ᐅ Unusually high quote for ventilation system

The original poster is building now and probably has an even higher interest rate than YPG and I did (about 3% back then). Since with us the prepayment already had double the effect, every additional euro of loan now is likely to have more than double the impact.

Where precise calculations are standard, unlike in private home construction, the use of centralized ventilation systems has long been established. No one speculates about the fitness benefits there; it simply comes down to this: We can only afford this building WITH a central ventilation system.

So, if someone wants to make simple (extra) repayments, they install such a system. For those who want to enjoy their life, anyway.

ypg schrieb:

The question is (since a ventilation system does not replace heating): how much electricity does a ventilation system consume?

Probably not as much as it saves. But if you are truly interested in energy savings, that’s only part of the picture. You also have to factor in the energy used in manufacturing, operation, and the additional effort required to raise the ceiling height.
However, none of the proponents in this or other threads have ever provided figures on that.
Financially, it will probably never pay off ... Whether the energy input balances out with the energy saved is something no one can say.
So, what remains is only the time saved on airing (which at least for us is manageable) and the improved air quality, which I have never disputed.

HeimatBauer schrieb:

If you want to enjoy life, eh.

He would rather spend an extra few vacations for 40,000€.

Would you choose your employer based on the presence of a ventilation system in the office, even if the employer pays significantly less?

HeimatBauer schrieb:

In commercial building projects, where calculations are precise unlike private home construction, the use of centralized ventilation systems is standard practice. No one speculates about the fitness benefits; the simple truth is: we can only afford this building with centralized ventilation.

However, they also factor in the trouble saved from mold issues when an apartment has mechanical ventilation. In owner-occupied homes, any argument about whether the owner or occupant is to blame for dampness becomes unnecessary, and any related costs are typically covered by the homeowner anyway.

PS to Muskeltier:
This interest-based calculation is not sound. You wouldn’t count the cost of a beer at the pub by assuming the money could instead be invested for 50 years at 8%, effectively paying $100 for a beer.

Musketier schrieb:

From a financial perspective, it will never make sense...

The Earth is flat...

Currently, in Munich, the acknowledgement of the Earth’s roundness is preventing one of the largest public building projects—because the city still simply says, “The Earth is flat, prove me otherwise.” A public building is planned here; the client is the city, and the users are the city—but the two floors are supposed to be used by different municipal departments. Everything is fine, the heating and ventilation design is complete—but regarding the energy recovered from the exhaust air (which, according to Musketier, doesn’t exist, but in reality is immense), the ventilation system currently cannot distinguish whether this energy comes from Institution A or Institution B. The city’s suggestion: just omit the ventilation system with heat recovery! A very clever idea—now not only do operational costs increase significantly, but construction costs do too, because the heating system must be designed completely differently.

So yes, in the early Middle Ages, similar twisted ways of thinking were common; back then, it was considered normal to spend life crawling, sitting, and coughing in a house. At some point, people realized that with the new fireplaces in their homes, they could also stand, lie in bed, and generally enjoy hobbies other than coughing. This realization still awaits those who prefer opening windows for ventilation.