Heat always travels to cold and wet always travels to dry - (unless acted on by an outside force). Your windows are a prime example of that principle. In the winter, the outside air is cold and dry. Cold air does not hold moisture very well and no matter how dry your home may feel to you, it is still holding more moisture than is the air outside. That warm and moist inside air wants very badly to equalize with the cool dry outside air, so it is looking for a way to escape from your home. In the middle of summer, pull a can of something cold and frosty out of the refrigerator and notice how quickly the can becomes wet on the outside. This is condensation caused by the contact between the warm, moist summer air and the cold can. The surface of the can is below the dew point. Trying to stop moisture from forming on the can is impossible because it is some very basic physical laws at work. Unfortunately, those same physical laws are affecting your windows in the winter when you get moisture forming on the surface of the glass. Your leaky inside windows are like an open invitation for your nice warm inside air to go outside...and in the process, it is drawing lots of nice warm, moist air to the storm windows. The warm air is contacting the storms and, like the can out of the refrigerator, the glass surface is below the dew point of the air inside your home...thus, condensation on the glass surface. With a single pane window, when the temperature is 0 degrees outside (F), the face of the glass inside is only about 16 degrees. At 16 degrees, it doesn't take much moisture to cause condensation on the surface of the glass. BTW, the numbers I am using are center-of-glass measurements - edge readings will be lower by several degrees. If you add a "tight" storm window, then the surface of the inside of the inside window may be about 40 degrees or so, when the outside temp is zero, but that outside storm is still going to be well below freezing. At 40 degrees, for example, it takes only about 6-1/2 grams per square meter of moisture in the air to reach the 100% RH level or dew point temperature - which is pretty close to the temperature of your windows. At that 6-1/2 grams of water per cubic meter an RH reading of only 30% at 75 degrees is sufficient to have moisture on your inside windows - at that moisture level. At 32 degrees it obviously takes even less moisture to reach 100% RH which will cause condensation and subsequently frost or ice on the storms. Ultimately, there are two things you can do to help prevent moisture from gathering on your windows first, you can attempt to increase the temperature of the windows to a mark above the dew point, and second, you can attempt to block the warm, moist air from reaching the glass. In order to raise the dew point of the windows themselves, you will have to assist your homeÂs heating system by using small fans or, even better, small forced air heaters, close to, and directly facing the glass. I suspect this is not a practical solution, except for maybe the very worst offenders. This "solution" should warm the inside glass enough to avoid moisture build-up, but at an obvious cost in your energy usage, but it may not do a thing for the water and ice build-up on the storm windows  only on the inside glass. As Guy suggested, the plastic window covering is probably the best possible "solution" for your situation. The plastic film will help to keep inside moisture away from the windows. Also, as Carol suggested, keeping blinds and curtains open will help a great deal control inside condensation, but that won't do much for icing-up storms, unfortunately.

The argument that one spacer system is inherently superior to another or all others is ripe with the possibility of misinformation, misunderstanding, and certainly a great deal of emotionalism. Each system has its proponents and its detractors. In the past, polysulfides, silicones, butyls, and other sealant or adhesive materials were used as the primary (and often only) seal for many aluminum spacer systems up to the advent of the original warm-edge spacer systems. Many of these same aluminum spacer systems have shown extensive seal failures when analyzed possibly as high as 6% - 10% seal failure rate at 10 years for some of these units. Virtually all newer spacer systems, including SuperSpacer, use a dual seal system which in the case of the SuperSpacer system includes, primarily, a hot-melt butyl sealant as the primary moisture or gas seal and an acrylic-adhesive as the primary structural seal. Unlike other systems, however, SuperSpacer is "reversed" in that it places the structural seal inside the IGU (between the lites) and the primary or moisture seal to the exterior of the structural seal. Does reversing the moisture / structural seals (compared with other systems) make SS an inferior product? No, not in the least actually SS outperforms every other system on the market, including TPS, in energy performance numbers given that Super Spacer is generally only about ½ to one degree better than TPS at the edge. The hot melt butyl primary seal used with the SuperSpacer system has a very specific application temperature range of 275º 325º. If the applied material is outside of this range, then the P1 chamber testing can be significantly reduced to as little as two to three weeks to seal failure. What happens in the field in this case? In addition, SuperSpacer allows the use of polysulfides, polyurethanes, and even silicone as the primary moisture seal. The problem is that none of those options is impervious to air and air/moisture intrusion into the airspace may be a possibility with the use of those materials. Edge Tech advertises that their system goes 80+ weeks in a P1 test. They advertise that the "metal" (stainless Steel) systems go 40+ weeks in the P1 chamber in the same marketing brochure Edge Tech also made the claim that none of the other systems tested lasted more 40 weeks. What they dont explain is that the "40+ weeks" of the metallic system was actually 80 weeks for a PIB / silicone dual seal spacer system. Some industry folks suggest that one week in a P1 chamber is equal to one year in the field while other folks suggest that one week in a P1 chamber equals one week in a P1 chamber - and nothing else should be inferred. However, after 80 weeks or so in the P1 chamber the bond between the glass and the seal begins to break down possibly as much from glass deterioration as from spacer material failure. Am I slamming SuperSpacer? Again, not at all. When manufactured to strict quality control standards and exactly as specified by the manufacturer, then SuperSpacer really is a very good, even superior, product. What Edge Tech does really well is market their product(s). They have what appears to be an excellent, even superior, product; but they also have a marketing program that totally kicks butt. They have opened areas of discussion that really didnt exist prior to their introduction of itthey have emphasized SSs inherent advantages while ignoring any potential disadvantages (which is what marketing folks do, of course). They have invented new ways to categorize window spacer systems in some ways they have introduced the idea of IGU spacers to the general public. Energy performance and durability are what these things are ultimately about. How do they compare? At the edge of the IG, SuperSpacer is the best performer with TPS (Thermoplastic Spacer) second by about a degree or so. Cardinal Glasss XL stainless steel system (there are a couple of different ones on the market, but Cardinal is the largest manufacturer) is about two degrees or so lower than TPS a bit better than Swiggle. Drop another degree or so to Intercept and about another 6º to 8º for aluminum. Ultimately, using a LowE coating will have a much greater effect on the overall unit temperature performance than does the choice of which one of the "warm edge" systems. Of course using a LowE coating with SuperSpacer and with Swiggle still keeps SS a couple of degrees warmer at the edge, but these are also ratings of the "raw" IGU so what happens when the unit is in a frame? Well, how about this for thought from a joint Canadian and European study on the performance of various edge systems: "Conclusion The thermal resistance of the spacer bar material influences the glass temperature at the edge-of-glass region of an IG unit. Based on the limited testing performed at IRC and computer modeling at EMPA Switzerland, the spacer bar with the highest thermal resistance shows the warmest glass temperature on the warm side and the coldest temperature on the cold side of the glass at a distance 5 to 60 mm from the edge of the IG unit. But the effect of the type of spacer bar on the overall thermal resistance (and tote heat loss) through windows depends heavily on the window design and material. Therefore, the full impact of thermal characteristics of the spacer bar material on the thermal resistance and the condensation resistance of a window should only be determined by testing complete window assemblies." Heck of a concept testing complete systems rather than independent component testing to determine how the system will perform. Durability some folks will suggest the idea that desiccant is used in most spacer systems in order to hide seal failure. While it is correct that the desiccant used in these systems could absorb moisture in an IGU so that for many years there would be no evidence of a seal failure, a catastrophic seal failure, like those seen in some older single-seal, organic-seal, IGUs would overwhelm the desiccant relatively quickly and could cause the window to fog as well but this is much less likely with todays dual seal systems be they non-metallic, metallic, or otherwise. But what if there is a seal failure? Well, the desiccant used in these systems (except TPS which includes only 4% desiccant in its structure) could very well prevent moisture from forming inside the IGU for many years even with a minor seal leak and to play devils advocate, so what? Well, if the window was argon filled (which is true of half of IGUs manufactured today), then the argon will escape possibly to be replaced with air. But, if only half of IGUs today have argon fill then what about a window with no argon that has a "leak" as noted what happens to the energy performance? Basically nothing. There is virtually no difference in the energy performance numbers of an IG unit sealed or unsealed. If the desiccant was sufficient to maintain the interior without condensation, then the LowE coating would be safe as well. As I said though, I am playing devils advocate and real world numbers as well as lab testing are very specific that seal failure numbers in newer systems are extremely low. Kommerling TPS claims that they have never had a failure. EdgeTech claims less than 1% over 20 years and Cardinal advertises less than a quarter of a percent using XL for 20 years. Swiggle is higher, Intercept is much higher. Depending on the source of the information, Intercept may be as high as 6% (or more) at 10 years failure rate. This is primarily a manufacturer rather than a product issue, but it has become a very serious problem for several major window companies. And speaking of argon, filling an IGU to 100% with argon will improve performance by 16%. 50% argon fill improves performance by 8%. 25% argon fill improves performance by 4%. Notice the trend?

It isn't the condensation that I am concerned about. The condensation is on the outside of the windows due to weather. What I am concerned about are the suction cup marks. I've been told this is considered a defect in the glass if they don't wash off. The suction cup marks do NOT wash off. I also have numerous scratches and nics in the glass as well as a reside that will not wash off. Our first set of sashes were declared defective by a Pella service tech, these are the second set. Now we are being told different things by different Pella people, the first service tech said the second set is also defective but he no longer works for the company. Now the service people don't want to come right out say it is a defect but they aren't saying it isn't. We are concerned that in a few years they might show even when there isn't condensation. This issue has been going on for almost 2 years with no resolution. There are fine lines that look almost like spider webs in the glass that can only be seen on bright sunny days. Since the weather has been wintery and not much sunshine it is difficult for the techs to see what I am talking about but on a bright sunny day the windows look horrible. If you have any knowledge about the suction cup marks or the "spider web" type of marks in the glass I would like to have an opinion.

After reading all the comments above, Its imperative that I make mine. I owned a window tinting company for 22 years. Of all the window manufactures from 1981 to 1999 when we built our custom home, Marvin was the only true quality competitor to Hurd. We chose Hurd when our home was built in 1999. All of our windows are in great shape to this date except a few cranks have worn out and been replaced. All of our HURDS have 1" thick thermo-pane glass units. Ours are aluminum exterior clad w/ pine wood interiors. I tinted them all in 1999 when we moved in and just had all the tinting redone in 2019. All of our HURD windows are 5' to 6' tall each and very wide. we live in the country. I'm totally shocked at all the above comments.