COMPARE · SIDE BY SIDE
Glass house vs film house
The two structures most buyers weigh against each other, compared on the numbers that matter over ten years.
| Venlo glass | Multi-span film | |
|---|---|---|
| Light transmission | About 88–91 % when clean, stable for 25 years | About 88–90 % new, falls with age and dust |
| Capital cost per m² | Higher: glass, aluminium and heavier frame | Lower: film and a lighter frame |
| Service life | 25 years for the structure, panes replaced individually | Film replaced every 3–4 seasons |
| Night insulation | Single glass is poor; double glazing or screens needed | Double film holds heat better than single glass |
| Climate precision | High with vents, screens, heating and a computer | Medium; good with screens and forced ventilation |
| Best crop fit | Tomato, pepper, cucumber, cut flowers, young plants | Vegetables at scale, herbs, nursery, seasonal fruit |
| Ten-year view | Higher capex, lower replacement cost, higher yield ceiling | Lower capex, recurring film cost, faster payback |
Film wins on capital and speed; glass wins on light, life and control. The decision usually turns on the crop value per square metre and whether you heat.
Next step
Want this compared on your numbers?
Send the area, the crop and the energy price you pay. We run the ten-year comparison and show the assumptions.