Hello,
We are starting to get really frustrated... every builder tells us something different...
We want to build a 130sqm (1,399 sq ft) KfW 70 house with the living room facing south, and we are unsure whether to choose gas or an air source heat pump. Some providers, at almost the same price level, offer us air source heat pumps and claim that the annual costs are significantly (30%) lower compared to gas, while others doubt this.
We understand that insulation with gas/solar systems is usually better because an air source heat pump boosts efficiency more towards KfW 70 standards compared to gas/solar, which might argue in favor of gas. An air source heat pump might fail somewhat sooner, and in case of problems, you can usually get quick and competent local support with gas. With air source heat pumps, there could be more difficulties. Additionally, the noise of air source heat pumps (in our case about 3 meters (10 feet) from the neighbor) is not insignificant. Some say that sooner or later, everyone ends up having issues with neighbors for this reason.
We are interested in air source heat pumps with storage tanks from these providers: Vaillant, Mitsubishi Zubadan, and Rotex.
What we are really curious about is the annual cost for heating and hot water with both systems.
We live near Kassel.
What should we choose, and what would be cost-effective TODAY? What is your opinion on Vaillant?
Regards
Gigi
We are starting to get really frustrated... every builder tells us something different...
We want to build a 130sqm (1,399 sq ft) KfW 70 house with the living room facing south, and we are unsure whether to choose gas or an air source heat pump. Some providers, at almost the same price level, offer us air source heat pumps and claim that the annual costs are significantly (30%) lower compared to gas, while others doubt this.
We understand that insulation with gas/solar systems is usually better because an air source heat pump boosts efficiency more towards KfW 70 standards compared to gas/solar, which might argue in favor of gas. An air source heat pump might fail somewhat sooner, and in case of problems, you can usually get quick and competent local support with gas. With air source heat pumps, there could be more difficulties. Additionally, the noise of air source heat pumps (in our case about 3 meters (10 feet) from the neighbor) is not insignificant. Some say that sooner or later, everyone ends up having issues with neighbors for this reason.
We are interested in air source heat pumps with storage tanks from these providers: Vaillant, Mitsubishi Zubadan, and Rotex.
What we are really curious about is the annual cost for heating and hot water with both systems.
We live near Kassel.
What should we choose, and what would be cost-effective TODAY? What is your opinion on Vaillant?
Regards
Gigi
R
R.Hotzenplotz25 Mar 2018 22:32Alex85 schrieb:
Just make up your mind already.Everything was decided until a few months later I was told that what I had envisioned wasn’t actually feasible. I think it’s normal to reconsider at that point. However, I agree with you that I first need to find out tomorrow how much more expensive it will be. In the end, I definitely don’t want to pay an extra 2–3 thousand euros for it.
R
R.Hotzenplotz26 Mar 2018 19:55It looks like the installer will simply position the flat-plate collectors at a 15° angle. This will probably result in about 100 kWh less output per year. But that doesn’t really matter. The entire solar battery system is mainly there to satisfy regulatory requirements, not for economic reasons.
Hopefully, we'll be satisfied with this solution. The brine heat pump wouldn’t have been much more expensive. However, there is a lack of confidence in it. The installer also confirmed to me today that hardly anyone actually signs those 400 euro maintenance contracts. That would surely have changed the situation, but now it will probably go ahead as planned.
It might be different if he calls tomorrow and says that, for this or that reason, it’s not feasible without additional costs.
Hopefully, we'll be satisfied with this solution. The brine heat pump wouldn’t have been much more expensive. However, there is a lack of confidence in it. The installer also confirmed to me today that hardly anyone actually signs those 400 euro maintenance contracts. That would surely have changed the situation, but now it will probably go ahead as planned.
It might be different if he calls tomorrow and says that, for this or that reason, it’s not feasible without additional costs.
Saruss schrieb:
...but I have never heard of any long-term problems, and the technology is quite mature and has been used for a long time Well, frozen probes, excessive extraction rates, soils that no longer fully regenerate... those issues do exist, but they wouldn’t stop me from using this technology. And yes, many of these problems can probably be avoided with proper planning and installation, but most people aren’t deeply involved enough to spot planning or execution mistakes. However, the same applies to other energy sources as well...
R.Hotzenplotz schrieb:
The brine heat pump wouldn’t have been much more expensive. But the trust in it is missing. A slap in the face for anyone who would have to pay a surcharge of $10,000 or more [emoji23] From my point of view, a huge mistake given the circumstances, but you have to feel comfortable and trust your system technology, not me [emoji4] I’m curious to see how things develop.
R
R.Hotzenplotz26 Mar 2018 20:36I believe it is difficult to assess this in advance. After all, there are plenty of cases where a heat pump does not operate efficiently. Even the energy consultant who prepared the heat demand calculation for the installer recommended a gas heating system to me. He deals with these matters daily. However, if he calls me tomorrow and points out any problems or additional costs, I would still commission the heat pump without losing sleep over it.
Similar topics