<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Does Chicago Code Require Low-E Glass?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://chicagowindowexpert.com/2009/11/03/does-chicago-code-require-low-e-glass/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://chicagowindowexpert.com/2009/11/03/does-chicago-code-require-low-e-glass/</link>
	<description>Nobody knows more about windows.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Jul 2010 20:19:50 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mark Meshulam</title>
		<link>http://chicagowindowexpert.com/2009/11/03/does-chicago-code-require-low-e-glass/comment-page-1/#comment-475</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Meshulam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Apr 2010 13:25:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chicagowindowexpert.com/?p=1388#comment-475</guid>
		<description>Hi Julie, 

Thanks for that explanation. It is good to dialog with someone actually involved in the creation of codes. 

I don&#039;t see a disagreement between your comments and those of Randy and Patrick in this article. Did I miss something?

It appears that the numbers your team has derived are in synch with current industry capabilities. What about the future? Are there plans to tighten the requirements along the lines of what the Federal Government is targeting: .30U and .30 SHGC?

Further, it seems that air infiltration, despite being a major contributor to heat loss, is the poor ignored cousin in all of these conversations. When is the code-producing industry going to take this on? 

And finally, I am wide awake when discussing this subject. It&#039;s the readers that concern me. Wake up guys, We&#039;re done now!

Thanks again, 
Mark</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Julie, </p>
<p>Thanks for that explanation. It is good to dialog with someone actually involved in the creation of codes. </p>
<p>I don&#8217;t see a disagreement between your comments and those of Randy and Patrick in this article. Did I miss something?</p>
<p>It appears that the numbers your team has derived are in synch with current industry capabilities. What about the future? Are there plans to tighten the requirements along the lines of what the Federal Government is targeting: .30U and .30 SHGC?</p>
<p>Further, it seems that air infiltration, despite being a major contributor to heat loss, is the poor ignored cousin in all of these conversations. When is the code-producing industry going to take this on? </p>
<p>And finally, I am wide awake when discussing this subject. It&#8217;s the readers that concern me. Wake up guys, We&#8217;re done now!</p>
<p>Thanks again,<br />
Mark</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
