Choosing glass by orientation rather than by budget
Glazing is usually bought as a single decision — how much, and how good — when it should be at least three decisions taken separately for each elevation of the new room. The first is light transmittance: how much daylight comes through. The second is the solar factor, sometimes called g-value: how much of the sun’s heat comes through. The third is the U-value: how much heat leaks out on a cold night. These move independently, and modern coatings let you hold light transmittance high while pushing the solar factor down, which is exactly what a south or west-facing rear elevation needs and exactly what a standard specification does not do. On a north-facing rear the priority reverses: solar gain is scarce and welcome, so a higher solar factor with the best available U-value is the right choice, and paying for heavy solar control there simply makes the room darker and greyer. Overhead glazing deserves its own decision. The summer sun is high, so a horizontal or shallow-pitched rooflight receives far more solar energy per square metre than a vertical window on the same elevation, and a large south-facing lantern is the most reliable way to build a room nobody can sit in during July. Where overhead light is wanted — and in a deep plan it usually is, because it is the only way to light the middle — specify it with a low solar factor, keep the area proportionate, and place it over the working part of the kitchen rather than over the dining table where people sit for an hour at a time. None of this adds much to the cost of the glass. It is a specification decision, not a budget one, and it is irreversible once the units are made.