Hello and greetings to the community,
My girlfriend and I are considering building a house in the near future.
We already have a plot of land, so that issue is settled.
We have also decided on the type of house.
We want to avoid rising energy costs by building a passive house with solar panels on the roof.
Additionally, we definitely do not want wood as a building material but prefer traditional bricks or something similar.
In terms of design, we want something suitable for aging (i.e., accessible) and therefore a bungalow.
The dimensions for the house are already set: 15.50 meters (51 feet) wide and 11 meters (36 feet) long, which equals about 170.5 m² (1,835 sq ft).
Now to my questions:
- I have read a lot about passive houses online, and one site mentioned that it is almost impossible to build a bungalow as a passive house. Why is that?
- Are the costs for a bungalow cheaper or more expensive than for a two-story house?
- Is there a building material comparable in quality to brick?
- Is a passive house built with solid construction, i.e., bricks, significantly more expensive?
- Is there any way to get an approximate price estimate for our “dream house”?
Many thanks in advance
Regards
Hugh60
My girlfriend and I are considering building a house in the near future.
We already have a plot of land, so that issue is settled.
We have also decided on the type of house.
We want to avoid rising energy costs by building a passive house with solar panels on the roof.
Additionally, we definitely do not want wood as a building material but prefer traditional bricks or something similar.
In terms of design, we want something suitable for aging (i.e., accessible) and therefore a bungalow.
The dimensions for the house are already set: 15.50 meters (51 feet) wide and 11 meters (36 feet) long, which equals about 170.5 m² (1,835 sq ft).
Now to my questions:
- I have read a lot about passive houses online, and one site mentioned that it is almost impossible to build a bungalow as a passive house. Why is that?
- Are the costs for a bungalow cheaper or more expensive than for a two-story house?
- Is there a building material comparable in quality to brick?
- Is a passive house built with solid construction, i.e., bricks, significantly more expensive?
- Is there any way to get an approximate price estimate for our “dream house”?
Many thanks in advance
Regards
Hugh60
B
Bauexperte25 Nov 2013 12:22Hello and welcome to the HBF,
No offense – but some effort on your part is definitely expected, in my opinion.
Best regards, Bauexperte
Hugh60 schrieb:Take some time to read through the forum; it is tiring to answer the same basic questions over and over again.
- I have read a lot online about passive houses, and on one site it said that it is almost impossible to build a bungalow as a passive house. Why is that?
- Are the costs for a bungalow cheaper or more expensive than for a multi-story house?
- Is there a building material similar in quality to brick?
- Is a passive house built as a solid construction, that is with brick, significantly more expensive?
- Is there any way to get an approximate price estimate for our "dream house"?
No offense – but some effort on your part is definitely expected, in my opinion.
Best regards, Bauexperte
T
toxicmolotof25 Nov 2013 12:29And a tip for one of your questions:
Why do the Inuit build igloos as hemispheres?
Setting aside structural considerations, I will point out the ratio of surface area to volume. And now to your slab-shaped cuboid compared to a cube.
Why do the Inuit build igloos as hemispheres?
Setting aside structural considerations, I will point out the ratio of surface area to volume. And now to your slab-shaped cuboid compared to a cube.
T
toxicmolotof25 Nov 2013 12:38Your house has 473 m² (5,093 sq ft) of exterior surface area; a typical two-story house with a flat roof has only about 355 m² (3,821 sq ft) of exterior surface area.
I assumed a story height of 2.5 m (8 ft) and an almost square footprint.
I assumed a story height of 2.5 m (8 ft) and an almost square footprint.
First of all, thanks for your second reply, toxicmolotow.
Yes, in terms of shape, it would be a square and without a basement.
The principle of a passive house is insulation and air circulation, so I don’t really understand how that relates to the exterior surface area.
A passive house basically creates an airtight space, so the size of the airtight space shouldn’t matter.
Regarding the first post: Of course, I had already read through this before, but I simply didn’t find the right information, such as a similar building material that is as good as brick.
Yes, in terms of shape, it would be a square and without a basement.
The principle of a passive house is insulation and air circulation, so I don’t really understand how that relates to the exterior surface area.
A passive house basically creates an airtight space, so the size of the airtight space shouldn’t matter.
Regarding the first post: Of course, I had already read through this before, but I simply didn’t find the right information, such as a similar building material that is as good as brick.
T
toxicmolotof25 Nov 2013 12:57The larger the exterior surface area, the greater the energy loss (heat), assuming the same insulation.
You will likely be able to build a bungalow as a passive house as well. However, instead of 20cm (8 inches) of insulation, you would need 30cm (12 inches), for example. Just as an example – I am not a professional. The cost for this item would increase by about 50%. Does it make sense? Is it worth it? Do you want it?
You will likely be able to build a bungalow as a passive house as well. However, instead of 20cm (8 inches) of insulation, you would need 30cm (12 inches), for example. Just as an example – I am not a professional. The cost for this item would increase by about 50%. Does it make sense? Is it worth it? Do you want it?
Similar topics