ᐅ Solid masonry house built stone by stone, the ecological timber house, or...

Hello dear forum readers,

We are looking for some guidance to help us decide what and how we want to build.

A solid masonry house, ecological wooden house, or perhaps a house from a well-known builder on the market who also constructs to KfW 55 standard but uses materials like plastic, glass wool, and polystyrene in the wall assembly.

Our current favorite is a wooden house builder with a good reputation in the region, but who also expects appropriate payment. After a longer consultation in a show home of a large builder, we were advised to think carefully about what really matters to us in a house. Should the building envelope be ecologically flawless, or is it acceptable to use somewhat cheaper materials while still achieving the same performance and subsidies? Obviously, that saves money... but how did you decide?

We would appreciate any tips and remain

Best regards

dorosasa

Ecology is also important to me, although I’m not an environmental fanatic. That’s why I feel good about a solid masonry house. Aerated concrete is not toxic; it’s simply stone, cement, lime, sand, and air. The exterior plaster is mineral-based as well. There is no need for insulation with polystyrene. Ok, I believe there is polystyrene under the screed. But the Knauf insulation used in the roof is purely mineral and environmentally acceptable. Of course, our windows are made of plastic, probably PVC profiles, but wooden windows are simply too expensive for me. The interior plaster, made of gypsum and lime-cement, is harmless, as is the drywall on the ceiling. The house has a certain charm, and this building method is cost-effective. 110 m² (1,184 sq ft) for 163,000. I can overlook compromises with windows, for example. Karsten

Hello!
Our house was also built by a local builder. It has now become eco-friendly, which we quite like. At first, you focus on the price, then on the details. He was not the cheapest option, but the overall concept was a good fit.

dorosasa schrieb:
Solid masonry house, stone by stone, the ecological wooden house

The association "ecological" = "wooden house" seems to me as naive as it is popular. I’m not sure if it’s a belief in the goodness of plant fibers or if city kids imagine wood from freely roaming sheep in their minds ;-)

Energy-saving regulations / KfW standards mean that even with wooden houses you either have insulation layers in between or material thicknesses that, in terms of resource consumption, are far from being "eco."

Stone by stone (and nothing else, so monolithic and especially without glued-on pollutant accumulators) leads to aerated concrete, or for example pumice (e.g., KLB climate light block, or Bisotherm). Sand-lime brick is also good; personally, I prefer it rarely used today as a 2DF (twice brick thickness) visible masonry (and cavity wall) construction.

Incidentally, aerated concrete is now also offered for "solid roofs" – if you are looking for an alternative to the "yellow turf" there as well ;-)

---

https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/

To me, ecological means low in pollutants, minimal resource consumption during production, short transportation distances, and so on.

Honestly, I haven’t given it much thought. Our builder claims to be ecological, but I’m somewhat skeptical. However, the craftsmen do come from the local area.

The first point made by @haydee is quite accurate.
Therefore, wooden houses are often not environmentally friendly, as the wood rarely comes from the local area.