Sir, - One becomes weary of uPVC window-frame "bashing" in your letters page. The assertion by Ms Mary Bryan of the Irish Georgian Society (September 19th) that "there is no economic, aesthetic or practical argument in favour of uPVC that holds water" is pushing credulity a trifle too far. I can accept that some old buildings of real character could and do suffer from insensitive "improvements", but statements such as that quoted above do nothing to remedy that situation.
About 12 years ago in our suburban house we replaced our "traditional" timber window-frames with uPVC frames. Our consumption of central heating fuel dropped by 2,500 litres a year, yielding a total reduction since then of some 30,000 litres. This would appear, at least to me, to be a strong economic, practical and environmental argument in favour of uPVC. The aesthetic improvement from flaking paint to smooth, clean PVC is not inconsiderable.
Even earlier, in an old house in West Kerry, we replaced decaying tradition with uPVC. The change from huddling in an overcoat in front of a roaring fire to sitting back in shirt sleeves with a lkW electric heater would carry a heavy load of aesthetic deterioration. I am not convinced that any such deterioration occurred.
The character of Irish country towns depends on the setting of the towns and the general air of a living, lived-in community environment. It derives very little character from the material used in its window-frames. - Yours, etc., Donal O'Halloran,
Ballineaspaig Lawn, Bishopstown, Cork.