Vestaxx window heating - experiences?

I understand fun and can also deal with cynical remarks, but I am currently a bit disappointed because the topic is being ridiculed here.

I am seriously engaging with the current situation of various building families who may be uncertain about which heating system is right for them. The decision is final and then, say, cannot be easily changed for 20 years. And these are mostly not energy experts; they cannot fully understand the topic in detail and are looking for well-founded insights in forums like this one.

I admit, probably none of the people active here have experience with a window heating system. That is why I have come here to shed some light on the matter with comprehensible data and facts. And if someone then prefers a water-based system, that is totally fine. Then they prefer the technical efficiency and not the economically ecological (CO2 footprint) solution.

Maybe a few words at this point about a reasonably well-insulated old building. Here, one could get rid of the fossil heating carrier and install a heat pump with subsidies, using it with the existing or possibly new radiators. This would certainly work for the transition period. And if you want to replace the windows anyway, you can still use the heating glass for peak coverage in the cold winter. This is, if in doubt, not more expensive than retrofitting a floor or ceiling heating system.

I think you might have to rise above the nonsense if necessary. You have already done a lot for the system window heating by even bringing up the topic here. Before this thread, I didn't even know it existed.

Nevertheless, we are here on the Internet, and most others here have probably not studied electrical engineering with a focus on energy technology. There have already been many in-depth discussions here, of which 95% of people probably did not understand everything, and of those, presumably around 30% still believed they understood everything.

I enjoy reading that, but I cannot judge who is right in the end. If your numbers are correct, it might really be worth considering for renovations. But having such "deep" discussions on the Internet with someone is a bit like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter how well you play chess, in the end, the pigeon will knock over all the pieces and strut across the board as if it had won. ;)

Then he would rather prefer the technical efficiency and not the economically ecological (CO2 footprint) solution.

I would really be interested in some numbers regarding this claim! A few hoses in the screed are supposed to require more energy in production than the manufacture of heated windows + quadruple consumption over their lifetime! Interesting...

Here you could get rid of the fossil heating carrier and install a heat pump with subsidies and operate it on the existing or possibly new radiators. That would certainly work for the transitional period. And if you want to renew the windows anyway, you could still use the heating glass for peak coverage in the cold winter.

But now this is completely a forced marketing of a system. Every heat pump already has a built-in electric heater to cover peak loads. The additional installation effort is zero, nada, niente. For a window heating system, you first have to run connections to all windows. Since you certainly don't want a surface-mounted installation in the living room, you have to tear open the walls in an old building for it. That alone makes window heating senseless in old buildings. In addition, there is the surcharge compared to normal windows and the need to control two heating systems. The heat pump's heating element automatically adjusts according to the outside temperature. Sorry, but for old buildings I absolutely cannot see any advantage here. The scenario duplicates an existing system and causes additional effort and costs. If the system has a legitimate reason for existence, then only in new buildings where the energy demand is low and the additional lines are not a big effort. However, it is still not clear to me where the decisive advantage over conventional infrared heating lies. By the way, this radiates 100% of the energy into the building and if a panel breaks, I can buy a new one at the hardware store and replace it. With window heating, you can only hope that the supplier still exists in 20 years. And when the windows are due for replacement, you also throw out the window heating.

Thank you Kati - Your response gives me courage and joy to continue enlightening here. And it's not about being right. That is always subjective. It is about showing alternatives and convincing. Now I will reply to Rotormotor, to whom I am supposed to explain why window heating has a much lower CO2 footprint than a few hoses in the ground. I feel like a teacher and actually have no time for it. I would rather take care of my customers whom I have convinced, but I will answer anyway.

I am new here and don’t know how to display a user’s reply like you do. Maybe someone can give me a tip. THANKS