ᐅ District Heating KfW55 - KfW70 Costs for Ventilation and Exhaust Systems
Created on: 1 Sep 2017 21:35
Z
zizzi
Hello everyone,
we are planning a bungalow.
We initially decided on KfW 70 because the payback period for KfW 55 is relatively long (the equipment that needs to be installed requires maintenance, can break down, and partly also consumes electricity). The highway is approximately 500 m (550 yards) from the property and despite a noise protection forest, it is still quite loud. Therefore, we want to plan a ventilation system, probably without heat recovery (ventilation with closed windows).
Today I found out that the property where we want to build is supplied with district heating.
The costs are as follows: one-time fee €9,500, annual basic price for 2017 calculated at €450 (subject to change), energy costs at 5.2 Ct./kWh (subject to change). The formulas for price adjustments are included in the contract (not yet signed) but they are not easily understandable for everyone.
There is an advantage here: the primary energy factor is 0.43 (certified and valid until 2024). According to the energy supplier (municipal utility), the representative told me that KfW 55 standards can only be met with additional thermal insulation compared to KfW 70 (without further measures).
What are your opinions on the resulting maintenance costs, experiences with district heating, and KfW 70 versus KfW 55?
we are planning a bungalow.
We initially decided on KfW 70 because the payback period for KfW 55 is relatively long (the equipment that needs to be installed requires maintenance, can break down, and partly also consumes electricity). The highway is approximately 500 m (550 yards) from the property and despite a noise protection forest, it is still quite loud. Therefore, we want to plan a ventilation system, probably without heat recovery (ventilation with closed windows).
Today I found out that the property where we want to build is supplied with district heating.
The costs are as follows: one-time fee €9,500, annual basic price for 2017 calculated at €450 (subject to change), energy costs at 5.2 Ct./kWh (subject to change). The formulas for price adjustments are included in the contract (not yet signed) but they are not easily understandable for everyone.
There is an advantage here: the primary energy factor is 0.43 (certified and valid until 2024). According to the energy supplier (municipal utility), the representative told me that KfW 55 standards can only be met with additional thermal insulation compared to KfW 70 (without further measures).
What are your opinions on the resulting maintenance costs, experiences with district heating, and KfW 70 versus KfW 55?
W
winnetou782 Sep 2017 23:20Nordlys schrieb:
Oh, Persians... Your German is clearly better than my Persian.[emoji1]
I'm satisfied with these devices. Good enough for us, no chance of misuse since there's nothing to operate, no germs, no pipes, nothing to maintain. Simply put. KarstenOne ventilator per window, I read somewhere that there should be at least two ventilators per window.
Nordlys schrieb:
First, because it is cheaper. Second, because it is technically simple and therefore less prone to problems. Third, because "keep it simple" is a mindset that many people appreciate. (You can drive a Tesla or a Dacia; which one is ultimately more environmentally friendly from production to recycling is not certain).
Regarding arifas.
In our bathroom, we have installed an exhaust fan by Helios, with variable speed, humidity sensor, and filter. Additionally, each window in the house has a trickle vent from Regel Air. That’s all.
KarstenThanks!Our second car is a Dacia 7-seater [emoji23]. I love that vehicle. It drives well, has plenty of space, and costs just a fraction to purchase compared to other 7-seaters [emoji56].
These trickle vents are currently in our offer as well. And there is a fan planned for the main bathroom. I’m just considering whether a decentralized ventilation system would be more suitable for the bedrooms and bathrooms. A central system will probably be too expensive. I’m not familiar with window-frame trickle vents and don’t know if they deliver what they promise. But decentralized ventilation with heat recovery in the bedroom might be too noisy?!
There is some mixing happening here as well. Central systems (which require a high investment) are available with and without heat recovery, so the question of why not use heat recovery is quite valid. It is not rocket science but purely mechanical. The additional investment cost is minimal. Heat recovery easily compensates for electricity costs, but not so much the initial investment. It mainly provides comfort.
Decentralized units might be perceived as unattractive and are often described as noisy. However, their total cost is roughly half that of a central system.
Decentralized units might be perceived as unattractive and are often described as noisy. However, their total cost is roughly half that of a central system.
...and if the system also includes moisture recovery, nothing stands in the way of a healthy and energy-efficient indoor climate.
That it is more expensive goes without saying, but it is consistently implemented!
The alternative is relying solely on window ventilation without a ventilation system or trickle vents, which I recommend if architects advise homeowners to cut costs on construction work and suggest half-baked ventilation concepts.
Window ventilation has worked for decades, and if done consistently, it also prevents mold growth.
That it is more expensive goes without saying, but it is consistently implemented!
The alternative is relying solely on window ventilation without a ventilation system or trickle vents, which I recommend if architects advise homeowners to cut costs on construction work and suggest half-baked ventilation concepts.
Window ventilation has worked for decades, and if done consistently, it also prevents mold growth.
Similar topics