About The EnergyWise Exclusive Guarantee

EnergyWise Structures has over 25 years of experience predicting performance with our proprietary computer program and we have analyzed over 40,000 structures. Over 2,500 of our analysis houses were fitted with sub-meters for the HVAC equipment and monitored for over two years.



The actual performance of these 2,500 houses within the guaranteed range of energy consumption as recorded by sub-metering, was submitted to a national insurance carrier.

We are the only company we know of that is confident enough to give an energy guarantee for ultra energy efficient performance predictions.

That is not a myth. However, accurate prediction of thermal performance based solely on R-value is a myth. You should be wary of anyone telling you otherwise.


R-Values Alone Do Not Accurately Predict Real-World Performance

The EnergyWise certified structure does not allow the use of spun glass insulation material (fiberglass). Performance predictions using heat transfer calculations based on tested and published R-values alone do not accurately predict real-world performance. R-Value is a term given to the property of any material to "resist" the conduction of heat. R-Value as a property is legitimate. The functional design of the laboratory determination of this property, relative to commercial insulation materials, is flawed at a fundamental level - yielding what can be called the R-Value myth. This flaw forces the engineering community, bound to adhere to the scientific formulas dictated by their governing body (ASHRAE), to calculate heat loads using the "myth" that this R-Value property of various insulation materials derived by flawed test methods can accurately predict the performance of the insulation material in real life. Not true.

Let's look at two of the "test criteria" used in the laboratories to determine R-value. The first criteria relates to "standard temperature". This stipulates that the test be conducted at a constant temperature of 75-degrees fahrenheit. Does it seem odd that a test to determine the performance values for insulation material for HVAC equipment would be designed around a 75-degree temperature? Who uses heat or cooling when it's 75 degrees? It isn't surprising that fiberglass performs well at 75-degrees. However, the efficacy of fiberglass decreases in efficiency at hotter and cooler temperatures while foam both perform very well at hotter and cooler temperatures. Now do you see why we're suspicious of R-Values as a rule of thumb?

Secondly, the "test criteria" requires that R-value testing not start until the materials reach "steady state". Steady state occurs when a material is exposed to a heat source on one side and allowed to become thermally saturated so that for every single unit of heat entering on one side of the material a single unit of heat exits the opposite side. This seems very scientific. It appears logical, but it misses a single important issue relevant to predicting real world performance: The amount of time it takes to reach steady state.

Why is that important?

Because fiberglass reaches steady-state within a few hours, cellulose takes about a day and EPS foam takes several days to get to steady state. In the real world, foam will not actually reach a steady-state condition and, in the final analysis, is a far better insulator than fiberglass. In addition, foam acts as an impediment to air infiltration. Fiberglass can't make the same claim.