ᐅ Building to the Energy Saving Ordinance 2016 or to KfW55 standards
Created on: 16 Jun 2021 13:08
R
Raiweired
Hello,
I have been following the forum for a few weeks and have an important question before signing the fixed-price contract.
I am building a turnkey city villa (catalog home) with an air-to-water heat pump, living area approximately 118 sqm (1272 sq ft), and the planning contract has already been awarded. The general contractor offers a standard build according to the Energy Saving Ordinance 2016 and charges an additional approximately 13,000.00 Euro for upgrading to KfW55 standards, which includes improved insulation under the slab and ceiling above the upper floor, as well as exchanging Poroton T12 bricks for Poroton T9 bricks.
The subsidy for KfW55 is 18,000.00 Euro, and the subsidy for KfW55 EE is up to 26,250.00 Euro.
If I build to KfW55 standards, I expect additional costs of 13,000.00 Euro for the improved insulation, 2,000.00 Euro for the energy consultant, and 10,000.00 Euro for a decentralized ventilation system. That would use up the subsidy entirely. According to my research, the annual savings in electricity costs for the air-to-water heat pump compared to the Energy Saving Ordinance 2016 are only about 100.00 Euro per year.
Of course, the higher market value potentially achieved when selling the house speaks in favor of KfW55, but I do not plan to sell.
Otherwise, the savings compared to the Energy Saving Ordinance 2016 to KfW55 are only marginal. Additional ventilation also brings maintenance costs. With KfW55, the building envelope is sealed so tightly that fresh air must be supplied again via fans. You pay for the increased insulation and then for the ventilation needed to compensate. Houses built to the Energy Saving Ordinance 2016 are not as airtight and do not require ventilation systems.
I am opening this topic for discussion.
I look forward to hearing the various opinions.
Regards, Raiweired
I have been following the forum for a few weeks and have an important question before signing the fixed-price contract.
I am building a turnkey city villa (catalog home) with an air-to-water heat pump, living area approximately 118 sqm (1272 sq ft), and the planning contract has already been awarded. The general contractor offers a standard build according to the Energy Saving Ordinance 2016 and charges an additional approximately 13,000.00 Euro for upgrading to KfW55 standards, which includes improved insulation under the slab and ceiling above the upper floor, as well as exchanging Poroton T12 bricks for Poroton T9 bricks.
The subsidy for KfW55 is 18,000.00 Euro, and the subsidy for KfW55 EE is up to 26,250.00 Euro.
If I build to KfW55 standards, I expect additional costs of 13,000.00 Euro for the improved insulation, 2,000.00 Euro for the energy consultant, and 10,000.00 Euro for a decentralized ventilation system. That would use up the subsidy entirely. According to my research, the annual savings in electricity costs for the air-to-water heat pump compared to the Energy Saving Ordinance 2016 are only about 100.00 Euro per year.
Of course, the higher market value potentially achieved when selling the house speaks in favor of KfW55, but I do not plan to sell.
Otherwise, the savings compared to the Energy Saving Ordinance 2016 to KfW55 are only marginal. Additional ventilation also brings maintenance costs. With KfW55, the building envelope is sealed so tightly that fresh air must be supplied again via fans. You pay for the increased insulation and then for the ventilation needed to compensate. Houses built to the Energy Saving Ordinance 2016 are not as airtight and do not require ventilation systems.
I am opening this topic for discussion.
I look forward to hearing the various opinions.
Regards, Raiweired
I believe that the perception of indoor climate is very individual. One person might not notice anything at all, while another is very sensitive. Even if the effect is purely placebo, that is still fine.
Another aspect that played a role for us was the long-term issue. I am convinced that an external thermal insulation composite system (ETICS) loses its insulation properties after 30 or 40 years due to greater exposure to weather. By that time, it will certainly be classified as hazardous waste and will need to be disposed of at high cost during any potential renovation. I am 30 years old and expect that my facade will have to be renovated once within my lifetime. A solid brick wall, which achieves its insulation properties through wall thickness (plus air gaps and internal insulation), does not have this problem.
Another aspect that played a role for us was the long-term issue. I am convinced that an external thermal insulation composite system (ETICS) loses its insulation properties after 30 or 40 years due to greater exposure to weather. By that time, it will certainly be classified as hazardous waste and will need to be disposed of at high cost during any potential renovation. I am 30 years old and expect that my facade will have to be renovated once within my lifetime. A solid brick wall, which achieves its insulation properties through wall thickness (plus air gaps and internal insulation), does not have this problem.
R
RotorMotor9 Jul 2021 10:00hampshire schrieb:
There is a reason why people feel very comfortable in some houses while others are perceived as "stuffy." This relates to both the behavior of the occupants and to building physics. Factors such as wall construction and the connection between different materials (regardless of which) as well as the technology used for temperature and humidity control play a significant role. Reducing the issue to a single building material (wood or masonry) is just as simplistic as reducing it to "airtightness."
What I don’t like is this oversimplification combined with the fundamental claim that "everything else is nonsense."
Certainly, different sides use metaphors that work more or less well.
Referring to the process by which a material balances moisture — by absorbing moisture and then releasing it back into the interior (not through the wall to the outside) — as "breathing" is a useful illustration, though taken literally it clearly doesn't hold up. If I remember correctly, I asked for measurements and data a long time ago. But you apparently prefer to keep talking about breathing walls and the feel of the room. That's a pity.
H
hampshire9 Jul 2021 10:07No, not from breathable walls, but from the ability to balance moisture and maintain comfortable air quality. My device cannot measure CO2 ppm; it measures an AQI. I confused the two.
N
nordanney9 Jul 2021 10:35mete111 schrieb:
I am convinced that an external thermal insulation composite system (ETICS) loses its insulating properties after 30 or 40 years because it is more exposed to weathering. Why? There is a 10mm (0.4 inch) layer of plaster on top. The insulation boards themselves are not directly exposed to the weather.
mete111 schrieb:
By then, it will definitely be classified as hazardous waste. Why? Mineral wool, phenolic foam, and others are not hazardous waste and are not harmful to the environment.
mete111 schrieb:
I am 30 years old and expect that my facade will need renovation once during my lifetime. A solid brick wall that achieves its insulation through sheer wall thickness (plus air cavities or internal insulation) does not have this issue. What exactly do you mean by “renovation”? Even the facade on a monolithic construction needs renovation over time. You can look at many historic buildings and their plastered facades to see this.
Similar topics