ÂDearI am in the designing stage of my villa (located in JEDDAH, SA: 21.2854° N, 39.2376° E). I expressed my desire to the architect that 60-70% of the facade of the villa to be LOW-E glass in order to enjoy 100% natural lighting during the day and to conserve on my cooling bill at the same time. I was surprised when he said that the well-insulated concrete or brick wall is much energy efficient than even double-glazed or triple-glazed low-e glass. He added that the amount of savings due to natural lighting is off-set by the deference in energy conservation efficiency between double-glazed or triple-glazed low-e glass and the well-insulated concrete or brick wall. Especially in this location. I was puzzled, because I had a strong belief that LOW-E glass is the best option for energy efficiency enthusiast. If somebody has a professional opinion please share it with me. Â I also would like to share your opinion on my emails:BRMohammed Ali     Â
James V Dirkes II, CEO/President
Coffee conversation: ? the minute one is labeled mean-spirited simply for raising an opposing view, debate is silenced. If we disqualify legitimate discussion, we compromise our ability to know the truth. We need to cultivate the ability to disagree civilly and not take opposition personally. We must also have the grace to allow our own views to be challenged with evidence and reasoning?
.