Hello everyone
We are currently taking the next steps toward building our own home. We have looked at several prefabricated houses and spoken with sales consultants from various providers. Based on this, we have created a top 5 list. Now I want to contact these 5 companies with our floor plan and the standards we want. This way, I hope the list will be reduced by 2-3 providers after receiving the first offers.
In my inquiry, I want to roughly outline what we have in mind. KFW55, KFW40, or KFW40+ is not yet very important—it will be one of these standards. Our floor plan does not differ much from the standard layouts offered by prefab house suppliers. Something like a simple 8x10 meter (26x33 feet) rectangular shape... To be able to compare the 5 offers reasonably, I want them all to be as similar as possible. Therefore, I would like to specify the heating system.
Now the question is, what is the right choice… I assume this is partly a matter of philosophy? The options are an air-to-water heat pump, an air-to-air heat pump, or a ground-source (geothermal) heat pump. I assume most have one of these three systems combined with solar panels on the roof.
My first thought was this: an air-to-air heat pump, since we would also have an automatic ventilation system in the house, making manual airing less or unnecessary. However, I have learned that all KFW-certified houses are so well insulated that they almost always have automatic ventilation. So this argument is no longer valid. Nevertheless, I still find the air-to-air heat pump interesting. We also want to install a wood stove in the living room. With an air-to-air heat pump, the indoor air is circulated throughout the house, so I could benefit from the wood stove’s heat everywhere, right? Perhaps even with heat recovery, which is usually included.
Another advantage of the air-to-air heat pump would be that if it ever gets too warm, we could install a fixed air conditioning unit somewhere in the house, and the whole house would benefit. The built-in cooling systems in these heat pumps usually aren’t as effective as promised.
Is it true that an air-to-air heat pump cannot provide domestic hot water? Then a second system would be needed just for hot water, which means more costs, two systems to maintain, and more space taken up. In the forum, I mostly see air-to-water heat pumps mentioned, probably combined with underfloor heating. That seems to be the most popular system. Is there a particular reason for this?
Geothermal heating combined with a heat pump seems to be the most efficient. But then I would also have underfloor heating, right? We actually didn’t want underfloor heating, but as I’m writing this, I’m starting to convince myself toward geothermal or air-to-water heat pumps…
How did you make your decision and why? Somehow, I don’t fully trust the salespeople, since they want to sell what makes more money, right? And since I’m not very technical in this area, I’m hoping to benefit from your experience.
Best regards Andreas_79
We are currently taking the next steps toward building our own home. We have looked at several prefabricated houses and spoken with sales consultants from various providers. Based on this, we have created a top 5 list. Now I want to contact these 5 companies with our floor plan and the standards we want. This way, I hope the list will be reduced by 2-3 providers after receiving the first offers.
In my inquiry, I want to roughly outline what we have in mind. KFW55, KFW40, or KFW40+ is not yet very important—it will be one of these standards. Our floor plan does not differ much from the standard layouts offered by prefab house suppliers. Something like a simple 8x10 meter (26x33 feet) rectangular shape... To be able to compare the 5 offers reasonably, I want them all to be as similar as possible. Therefore, I would like to specify the heating system.
Now the question is, what is the right choice… I assume this is partly a matter of philosophy? The options are an air-to-water heat pump, an air-to-air heat pump, or a ground-source (geothermal) heat pump. I assume most have one of these three systems combined with solar panels on the roof.
My first thought was this: an air-to-air heat pump, since we would also have an automatic ventilation system in the house, making manual airing less or unnecessary. However, I have learned that all KFW-certified houses are so well insulated that they almost always have automatic ventilation. So this argument is no longer valid. Nevertheless, I still find the air-to-air heat pump interesting. We also want to install a wood stove in the living room. With an air-to-air heat pump, the indoor air is circulated throughout the house, so I could benefit from the wood stove’s heat everywhere, right? Perhaps even with heat recovery, which is usually included.
Another advantage of the air-to-air heat pump would be that if it ever gets too warm, we could install a fixed air conditioning unit somewhere in the house, and the whole house would benefit. The built-in cooling systems in these heat pumps usually aren’t as effective as promised.
Is it true that an air-to-air heat pump cannot provide domestic hot water? Then a second system would be needed just for hot water, which means more costs, two systems to maintain, and more space taken up. In the forum, I mostly see air-to-water heat pumps mentioned, probably combined with underfloor heating. That seems to be the most popular system. Is there a particular reason for this?
Geothermal heating combined with a heat pump seems to be the most efficient. But then I would also have underfloor heating, right? We actually didn’t want underfloor heating, but as I’m writing this, I’m starting to convince myself toward geothermal or air-to-water heat pumps…
How did you make your decision and why? Somehow, I don’t fully trust the salespeople, since they want to sell what makes more money, right? And since I’m not very technical in this area, I’m hoping to benefit from your experience.
Best regards Andreas_79
Myrna_Loy schrieb:
No, apples and pears. But keep justifying your outdoor space heater disguised as a stove. 😀And you call your single-family house an environmentally friendly measure. Hypocrisy is not a virtue. You won’t become chairperson of the Annalena fan club that way. 8-)
M
Myrna_Loy31 Jul 2021 09:48Acof1978 schrieb:
And you consider your single-family house as an environmentally friendly measure. Hypocrisy is no virtue. You won’t become the chairperson of the Annalena fan club with that 😎 You really have no inclination to think in a nuanced way, do you? Otherwise, you would know that renovation has a better ecological balance than building new high-rises in rural areas. But that has nothing to do with the topic of heating, so we should leave this silly argument behind.
Myrna_Loy schrieb:
You don’t have the ability to think in a nuanced way, do you? Otherwise, you would know that renovating is better for the ecological balance than building new high-rises in rural areas. But this has nothing to do with the topic of heating, so let’s leave this pointless argument behind. I fully agree. It is also said that electric cars are environmentally friendly. However, if you look closer, you quickly realize: "Electric cars are only environmentally friendly if...". That’s why I won’t let a layperson speak badly about our fireplace when everything has already been discussed and planned with a fireplace and heating specialist (over 20 years of professional experience).
We are aware that burning wood just for the cozy fireplace atmosphere is not a good thing. But other measures are being taken to more than compensate for this "environmental sin." Even if they are not economically efficient...
I can’t really comment on the main question, but two points caught my attention.
You should see it differently: building a house means having a lot of money. Many people put emphasis on technology but no longer have the budget for hardwood flooring or tiles. So materials are offered that can be found for 15 or 25€/sqm (approx. 1.40 or 2.30 USD per sqft).
That doesn’t mean carpet is a 1990s standard automatically. There are many high-quality carpet manufacturers whose products cost more than hardwood and are natural, for example made from animal hair—something noble and renewable.
What’s important, among other things, is that the house is certified KfW40 (energy standard); many need this label to qualify for subsidies.
Homebuilding companies have to adapt to the buyer groups; otherwise, they won't sell houses. So, budget-build homes certainly have their place.
That can also just be a marketing trick. Including a few premium-sounding items in the building specification makes the offer appear more upscale.
We have marble window sills ourselves; if I’m not mistaken (it was a while ago), the surcharge for all of them was 80€ (approx. 90 USD).
But there are also regions or homeowners who don’t want to get involved with all the hype about external blinds, Bauhaus style, etc. (that’s still the majority), and the offers reflect that. You can still upgrade.
It’s like buying a car.
So I would be careful not to fall into the cliché thinking that average houses are cheap or have no justification just because there are expensive homebuilders. Their or your taste is not the standard.
In principle, if you can afford it, you should focus on good and contemporary technology. Radiators, for example, are still more of an ‘80s solution 😉 whereas underfloor heating is more commonly the standard now.
And: in the end, it has to fit your situation—if, for example, your soil survey turns out bad, adjustments down to lower budgets might be necessary. You may find yourself in the budget segment sooner than you want.
It’s easy to say all this with years of hindsight and experience, but I would never have chosen a builder who didn’t install underfloor heating. 😉
So, everyone is probably sitting in the glass house that Acof mentioned 🙂 (including me).
Nevertheless, when reviewing everything through an ecological lens, one shouldn’t excuse mistakes just because others do the same.
Each of us has to commute to work somehow and inevitably leaves a negative footprint in this world. We have a fireplace we use for heating in September, October, March, and April. And yes, the fire looks quite nice 🤨. I don’t have an electric car, and we bought a caravan that is towed by a gas-powered vehicle. Hopefully, nobody here will be “angry” at me for that.
But it doesn’t hurt to check your own footprint before making statements, to see if it really needs to be that way and where to start doing better—after all, it’s our children who will have to bear the consequences of our mistakes. Finger-pointing like “look at yourself” doesn’t help at all because it shifts responsibility away.
Andreas_79 schrieb:
Now, if a company wants to sell us a house and in 2021 still offers carpet and laminate as standard, that’s not acceptable and we won’t buy it. That clearly shows they are 20 years behind, and who knows in what other areas they are outdated—I can’t judge everything.
Andreas_79 schrieb:
@@RotorMotor, that’s a bit exaggerated and unnecessary. What I mean is that if a company still has something as basic as that from the 1990s as a standard in 2021, then surely many other things in their standard package are outdated as well.
You should see it differently: building a house means having a lot of money. Many people put emphasis on technology but no longer have the budget for hardwood flooring or tiles. So materials are offered that can be found for 15 or 25€/sqm (approx. 1.40 or 2.30 USD per sqft).
That doesn’t mean carpet is a 1990s standard automatically. There are many high-quality carpet manufacturers whose products cost more than hardwood and are natural, for example made from animal hair—something noble and renewable.
What’s important, among other things, is that the house is certified KfW40 (energy standard); many need this label to qualify for subsidies.
Homebuilding companies have to adapt to the buyer groups; otherwise, they won't sell houses. So, budget-build homes certainly have their place.
Andreas_79 schrieb:
I have to say that other providers offer higher-end standards straight away, like marble window sills and things like that.
That can also just be a marketing trick. Including a few premium-sounding items in the building specification makes the offer appear more upscale.
We have marble window sills ourselves; if I’m not mistaken (it was a while ago), the surcharge for all of them was 80€ (approx. 90 USD).
Andreas_79 schrieb:
which means that mainly the cheaper providers are disappearing
But there are also regions or homeowners who don’t want to get involved with all the hype about external blinds, Bauhaus style, etc. (that’s still the majority), and the offers reflect that. You can still upgrade.
It’s like buying a car.
So I would be careful not to fall into the cliché thinking that average houses are cheap or have no justification just because there are expensive homebuilders. Their or your taste is not the standard.
In principle, if you can afford it, you should focus on good and contemporary technology. Radiators, for example, are still more of an ‘80s solution 😉 whereas underfloor heating is more commonly the standard now.
And: in the end, it has to fit your situation—if, for example, your soil survey turns out bad, adjustments down to lower budgets might be necessary. You may find yourself in the budget segment sooner than you want.
It’s easy to say all this with years of hindsight and experience, but I would never have chosen a builder who didn’t install underfloor heating. 😉
So, everyone is probably sitting in the glass house that Acof mentioned 🙂 (including me).
Nevertheless, when reviewing everything through an ecological lens, one shouldn’t excuse mistakes just because others do the same.
Each of us has to commute to work somehow and inevitably leaves a negative footprint in this world. We have a fireplace we use for heating in September, October, March, and April. And yes, the fire looks quite nice 🤨. I don’t have an electric car, and we bought a caravan that is towed by a gas-powered vehicle. Hopefully, nobody here will be “angry” at me for that.
But it doesn’t hurt to check your own footprint before making statements, to see if it really needs to be that way and where to start doing better—after all, it’s our children who will have to bear the consequences of our mistakes. Finger-pointing like “look at yourself” doesn’t help at all because it shifts responsibility away.
Acof1978 schrieb:
As I said. Glass house and stones...
Acof1978 schrieb:
more than 20 years of professional experience It was actually over 30 just a moment ago. 😉 Putting that aside, I don’t consider a chimney and heating installer to be either competent or impartial when it comes to assessing the environmental impact of a fireplace. Still, I completely understand the desire to have a fireplace—I have one myself, which has provided us with many enjoyable hours. However, in new buildings, fireplaces will no longer be installed, not because of their environmental impact, but simply because it is difficult to achieve a comfortable temperature without producing soot and smoke. Also, since we don’t own our own forest, it is not economically practical to rely solely on a fireplace for heating.
Similar topics