The letter that trashed window replacements makes quite a few unsubstantiated declarations ("Window repair better than replacement," Aug. 17).
It essentially said energy-efficient windows are a bad investment, not a significant improvement, because statistical studies show it takes 40 years to recover the investment and the typical replacement window fails in 20 years. Also, the writer claimed that energy invested in replacement windows is several times greater than what the windows conserve in their very short lifespan.
Where does all that come from? The claim is made that statistics demonstrate these assertions, but he fails to name the studies and identify who did them, and he doesn't say what exactly was being studied. Just one reference is cited to a weatherization pamphlet by a historic preservation trust.