Hello everyone,
I would like to ask for your personal opinions.
The starting point is that we basically want to build a KFW 55 house, definitely with a 10 kWp photovoltaic system on the roof, but for cost recovery reasons, without a battery storage system (which I do not want to discuss here).
We were offered an upgrade to a KFW 40 house for 11,000 euros – in such a case, of course, all insulation and related measures would be improved.
For KFW 40+, the only thing missing would then be a battery storage system (which I originally did not want).
My thought now is that I could upgrade the house directly to KFW 40+ by paying the additional 11,000 euros plus purchasing a battery storage system for about 6,000 euros gross. That would result in an extra cost of 17,000 euros.
Compared to KFW 55, however, I would receive an additional 10,000-euro repayment bonus from the KFW bank as well as about 1,200 euros in VAT refund for the battery, so the effective extra cost in my case from KFW 55 to KFW 40+ would be around 5,800 euros.
While the battery no longer pays off in the end, you can consider the money simply as the price for a better efficiency rating, leading to lower energy consumption and a generally higher quality house – plus you can use more of your self-generated electricity yourself.
What do you think of this calculation and idea? Have I overlooked something important, and in your opinion, is the additional financial effort to achieve KFW 40+ worthwhile?
Are there any other arguments for or against the KFW 40+ upgrade from your point of view?
I’m looking forward to your thoughts and hope for an engaging discussion!
Best regards,
Ralf
I would like to ask for your personal opinions.
The starting point is that we basically want to build a KFW 55 house, definitely with a 10 kWp photovoltaic system on the roof, but for cost recovery reasons, without a battery storage system (which I do not want to discuss here).
We were offered an upgrade to a KFW 40 house for 11,000 euros – in such a case, of course, all insulation and related measures would be improved.
For KFW 40+, the only thing missing would then be a battery storage system (which I originally did not want).
My thought now is that I could upgrade the house directly to KFW 40+ by paying the additional 11,000 euros plus purchasing a battery storage system for about 6,000 euros gross. That would result in an extra cost of 17,000 euros.
Compared to KFW 55, however, I would receive an additional 10,000-euro repayment bonus from the KFW bank as well as about 1,200 euros in VAT refund for the battery, so the effective extra cost in my case from KFW 55 to KFW 40+ would be around 5,800 euros.
While the battery no longer pays off in the end, you can consider the money simply as the price for a better efficiency rating, leading to lower energy consumption and a generally higher quality house – plus you can use more of your self-generated electricity yourself.
What do you think of this calculation and idea? Have I overlooked something important, and in your opinion, is the additional financial effort to achieve KFW 40+ worthwhile?
Are there any other arguments for or against the KFW 40+ upgrade from your point of view?
I’m looking forward to your thoughts and hope for an engaging discussion!
Best regards,
Ralf
S
stefanc845 Feb 2017 21:23What you shouldn’t forget to include are the additional financing costs if you’re not paying for the house entirely with equity. Despite the low interest rates, for example, an extra 6,000€ in costs means about 3,000€ more in interest, bringing the total to around 9,000€ more. At least that’s what my calculation showed, and the result really surprised me.
By the way, we still don’t know whether to go for KfW 55, KfW 40, or no KfW standard at all. I think almost everyone faces this decision beforehand. Unless you build with companies that simply cover the house with a lot of petroleum-based materials, which is then marketed as KfW 55 and labeled "ecological." [emoji6]
By the way, we still don’t know whether to go for KfW 55, KfW 40, or no KfW standard at all. I think almost everyone faces this decision beforehand. Unless you build with companies that simply cover the house with a lot of petroleum-based materials, which is then marketed as KfW 55 and labeled "ecological." [emoji6]
Roppo schrieb:
So for me, the key question is: when does something like this become worthwhile?That is ultimately hard to say because it’s complex.
Some calculate just a few dollars of annual energy savings. But this is a simplified view. No one considers that a lower heating load also needs to be served, meaning you can save thousands by spending less on the heat pump and also thousands less on drilling if a ground-source heat pump with a probe is desired.
It’s similar to the heat pump versus gas discussion. Gas is currently very cheap to operate, but the system comparison often doesn’t take into account the chimney and space requirements. The chimney aspect is fine if you want a stove, but if you don’t want one, you save several thousand because you don’t need to invest in a chimney with a heat pump system. So there’s no point in arguing over a few dollars for chimney sweeping.
Hello Roppo,
for KfW 55, for example, a controlled residential ventilation system with heat recovery is not yet required. If you need all of that including photovoltaics, storage, and so on on top, then €11,000 can never be the case. Or did I misunderstand your statement “As for all the technology, which is probably most likely to fail early on, it is already fully installed in my KfW 55 house”?
In my opinion, the package of controlled residential ventilation, photovoltaics, and storage is not available for €10,000 more repayment subsidy plus €5,800 additional cost...
for KfW 55, for example, a controlled residential ventilation system with heat recovery is not yet required. If you need all of that including photovoltaics, storage, and so on on top, then €11,000 can never be the case. Or did I misunderstand your statement “As for all the technology, which is probably most likely to fail early on, it is already fully installed in my KfW 55 house”?
In my opinion, the package of controlled residential ventilation, photovoltaics, and storage is not available for €10,000 more repayment subsidy plus €5,800 additional cost...
FHW6Neu schrieb:
Hello Roppo,
for example, KfW 55 does not require a controlled residential ventilation system with heat recovery, and if you include all of that along with photovoltaic, storage, etc., the cost can never be just €11,000 (about $11,700), or did I misunderstand your statement "As for all the technology, which is most likely to fail prematurely, it is already fully installed in my KfW 55 house"?
In my opinion, the package including controlled residential ventilation, photovoltaic, and storage is not possible for the extra €5,800 (about $6,200) plus the €10,000 (about $10,600) repayment subsidy... Yes, you misunderstood. Although controlled ventilation is not usually required for KfW 55, my general contractor already installs all the technical features required for a KfW 40 house in a KfW 55. Of course, the photovoltaic system is additional from us, so for KfW 40+ really only what I mentioned in the previous post is missing.
Thanks again for the reminder about the financing costs, Stefan. That’s something I had already considered. Since the project is financed, the €3,000 (about $3,200) in interest is definitely a significant amount!
Similar topics