ᐅ Is a Gas Condensing Boiler a Practical Choice for New Single-Family Homes Under the 2016 Energy Saving Regulation?

Created on: 6 Jan 2019 13:18
B
Bob79
Hello everyone,
we are planning to build a single-family house with underfloor heating (about 200 m² (2,150 sq ft) for 4 people). The energy standard will comply with the 2016 Energy Saving Ordinance, not a KfW standard. The walls will be made of thermal insulation bricks, 36.5 cm (14.4 inches) thick with a thermal conductivity (lambda) of 0.08, and triple glazing with a U-value of 0.8. The builder’s specifications include a gas condensing boiler (Vaillant ecoTecplus with a seasonal efficiency of 109%), a solar collector system (7.53 m² (81 sq ft)), and a combined storage tank (600/170 liters (158/45 gallons)). The builder recommends this setup. They advise against using a heat pump. However, I am now uncertain, because a friend strongly recommends installing a heat pump for underfloor heating. I would appreciate any answers, recommendations, and experiences.
L
Lumpi_LE
7 Jan 2019 09:17
If you don’t want to deal with your heating system, it’s best to choose gas. Otherwise, you can say that the initial investment and running costs are roughly the same. No one can predict how electricity and gas prices will develop in 10 years.
Mycraft7 Jan 2019 09:26
Well, one can extrapolate a bit. Over the past 10 years, gas prices have remained largely stable. Considering Nord Stream 1 and 2, this is expected to continue for the next 10 years as well.

berny7 Jan 2019 09:59
That may be true. However, most of the gas comes from Russia, right? If someone decides to cut the supply, the situation in Germany could quickly become difficult. For electricity to power a heat pump, a) you also have suppliers from stable countries, and b) you can at least generate a small part yourself, both throughout Germany and on your own roof. So there are arguments for and against both options. In that sense, the earlier suggestion of a pellet heating system was meant humorously but isn’t entirely without merit... :-)
Mycraft7 Jan 2019 10:42
In Russia, no one will change course; gas and oil have been practically the only sources of foreign currency income for the last 20 years. There is no end in sight. Nord Stream 1 and 2 are largely financed, constructed, and later operated by Russia. Therefore, upon completion, more gas will flow to Germany rather than less. From a commercial perspective, this means either a stable or decreasing price, since the suppliers remain the same but the supply increases.
C
Caspar2020
7 Jan 2019 10:50
Mycraft schrieb:
In a commercial sense, this means either a stable or decreasing price. The suppliers remain the same, but there is more stock available.

In particular, the supply chain is significantly more stable, as certain problematic regions are being bypassed.
N
Nordlys
7 Jan 2019 10:58
The air-to-water heat pumps are powered by electricity. In Germany, a large amount of electricity is generated in the north by wind power but goes to waste because whenever a transmission line is planned to carry power from us to you in the south, local citizen initiatives immediately stand ready to block it. Coal power is no longer an option either, as activists chain themselves to trees and raise alarms, and no one dares to remove them by force. As a result, air-to-water heat pumps end up being powered mainly by electricity from gas-fired power plants, some hydropower, and a significant share of French nuclear power. Great, isn’t it? We are all so green. Hypocrisy to the power of ten. Karsten