Hello everyone,
My husband and I attended a home exhibition today featuring a local timber house builder (Schleswig-Holstein) and there we learned about the Vestaxx window heating system.
Is there anyone here who has experience with the Vestaxx window heating?
At first, it sounds unusual to have the heating integrated into the windows. For the triple-glazed windows, a nanotechnology-based, invisible layer is applied to the inner surface of the innermost pane, which warms the glass up to 40 degrees Celsius (104°F) via infrared and heats the room. The warmth actually felt very comfortable, and the windows were completely cold on the outside (today’s temperature was below 10 degrees Celsius (50°F)). Allegedly, the Vestaxx window heating transfers 92% of its heat to the room, and the Technical University of Berlin has tested this Vestaxx window heating system and rated it positively. It appears to have been on the market only recently.
Overall, I find this quite interesting. It is significantly cheaper than other heating systems, allows individual control of each room, and unlike underfloor heating, it is very responsive.
Of course, this only makes sense in a low-energy house (the timber builder mainly constructs 40+ standard homes), as the system runs on electricity. In that case, the Vestaxx window heating is said to consume very little power.
This is my impression from the expo; of course, they want to sell the system.
What are your experiences with Vestaxx? Have you heard of this system before? Could it be an alternative to conventional heating? Does it have a future?
My husband and I attended a home exhibition today featuring a local timber house builder (Schleswig-Holstein) and there we learned about the Vestaxx window heating system.
Is there anyone here who has experience with the Vestaxx window heating?
At first, it sounds unusual to have the heating integrated into the windows. For the triple-glazed windows, a nanotechnology-based, invisible layer is applied to the inner surface of the innermost pane, which warms the glass up to 40 degrees Celsius (104°F) via infrared and heats the room. The warmth actually felt very comfortable, and the windows were completely cold on the outside (today’s temperature was below 10 degrees Celsius (50°F)). Allegedly, the Vestaxx window heating transfers 92% of its heat to the room, and the Technical University of Berlin has tested this Vestaxx window heating system and rated it positively. It appears to have been on the market only recently.
Overall, I find this quite interesting. It is significantly cheaper than other heating systems, allows individual control of each room, and unlike underfloor heating, it is very responsive.
Of course, this only makes sense in a low-energy house (the timber builder mainly constructs 40+ standard homes), as the system runs on electricity. In that case, the Vestaxx window heating is said to consume very little power.
This is my impression from the expo; of course, they want to sell the system.
What are your experiences with Vestaxx? Have you heard of this system before? Could it be an alternative to conventional heating? Does it have a future?
V
Vestaxx GmbH9 Oct 2022 20:38kati1337 schrieb:
At first, I thought so too, but it’s just marketing nonsense. You can tell from the passive-aggressive attitude, occasionally interrupted by outright hostility, which then gets disguised with consultant jargon whenever he encounters someone who disagrees with him.
Numerical examples are usually dismissed (also passive-aggressively — "congratulations on your system! REALLY FROM THE HEART!!1elf") and then countered with the usual photovoltaic-makes-our-system-economical nonsense.
And anyone who denies this or questions it critically, like asking “what would the total cost calculation look like if we completely left out PV,” gets brushed off with “just watch our promotional video,” I mean, “webinar.”
Any discussion is pointless, it’s just a sales pitch trip.
At most I would react to his posts with emojis here, but the emoji that rolls its eyes is missing. Well then — you keep rolling your eyes — all good.
I will leave the rest of what you wrote uncommented.
No point, since I’m not representing YOUR opinion.
Just this much: You always want to exclude photovoltaics and then compare.
The result: Yes, the heat pump is the more efficient system — I have never disputed that!
But with us, for the same price, you get a substantial photovoltaic system (which we do not sell, by the way) included.
And it produces energy — no matter what you say about that.
And because there are no additional costs, I’m allowed to include the generated energy in my calculations.
If that’s marketing nonsense... what exactly about it is marketing?
What is wrong with the calculation:
Both heating systems, individually, have: initial investment costs, ongoing maintenance costs, operating costs, and a lifespan.
Based on this, independent of any photovoltaic system, a total cost calculation can be made and compared.
The lower initial cost of the underfloor heating is already taken into account within the investment costs.
If a system does not pass this comparison, then it simply does not pass.
I cannot and should not include a photovoltaic system in this calculation, and if I do, then I should either include the photovoltaic system for BOTH systems—both the costs and the savings—or for NEITHER system.
Trying to compare a heat pump system versus an underfloor heating system combined with photovoltaic is misleading, a simplistic calculation, marketing nonsense—call it what you want. In any case, the comparison is flawed.
Both heating systems, individually, have: initial investment costs, ongoing maintenance costs, operating costs, and a lifespan.
Based on this, independent of any photovoltaic system, a total cost calculation can be made and compared.
The lower initial cost of the underfloor heating is already taken into account within the investment costs.
If a system does not pass this comparison, then it simply does not pass.
I cannot and should not include a photovoltaic system in this calculation, and if I do, then I should either include the photovoltaic system for BOTH systems—both the costs and the savings—or for NEITHER system.
Trying to compare a heat pump system versus an underfloor heating system combined with photovoltaic is misleading, a simplistic calculation, marketing nonsense—call it what you want. In any case, the comparison is flawed.
Because it is fundamentally inaccurate from a financial science perspective.
You argue that saved costs equal lower investment. Whether the difference is invested in photovoltaics, ETFs, or simply spent on consumption would need to be evaluated separately from a financial science standpoint.
Because it is not really one system; it would only be considered a system if, for example, the inner pane included the heating element and the outer one was a photoactive cell, which would still need to be transparent to fulfill the primary function of a window.
The fact that it is not technologically one system makes it marketing.
You argue that saved costs equal lower investment. Whether the difference is invested in photovoltaics, ETFs, or simply spent on consumption would need to be evaluated separately from a financial science standpoint.
Because it is not really one system; it would only be considered a system if, for example, the inner pane included the heating element and the outer one was a photoactive cell, which would still need to be transparent to fulfill the primary function of a window.
The fact that it is not technologically one system makes it marketing.
Vestaxx GmbH schrieb:
Only with us do you get a substantial photovoltaic system included for the same price (by the way, we don’t sell them).
And it generates energy – no matter what you say.
And since there are no additional costs, I’m allowed to account for the generated energy in my bills. Yes, but: the photovoltaic system ALWAYS produces energy. It doesn’t matter how you heat your home. Even with an oil heating system, a photovoltaic system pays off. And that’s true even if you have to finance it with a loan.
Vestaxx GmbH schrieb:
If this is marketing hype… what exactly is marketing? This whole thing is actually more of a complete marketing failure....
Vestaxx GmbH schrieb:
Business case – I’m not sure what our business case has to do in this forum.
Regarding point 1: That is presumptuous and completely wrong. I am very proficient with our software (I partly developed it myself) and, as managing director, have access to all relevant experience. First of all, we have been discussing your cost-effectiveness calculation Vestaxx vs. heat pump the whole time. I am genuinely not willing to read a full page of continuous text; I want well-prepared tables. Secondly, we are talking about spreadsheet software such as Excel, OpenOffice, etc. No one here wants to see your software, but rather properly presented cost-effectiveness analyses comparing window heating systems versus heat pumps, based on current annual performance factors (COP) of 4–5.
Vestaxx GmbH schrieb:
Regarding point 3: An investment and operating cost calculation can hardly be made any clearer (Excel or whatever). Actually, mine is clearer. See my point above.
Vestaxx GmbH schrieb:
Your comment about climate change and CO2 emissions is great! But I have already written about this several times, which OWL ignores. Can you tell me how much CO2 the heat pump has produced through its pumps, compressors, valves, housings, and especially kilometers of underfloor heating pipes, before the first kilowatt-hour is generated? I don’t know exactly, but soon we will commission a master’s thesis on this – since heat pump manufacturers do not provide this data.
We are in the kilogram range for the entire heating system. I would like to see in more detail how you arrived at 16–20 tons more due solely to the COP. I already broke that down. Here is the previous excerpt:
CO2e for German steel assumed around 2.5 kg, PE underfloor piping 17x2 mm (∅0.7x0.08 inches) with 2 kg CO2e. Production overhead is estimated at a flat 25%.
Copper pipes and heat exchangers are indeed significant additional CO2 emitters. Add another 100 kg. Fortunately, aluminum is lightweight. The few valves and heating circuit distributors have a negligible impact.
The problematic part is obviously the CO2e associated with the German electricity grid mix. Before the war, there were ambitious targets, but with resumed operation of East German lignite power plants, I strongly doubt those goals now. I will simply assume that our government will reach the target of less than 25% of 1990 levels only ten years later, around 2040.
In the respective columns you’ll find electricity consumption per year multiplied by CO2e per kWh.
When summed over the observation period, it looks like this:
It is of course important to consider Scope 3 downstream emissions as well, not just cradle-to-gate.
Vestaxx GmbH schrieb:
Finally: I already discussed our system several years ago with Max Viessmann in Berlin at his request. I had the impression that HE understood me very well. 😉 Not long afterward, Viessmann added infrared heating systems to their product range. Why could that be? Infrared heating is actually the go-to solution here in the forum as well, for example, to supplement heating in the bathroom when the heating surface is too small. But that’s not what this discussion is about.
Similar topics