Spinny

But that is not the situation. It has been 20 years since Al Gore released 'An Inconvenient Truth' and the first COP meeting was in 1995 over 30 years ago. The end is nigh they cried but all the portents of doom have not actually occurred. And we definitely have people being paid to try to keep a failing narrative going, and people in school taught that opinon is fact, and organisations like the Met Office and the BBC obviously lying, censoring, and misrepresenting climate concerns. How do you know when a politician is lying to you - their lips are moving.

On the 'pick one' stuff, I am generally against false binary decision making. The best decisions under uncertainty are often to hedge your 'bets' and recognise the role and pros cons of alternatives - some of each please.

'Appeal to authority' as an argument is fallacious anyway. The truth is not determined by any 'authority' no matter his position or the number of letters after his name. Neither is it determined by popular vote, nor by the vote of those paid to promote narratives regardless of objective truths. Nature is as she is. As Rutherford said 'All science is either physics or stamp collecting'. I'd argue physicists generally have the most objective and questioning perspectives. They grow up with the motivation to find truths - nobody can really work as a physicist without both a capable mind and a passionate curiosity for truth. Climate science is more of a job - barely existed 40 years ago - now massively expanded as a result of climate alarm - turkeys don't vote for Christmas. We miss him still... https://youtu.be/OL6-x0modwY?si=vYOWFRolyMaOzxvQ

A juicy target in a hot war, especially if in port.

Europe stores gas of course, gets them through every winter. The Rough facility is off the coast of East Yorkshire, and accounts for about half of the capacity the UK has to store gas. It was closed in 2017, but then partly reopened in October 2022 following the energy crisis triggered by Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Even the US has a strategic oil reserve. And you can follow summary of the gyrations and commentary on natural gas supply and demand here... https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/natural-gas

Energy storage seems to be coming. Would seem best to wait for sodium batteries made in the West rather than enable China's oppression. Also avoids the fire risk of lithium. (I remember buying an early flat screen TV - within 18-24 months you could buy 50% larger for almost half the price.)

According to ChatGPT... "No — there’s no credible evidence that John F. Clauser is paid by the American Petroleum Institute (API)."

I didn't actually say it cost a fortune to install a heat pump in a new build - where did I say that ? And the poor don't generally live in new builds. We are talking about older properties and going around ripping out existing central heating to replace it with heat pumps at great TOTAL cost to the tax payer. Think victorian terraces of flats and high rise buildings, cheek by jowl, little parking, no gardens. When someone from government (Millipede) arrives and says 'I am here to help you' - run for your life as fast as you can. The history of centrally planned economies is not good for anyone.

You seem not to understand the point I made. You cannot in one breath push for and bring about the destruction of the UKs indigineous fossil fuel industry (in the name of CO2 emmissions and climate emergency) AND then bemoan the low levels of UK energy security because of the need to import fossil fuels. You cannot claim the lack of UK indigineous fossil fuel industry (which you have acted to destroy) as a reason to destroy all fossil fuel use. There is only 1 reason there - you want to destroy use of fossil fuels in the UK to achieve net zero - it is 1 reason, there is no 2nd reason regarding energy security. You are using tautology and not recognising it. Smoke and mirrors. We are going to be using fossil fuels for many decades to come whatever is done. The UK cannot go net zero in any short timescale, so we will be happily burning gas for many more decades, like it or not. Energy security has many solutions including building gas & oil storage facilities, building nuclear power stations (large & small), building clean coal solutions. Batteries will eventually play a role. etc. Mr Millipede has just announced a new package of mad policies to ban gas boilers in new builds and spend a fortune installing heat pumps for the poor (who often live in accommodation for which they are unsuitable). Fortunately there is no industry capacity to achieve his policies on the scale he proposes, and thankfully he will be out of power within 3.5 years now. IMO, the country does not need mad crusading zealots leading us into self destruction like Chicken Licken.

There is a scientific theory yes - a hypothesis. In physics we look to establish the veracity of theories using experiment with independent repetition. The experiments aim to show that the predictions of the theory occur in practice. To my knowledge no actual experiments have been done as it is clearly difficult if not impossible to replicate a mini earth and atmosphere to experiment on in the lab. For the theory which does exist there are also strong counter arguments e.g. that (1) atmospheric effects reach a saturation point beyond which more CO2 no longer significantly impacts temperature and (2) that the impact of water vapour and clouds - present in vastly greater amounts than the 0.04% of CO2 - drown out any CO2 effects. One theory was even based on variations in cosmic rays impacting the nucleation and formation of cloud cover. Lots of things impact climate - many cyclical. In the longer term records there are clear disgreements over whether higher CO2 is actually a cause of higher temperatures, or indeed is itself caused by higher temperatures. Looking for simplistic dependencies in complex systems can be misleading. I am not saying it is wrong, I am just saying it is not proven and is open to question. Unfortunately too many people would rather engage in personal attacks, cancellation, and spurious appeals to 'authority', over actual engagement in scientific debate. Certainly I have studied Physics. Presumably you are aware anthropogenic climate emergency is questioned by at least one Physics nobel prize winner. But I think we get off the point, which is really just an appeal for recognising uncertainty and doubt, and not charging around like just stop oil fanatics insisting on net zero extremism.

If only that were still true. In today's world academics get monitored and ranked by papers published and citations. Lots of junk journals and journals with biased editors etc. Academics can often engage in mutual back scratching, reviewing, citing, and naming each other on papers for mutual advantage.

I don't need to cite a paper to disprove something. Anthropogenic driven climate change through emmissions of carbon dioxide is a hypothesis which has not been scientifically proven. There are no papers that prove it occurs. All we have is a claimed correlation over 50-100 years between industrialisation and global CO2 emmissions and some average global temperatures. 50-100 years is a short time period - there are plenty of climate variations with no industrialisation - the romans grew grapes in england. It is a theory and correlation is not necessarily causation. Many models are built and used where CO2 driven warming is assumed as input and therefore produce warming output. There are alternative theories and many doubting and questioning scientists that are frequently censored, blocked, and cancelled. Others use their wealth to promote the theory by paying journalists to write anthropogenic climate change propaganda. That doesn't mean it is wrong, but it is certainly unproven and has very considerable doubt and uncertainty. Unfortunately many people do not understand how science works, many people are unable to cope with things being uncertain, many people are content to watch BBC climate propaganda without questioning it, many people want to make political capital out of it, or to make money off the back of it. It is very wrong to be tearing up the UK economy and finances as though it is a climate emergency when it is not. If we get some perspective we can think of many things that we were told 20 years ago would be upon us but are not - from polar bears dying out, coral reefs being no more, the sea lapping at the ankles of the statue of liberty, the earth ''boiling'', the polar ice retreating opening up the arctic seas - none of which has occurred. In the internet age nothing sells like fear, every other piece of clickbait is a scare story.

Sorry Beelbeebub, but you have some daft self contradictory arguments here... It is the mad Millipede and the extreme net zero nutters that are actually greatly responsible for UK dependence on oil & gas from overseas - because they have spent the last 10-20 years stopping all uk fossil fuel production. You cannot then argue that the UK should go net zero because it depends on overseas oil and gas and that is a security issue. You are in the land of the madman there. The UK probably has plenty of fossil fuels on and around it's own shores that would provide energy independence for an awful long time. In case you were not born then the UK shut down it's coal mines in the 1980's. There is more gas and oil around our coast, ample coal reserves, and then there is fracking. Also worth remembering that at some point mankind will master fusion power anyway. The UK has very very foolishly done away with its gas storage facilities. You also claim one nearly 80 year old man aka Trump, will hold the UK as an LNG energy hostage in the same way Putin was doing with Europe. Trump will be gone in 3 years, may become powerless after the mid terms, why would any nation take the slightest bit of notice of Trump when planning for energy security for the next century. (PS There is no definitive scientific evidence for anthropogenic climate change of course. Many people are unfortunately making a good living touring the world on jet planes and cranking out unscientific lies and misinformation that the world will end if we don't stop cows farting, and blaming every flood or fire (which we have always had) on carbon dioxide. It is nonsense and the wheels are already beginning to fall off the band wagon.) The way to energy security is a diversified energy infrastructure using multiple sources, not a self righteous dependence on 100% renewables only. Technology will render many of today's solutions obsolete within a decade or two anyway. The world is only just beginning on engineered proteins for example. So nothing wrong with building energy efficient homes or using alternative energy sources, but let's not kid ourselves with net zero extremism.

Just looking at WoodUpp, as I will need to disguise an access panel which I plan to install to hide electrical gubbins. Seems like it could word to conceal a hinged wall access panel. Also seems to have the benefit that coat hooks and shelves and things can be mounted onto it. However I am not sure of the strength of these for hanging coats and things. Any one have any experience of this stuff ? (Or other suggestions for hidng an access panel)

Circuits/loops and Zones are two different things - presumably you are aware of that. Do you have a design that actually provides the pipe layouts ? Our suspended floor system design included the proposed pipe layouts. Are you going to put pipes under the island and banquette seating ? Views seem to differ, architects argue the u/f heating is for life of building so should allow future internal reconfiguration. (I have no expertise here, but is it not a good idea to ensure you have sufficient loops to provide some resilience should the worst ever happen - i.e. a loop fail, get punctured etc.) Do think about ventilation and solar gain. Having had a cold house we thought it would take care of itself and our architect never once mentioned it as something requiring design. Depending which way your glass faces and what it is, solar gain can be significant. Only one appliance in the utility ? Or is that X a washer and dryer stacked on top of each other ?

Not clear where your boundaries are with neighbours etc from those drawings. Personally I find all this 'permitted development' stuff a bit unnecessary. If you are going to build something reasonable with due consideration for your neighbours and the local context and setting, why be trying to use permitted development ? The cost and timeline involved with getting planning permission is not excessive compared with the costs, timelines amd risks involved with a building project. I don't think LA planning are going to have spurious objections. You don't say whether you are engaging with neighbours regarding your plans - which is the recommended approach by all good architects and the planning office. Going through planning permission will at least ensure immediate neighbours are informed even if you want to shaft them. You never know, LA planning might have something helpful to say about your plans, and having planning permission can only be a positive when it comes to the sales value of the property, and dealing with neighbour relations during the build itself.

Which way is that horizontal round pipe across the wall above the window actually falling ? Looks very horizontal or even running the other way ? I'd say think about why someone has done that Heath Robinson type arrangement of pipe work. It looks like some kind of extension and/or remodelling work was done at some point, but wasn't very well planned with drainage routes not planned properly in advance - or else kind of botched to avoid spending money doing a proper job. If it had planning permission there may be some drawings on the local authority planning applications website. Kinda looks like the ground floor window may have been added blocking the vertical path down to the drain - and/or the drain moved along the wall to make room for a new wall. (Does surface rain water at ground level drain away from that external corner between the windows as it should - or towards it ulp ? I wonder if those leaves near the corner have been washed there because the surface falls into the corner ?} People do very weird and wacky stuff when they lack the brain or money to do things properly. It may be best to give the whole arrangement some thought to see if there is just a whole better layout which might involve more work but be a better long term answer if you plan to live in the house for many years ?

Not a confession, but ... Builder sent his chippy to site with some youngster in tow (doubtless very cheap labour for the builder). Chippy sets the youngster up to put some battens on the wall - simple enough. Youngster proceeds to drill all the way through the concrete block wall and out the other side. Which I discover some days later when wondering why bits of new plaster have fallen off the wall on the other side. Multiple holes right through the wall coming within mm of drilling straight into the back of the new £2k boiler wall mounted by the plumber days before and the cylinder expansion tank.

Happy New Year. Here is hoping that as we enter the 5th calendar year of a 6 month extension project we can achieve completion this year. 2025 was another annus horribilis of stress, frustration, disappointments, nasty neighbours, health problems, imaginary plumbers, a backed up drain, and a dead dog. We even had a door come off its hinges only yesterday. May 2026 bring us all the change we hope for.

Thanks , that's fine. Take care in finding your independent inspector and be sure to put all the hypotheses people have suggested to him to have him check and comment on each. Hopefully you can find someone that will come with measurement devices for temps, plumbness, fit accuracy, air gaps etc. It will be interesting to hear what he finds. I think this is a common concern and has got me thinking again about what to put between the packers under my bifolds. I had to have celcon insulating blocks replaced with concrete blocks because my builder was seemingly unable to actually securely mortar in the celcon blocks, and the window company doubtful about screw fixing into them.

OK, but I don't see that there is any other method to identify what is actually happening other than identifying a list of possible hypotheses that might explain it, and then seeking to test and check these hypotheses one by one. It is what we call the scientific method. Once there is an objective identification of the actual problem(s) it is possible to ascribe responsibility and whether reasonable care and skill has been used or not. Unfortunately it is still often human nature for people to start by avoiding blame and attributing faults to other factors as your fitters are doing. They might be right or wrong, and what is needed is a logical scientific identification of the problem(s). Even bringing in other 'experts' can sometimes only generate more opinion unless there is some focus on establishing facts and evidence supporting or refuting hypothetical causes. I will say that in my experience it is too common for some trades people to essentially ignore what the customer says on the basis that the customer is assumed to be ignorant, inexperienced, unqualified to comment etc. To try to be fair there are doubtless customers where this is true but in reality it should matter not who makes claims or statements, only whether they can be established as factually true or false. But I have also had 5 different plumbers give me 5 different opinions on a plumbing problem - some of them fairly obvious crap. However sometimes you do need to bring in somebody with letters after their name and direct experience (e.g. surveyor, engineer, architect, QS etc) to tell some tradespeople exactly the same as the customer is saying and to state the bleeding obvious, before they will remotely accept it. I would encourage you to focus on rigourously identifying the problem(s), because even if you gain a section 75 financial settlement you will still need to get the doors replaced - and if you don't understand the current problem(s) you are likely to see them repeated on a new product/install. It has been my experience in life that things are mostly like the saying about making a cooked breakfast - the hen is involved in the endeavour but only the pig is actually committed. Whether it is a health problem, a car problem, or a building problem you can seek help and opinion but in the end it is only you the pig that actually bears the problem and is truly driven and committed to getting a resolution. Ignore the bullshit, the name callers, appeals to claimed 'authority', those that play politics, the insurers, lawyers, dissemblers, chancers and deniers etc. Find the truth, hold people to account - whether a window fitter, the horizon scandal, the blood transfusion scandal, grenfell, or hillsborough. Find the truth, speak the truth, live the truth. As the man said 'For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled' Happy New Year

Go to ChatGPT and type in... "Is it possible for cold air to pass through a double glazed door or window by passing around the sealed double glazed unit i.e. between this unit and the frame it is fitted into ?" When Chat GPT answers and then asks you the frame type etc type in,,, "a upvc frame which has been fitted a few weeks ago and comprises of a french door fitted between 2 outer fixed glazed windows" (And the first 2/3 minutes of this video may be of interest... https://youtu.be/rc5DutkQ0WM

Also that heat camera is showing the coldest strips at the bottom edge of the double glazed units i.e. just above the bottom frame where the glazing starts. Could it be that the double glazed units were not a good tight fit into the frame itself, so that you actually have cold air finding it's way through the windows/doors themselves - underneath the base of the double glazed unit - i/e/ between upvc frame and DG unit. Window companies may be ordering in ready made dg units to fit into their frames. They will NOT want the glass to end up too big, so it would seem quite possible for the dg unit to end up on the small size sometimes and perhaps not to fit tightly ? Also there are usually seals between the glass and the frame - are these tightly fitting ? I think it is usual to have a little lee way for heel/toe adjustments, but ultimately the entire door assembly should be perfectly air tight on both sides. If you fart outside you should not notice it inside :0). Maybe you could try some sort of smoke test ? (In my youth I once had to travel around with a fire service chap for a few days as part of a business analysis - the height of his entertainment was taking out a phallic shaped smoke machine which hummed and emitted smoke from the tip to test the smokes. For some reason he thought it amusing to test the smokes in the headmistress office when visiting the girls schools ?!@)

Can I add in another consideration. From what you have described the complete window/door consists of multiple individual parts: The two fixed side windows with their own frame (presumably pre glazed with double glazing units), the central doors with their frame, and the cill piece itself which the other parts sit onto as a base. Have you carefully checked the vertical and horizontal alignment of these different parts ? If for example the two side windows were fitted to the outer edges of the opening first, but the inner vertical frame edge ended up not being perfectly vertical, then fitting the door frame vertically against it would become a problem. Quite possibly a fitter might then choose to then fit the door frame perfectly vertical regardless. So there would then be a variable gap between the side frame and the door frame - quite possibly tight at the top, but with an increasing gap near the base. This could then be filled with mastic/sealant and appear normal. However there could be an uninsulated gap or path left between the fixed windows and the door frame at the lower part - thereby causing cold bridging problems. In a similar way there could be misalignment and gaps occurring between the cill and the window and door parts fitted onto the cill - again possibly leading to cold gaps between the cill and frame possibly hidden by sealant. I have to say it is a skilled and potentially time consuming task to assemble frames into an opening with precision such that all the verticals are spot on plumb and all the horizontals are spot on plumb level. Doors especially need to be true so they don't swing open/closed of their own accord etc and meet correctly when closed. Anything other than expensive spirit levels are unreliable and can easily be out. Small alignment errors which many tradies might think 'good enough lets go down the pub' might mean installation gaps at the lower part of the frame and between cill and frames. I might be barking up the wrong tree, but get yourself a long expensive known accurate spirit level (or plumb line) and carefully examine whether all the parts of the installation are properly plumb and tightly joined to one another. (It took a second fitting visit to get our alu bifolds right and they sent their crack fitters that were at it until 7pm getting it all just so. And I imagine UPVC frames may show more bendability than aluminium.)

I have aluminium doors and three have cills. The manufacturers technical drawing shows that the cill (as with the frames) incorporates a thermal break betwen the external facing aluminium and the internal facing aluminium. If you google 'do PVC cills have a thermal break' their AI engine says PVC cills do not incorporate a thermal break etc because the UPVC is itself more insulating, and that air pockets are usually also incorporated into the design to reduce thermal bridging. I think you might start by obtaining and examining the technical drawings of the UPVC cill and frame designs, and also to identify what the manufacturers data sheets and specs and installation instructions have to say about the thermal properties the door and cill etc is designed to achieve - and with what installation detail. This then might allow you to identify specific product thermal specifications you would rightly be expecting to achieve, and to compare this with what has actually been achieved by the install. Any discrepancy will then either be due to a defective product, and/or a defective installation and therefore responsibility rest with the manufacturer and/or the installer. You say a conservatory was taken down and this window fitted into the opening in the wall ? Did you give any consideration to ensuring the opening was properly prepared for the door fitting - e.g. by a builder such as the one doing the demolition ? If you ordered the door without having the opening surveyed or prepared to the installer/manufacturer's instructions then I would imagine this might make a claim more questionable ? From the photographs it looks as though there is two layers of sealant and a DPM between the cill and the brickwork. One might expect this to at least provide a little insulation, but if you can feel draughts it seems the underside of the cill is not properly sealed up. So you might try actually getting the gap between the cill and the brickwork properly sealed up externally to stop all entry of cold air from the outside. I can understand you being very disappointed with the thermal performance - did you research and check this out when choosing your doors ? Personally I would expect the window company to be trying to do something more than complete denial.