question asked upfront got my attention. That anyone would question whether we need windows in our homes seemed to me absurd. Even before I started reading I was preparing in my mind a scathing review should the article simply advocate letting energy efficiency trump the need for windows. I was relieved that the your examination of the topic was more nuanced. The potential cost in terms of energy loss if windows are poorly designed is obvious. Poor planning in their placement can also significantly undermine efforts to make buildings more energy efficient. That said, the feel of an indoor space created by the entry of natural light and the connection to outdoor space that windows allow is almost always the first thing that strikes me, positively or negatively, when I enter any living or working space. Done well it can transform my mood positively instantly upon entering a room. Done poorly and I will spend my entire time in the space planning my escape into the light. No attempt at replacing the impact of natural light and or a view using full spectrum artificial lighting or other design techniques to recreate that feel has, in my experience, come remotely close. They always conjure up a visceral feeling of living in a dystopian world where we have been forced underground or into space by the destruction of the natural world. I am a creature of sunlight. I will turn down my heat and bundle up, I will shutter my windows at night, I will install thermal shades or curtains and do a thousand other things to limit the amount of energy I consume but I will not give up my windows.
Don't codes require an additional egress, almost always a window, from all bedrooms?
It is worthwhile asking what purpose we make of rooms and this influences the value of windows. Bedrooms are multi purpose with uses beyond sleeping and private moments, it’s worth remembering in these post pandemic times that they can also be sickrooms whose residents will often find relief in a good view. Bedrooms in smaller dwellings can also find themselves redefined as part time work spaces when every resident of the space is working from home.
I wrote something like this and took it out, but missed the important point about sickrooms in these times. Thank you for making the point.
"Solutions: 1. Frame the windows" I do like the first photo quite a bit as it turns the building into something "interesting and pleasing to the eye" - something that should ALWAYS be part of designing a building. The second photo is also interesting - reminds me of the addition that the Manchester (NH, USA) Community College put on that fronts to the highway that splits the city.
I heartily disagree with you "Rethink our standards of beauty" - that's how we got the ugly Bauhaus (and every time I see "Bauhaus", I think of the ugliest building in Washington DC - the FBI building). No and unacceptable. Boxy But Beautiful is a forcing to believe that only efficiency is only measure of "beauty". Sorry, Lloyd, but let me fix that for you: Boxy is Boring. Not interesting at all.
Great article. Windows are so ubiquitous that they seem absolutely necessary. I worked in a couple windowless workplaces, and it was disorienting, that lack of connection to the outside world.
Beautiful to go into details, window details specifically ! We do need windows for exactly those reasons mentioned. In Germany it is impossible to have an office in a commercial building in the basement without a window for example. Workplace By-Laws require a view to the outside. A cook in a restaurant must have a window in their place of work. The walk in freezer or garbage room are exceptions, as you would not spend 8 hours in those spaces. (Arbeitsstaettenrichtlinien). I think we are too far removed from nature as it is and while we can produce LED lights with the perfect wavelength to mimic sunlight, trigger melatonin production or even prepare us for a 20.000km trip to Asia with a much reduced jet lag effect. The window is a must have ! Studies have proven that people in a light filled hospital bed get well faster (Linen sheets and bandages are an added bonus with the frequencies of hemp fibre). One last bit on windows: The name comes from the Norse "Ow" for "Eye" or "Auge" and where the winding stops in the wall or possibly where the wind comes in at the wall. Old windows are beautiful, coincidentally drafty and allow for natural ventilation even when closed. Some German Passivhaus Windows are so tight and efficient now that they have their own ventilation included, provided with an internal heat exchanger to minimize energy loss.
We all should have the German rule on windows. It also makes building conversions much easier!
We all should also have the German supply situation on windows. Oh, to be able to walk to a random Home Depot or Lowe's and order triple pane tilt-turns...
“The rules haven't changed in 500 years: Keep the windows as small as you can get away with and still let in the light and views you want, with an eye for proportion and scale. And keep it simple.”
So where's the problem? If a client wants huge windows for the views and light they provide, then that's exactly what they get. A house from 1810 still had plenty of windows, albeit not floor to ceiling ones, but they weren't port holes either. Old 18th century homes in New England all have that same look, and it's aesthetically pleasing. Those modern, boxy, obnoxious creations shown above? They're reminiscent of old Soviet khrushchevka—and only slightly more appealing.
Just install quality windows, period. There are other things to concern one's self over.
Great dive into the subject! I've just finished a reno to a townhouse with views on Lake Ontario. I'd suggested removing a leaky & unsound bow window in the 3rd storey master bath with a smaller window. The client who insisted on a very expensive fix/replacement and the bathtub placed in this window bay, is upset that people on the lakeside path can see into the bathroom & how cold it is to sit in the tub, next to 3 large windows that are subject to wind off the lake. If I were on the building code commission, I'd make things like this impossible!
Off topic Lloyd, are you also considering an exit strategy from Substack, as per Straphanger today January 8, 2024 ?
Update to my comments of 20 minutes ago: after reading this, I am definitely looking at alternatives and leaving as soon as possible. https://substack.com/@katz/note/c-46840863?utm_source=notes-share-action&r=w1io
Further update: Substack folded today and is removing the serious offenders.
I have been considering it for weeks. I have already set up an account on Buttondown, but they do not have a comments feature, which I think is problematic. I support a lot of other writers with paid subscriptions and worry about what is going to happen to many of them if this site fractures.
There are creeps on every platform; even on LinkedIn, their algorithm delivers oil company ads and climate arsonists to my feed. I never knew there were nazis and transphobes here until these articles started coming out; there are no ads and no algorithmic feed to put them in my face.
But I am Jewish and have a trans daughter, so nazis and TERFs are a problem for me. Like Taras at Straphanger, I am looking at my options. I am also hoping against hope that Substack will change their minds- there is a difference between promoting freedom of speech and a site covered in Nazi regalia.
In the FWIW and context dept (Substack, Axios, and Hot Air):
Hi Casey,
"Thank you for the list of publications you sent in for review on Thursday evening.
We have completed an investigation and found that five out of the six publications you reported do indeed violate our existing content guidelines, which prohibit incitements to violence based on protected classes. We have removed those publications from Substack.
None of these publications had paid subscriptions enabled, and they account for about 100 active readers in total."
"Six publications. Zero paid subscribers. 100 Readers total. That’s the scope of the Nazi problem at Substack.
To put that in perspective, earlier this year Axios reported there were 17,000 writers who were earning money on Substack (and presumably many thousands more who are not earning anything). The total number of subscribers to various sites hosted on Substack at the time was 2 million."
https://hotair.com/john-s-2/2024/01/11/auto-draft-220-n604516
Now me: in this time of Jew and Israel bashing by the Left/Pro-Palestinians, I stand with Israel whole heartedly. Not only as an Evangelical Christian but as a political blogger that is MORE than tired of those two groups distorting our common language by deliberate usage, malfeasance concerning established word definitions, and portrayals of "reality" that only exist in the fevered minds of a few (and too many ideologues promoting a Narrative). Truth is truth and no amount of distortion or intimidation can change it.
It's what I fight every day.
Lloyd, someone coming after online you and yours concerning this, send me the links/info.
Thank you. I really appreciate the mixture of current technical concerns joined with historical context pushed up against what we need to have connection with others and nature.