Hello dear house building forum,
After reading here for a while, I would now like to ask the forum a question.
Our construction project is slowly gaining momentum, and our plans are becoming more concrete. I understand that discussing the pros and cons of a heating system without the relevant calculations does not allow for an accurate assessment. However, I am also interested in hearing practical experiences.
Our situation: we are planning a single-family house with a living area of 185 sqm (1,991 sq ft). We have decided on Poroton T8MW from Wienerberger as the building material, with a wall thickness of 42.5 cm (17 inches).
For the heating system, we had basically settled on a heat pump, since, for example, there is no gas connection available. We were therefore considering either an air-to-water heat pump combined with a hydronic (water-based) fireplace or a ground-source (geothermal) heat pump. In the cost estimates we received, both systems were fairly close in price.
Now, however, our architect has proposed a completely different system, which he considers more affordable and has also used in his 12-year-old new build.
This system includes a solar panel installation. To support this, a hydronic fireplace is installed, and as a backup, a small instantaneous water heater (tankless water heater). In addition, a ventilation system with heat recovery is installed.
I would therefore be interested to know if anyone in the forum has experience with this type of system or how it compares purely in terms of components to a heat pump.
After reading here for a while, I would now like to ask the forum a question.
Our construction project is slowly gaining momentum, and our plans are becoming more concrete. I understand that discussing the pros and cons of a heating system without the relevant calculations does not allow for an accurate assessment. However, I am also interested in hearing practical experiences.
Our situation: we are planning a single-family house with a living area of 185 sqm (1,991 sq ft). We have decided on Poroton T8MW from Wienerberger as the building material, with a wall thickness of 42.5 cm (17 inches).
For the heating system, we had basically settled on a heat pump, since, for example, there is no gas connection available. We were therefore considering either an air-to-water heat pump combined with a hydronic (water-based) fireplace or a ground-source (geothermal) heat pump. In the cost estimates we received, both systems were fairly close in price.
Now, however, our architect has proposed a completely different system, which he considers more affordable and has also used in his 12-year-old new build.
This system includes a solar panel installation. To support this, a hydronic fireplace is installed, and as a backup, a small instantaneous water heater (tankless water heater). In addition, a ventilation system with heat recovery is installed.
I would therefore be interested to know if anyone in the forum has experience with this type of system or how it compares purely in terms of components to a heat pump.
Hello,
Above, the correct observation; here, a question that no one can reliably answer.
Best regards
rodnex schrieb:An important insight, although it apparently didn’t have any impact ;-).
... Now I also know that the discussion about the pros and cons of a heating system cannot be accurately assessed without the relevant calculations.
rodnex schrieb:Then the decision, pending the required capacity, should actually not be difficult, provided the source for the brine heat pump has been properly sized. Why anyone would need a water-based fireplace stove in this context, only the seller seems to know.
... In the current cost estimates, both systems are fairly close.
rodnex schrieb:That doesn’t mean it makes sense here as well. The architect obviously has no basis for comparison. Apparently no calculation has been done either; otherwise, the comparison figures would have been available. Anyway, he doesn’t seem to be an HVAC engineer.
... which he considers more affordable and has also used in his 12-year-old new build.
rodnex schrieb:
... how it compares purely in terms of components to a heat pump.
Above, the correct observation; here, a question that no one can reliably answer.
Best regards
As I mentioned in my first post, I am not aiming for consumption forecasts accurate to the last cent. However, since house construction is not rocket science and the wheel is not reinvented all the time, based on the information I provided, there are certainly ways to evaluate the pros and cons of the system I described to determine whether it makes sense in principle and to provide a rough cost comparison.
Therefore, your statement does not help me at all. As I have already noted, I understand that everything ultimately needs to be calculated precisely. Nevertheless, I am convinced that a detailed calculation later will not completely invalidate any of the concepts.
The hydronic fireplace combined with the air pump is not an idea from the seller, but ours, since we have access to inexpensive wood. Since we want a fireplace anyway, it seems to us that adding heating support is a good complement, especially during particularly cold winter days.
Perhaps someone in the forum has faced a similar decision and can share some insights.
Therefore, your statement does not help me at all. As I have already noted, I understand that everything ultimately needs to be calculated precisely. Nevertheless, I am convinced that a detailed calculation later will not completely invalidate any of the concepts.
The hydronic fireplace combined with the air pump is not an idea from the seller, but ours, since we have access to inexpensive wood. Since we want a fireplace anyway, it seems to us that adding heating support is a good complement, especially during particularly cold winter days.
Perhaps someone in the forum has faced a similar decision and can share some insights.
B
Bauqualle19 Jun 2013 11:15rodnex schrieb:
This is a closed fireplace. .. these are water-bearing stove fireplaces / cooking stoves ... and not fireplaces!!!B
Bauexperte19 Jun 2013 11:56Hello,
Fundamentally, using solar energy, when properly planned, is a great concept. These types of systems are called solar houses and, if correctly designed and sized, are in no way comparable in cost to an air-to-water heat pump or geothermal heat pump. The downside is that the house is essentially built around the buffer storage tank, limiting freedom in room layout; the installation costs for solar use are typically in the six-figure range. The advantage: initial experience shows that the annual primary energy demand is lower than for a passive house (PH). A nationwide provider offers solar houses, which are guided and monitored by solar energy experts, and every solar house owner is truly independent from fossil fuels for heating a single-family home.
For comparison, building a true solar house requires:
- a large collector area on the south-facing roof (approx. 40 m² (430 sq ft))
- a 7,000-liter (1,850-gallon) buffer storage tank (approx. 4.5 m (15 ft) tall)
- large south-facing windows
- the house must meet KfW 55 energy efficiency standards
- a powerful wood stove with a heat exchanger (wood gasification stove with a nominal heat output of 25 kW (85,000 BTU/h))
Therefore, I believe—although I am not a certified energy expert—that the system your architect proposes is definitely worth considering as an alternative.
Regards, Bauexperte
rodnex schrieb:
Our architect has now proposed a completely different system, which he considers more cost-effective and has also used in his 12-year-old new build.
There, a solar system is installed. To support this, a hydronic chimney (water-circulated stove) is integrated, and a small tankless water heater serves as a backup. Additionally, a ventilation system with heat recovery is installed.
I would be interested to know if anyone in this forum has experience with such a system, or how the components compare to a heat pump.
Fundamentally, using solar energy, when properly planned, is a great concept. These types of systems are called solar houses and, if correctly designed and sized, are in no way comparable in cost to an air-to-water heat pump or geothermal heat pump. The downside is that the house is essentially built around the buffer storage tank, limiting freedom in room layout; the installation costs for solar use are typically in the six-figure range. The advantage: initial experience shows that the annual primary energy demand is lower than for a passive house (PH). A nationwide provider offers solar houses, which are guided and monitored by solar energy experts, and every solar house owner is truly independent from fossil fuels for heating a single-family home.
For comparison, building a true solar house requires:
- a large collector area on the south-facing roof (approx. 40 m² (430 sq ft))
- a 7,000-liter (1,850-gallon) buffer storage tank (approx. 4.5 m (15 ft) tall)
- large south-facing windows
- the house must meet KfW 55 energy efficiency standards
- a powerful wood stove with a heat exchanger (wood gasification stove with a nominal heat output of 25 kW (85,000 BTU/h))
Therefore, I believe—although I am not a certified energy expert—that the system your architect proposes is definitely worth considering as an alternative.
Regards, Bauexperte
Similar topics