ᐅ Implications of the Coalition Agreement for Home Builders?
Created on: 24 Nov 2021 18:52
P
Pinkiponk
Has anyone here already looked into the coalition agreement presented today and its implications for (us) homebuilders?
A positive point for new homeowners could be that there will be an exemption for property transfer tax if the property will be owner-occupied. The rent control measures are planned to be extended. There is a goal to build 400,000 new homes, of which 100,000 will be publicly subsidized.
As the operator of a gas condensing boiler, I would have been very interested to know whether Nord Stream 2 will become operational or not, but I haven’t read anything about that. Natural gas-generated electricity is supposed to be phased out by 2040, whatever “phased out” actually means. In the mid-2030s, natural gas heating systems are expected to be discontinued.
A positive point for new homeowners could be that there will be an exemption for property transfer tax if the property will be owner-occupied. The rent control measures are planned to be extended. There is a goal to build 400,000 new homes, of which 100,000 will be publicly subsidized.
As the operator of a gas condensing boiler, I would have been very interested to know whether Nord Stream 2 will become operational or not, but I haven’t read anything about that. Natural gas-generated electricity is supposed to be phased out by 2040, whatever “phased out” actually means. In the mid-2030s, natural gas heating systems are expected to be discontinued.
RotorMotor schrieb:
But a car battery is much harder to replace, and capacity loss means a reduction in driving range.The vast majority of electric car drivers simply replace the entire vehicle every three years when the lease ends. Of course, from a moral and environmental standpoint, this is disastrous, but hey, that’s how it is intended.R
RotorMotor27 Nov 2021 10:50Araknis schrieb:
Um, the vast majority of electric car drivers simply replace the entire car every three years when their lease ends. Sure, from a moral and environmental perspective, that’s a disaster, but hey, that’s just how it’s intended. Oh, I thought this was about what makes sense for society, not about saving a few cents for the upper class.
You don’t seriously believe that changing the drive system and energy source in a vehicle will alter consumption behavior?
What we are currently witnessing is simply an industry shift to a different energy source. However, nothing will change in terms of the behavior and volume of individual traffic. It is likely that due to prices, “ordinary people” will no longer be able to afford cars. I don’t see anything, not just the purchase price, becoming cheaper in the foreseeable future. Eventually, once there are “enough” so-called “environmentally friendly” electric vehicles on the road, subsidy programs will also be discontinued.
What we are currently witnessing is simply an industry shift to a different energy source. However, nothing will change in terms of the behavior and volume of individual traffic. It is likely that due to prices, “ordinary people” will no longer be able to afford cars. I don’t see anything, not just the purchase price, becoming cheaper in the foreseeable future. Eventually, once there are “enough” so-called “environmentally friendly” electric vehicles on the road, subsidy programs will also be discontinued.
H
hampshire27 Nov 2021 11:53RotorMotor schrieb:
So, fundamentally, what environmental benefit do you expect as long as there is no 100% renewable energy yet? It is important to see the whole picture, and your doubts are justified. I’m happy to share what I expect:
- The widespread use of decentralized battery systems has a grid-stabilizing and demand-smoothing effect. This is beneficial for the use of renewable energy sources that do not produce a constant output. The energy transition will be accelerated.
- Further advancement of battery technology makes investments in research and development more appealing and helps batteries become more resource-efficient, recyclable, affordable, and with higher energy density. Even if current batteries are not problematic, better ones will reach the market faster and in larger volumes.
- The increasing adoption of batteries for storing climate-friendly energy leads to greater acceptance and more people considering moving away from fossil fuels. Resistance decreases, determination increases—even if it's not perfect, the direction of public mindset matters a great deal.
Twenty years ago, only a few people could imagine buying things online. Those who started early often faced setbacks and ridicule. Many persevered, and gradually more people overcame their fears. Today, no one laughs at it anymore, and the advantages are widely understood. That’s how I hope it will be with renewable energy. More and more people getting involved, and a positive outcome for the pioneers who are still being mocked. Online shops look very different now than twenty years ago. The same will happen with the technologies used. Current batteries will soon be technically surpassed—but will still contribute. Subsidies make it attractive where it is not yet economically viable on its own.
Ladies and gentlemen, please, seriously, using a bit of common sense wouldn’t hurt: currently unused energy should be pooled more effectively rather than temporarily taken out of circulation and transported around unnecessarily. The fact that the transport vehicle also consumes some of this energy only makes this nonsense slightly less absurd. We should return to acting based on reason rather than on subsidy incentives!
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
11ant schrieb:
controlled by the brain instead of by subsidiesMoney eats brains. (Two more words)