ᐅ Mechanical ventilation with heat recovery: no – explanation provided in the text.
Created on: 15 Jul 2015 00:00
G
Grym
For a long time, I was very much in favor of controlled residential ventilation, but I have now revised my opinion. First, some basic considerations:
- Modern houses are built so tightly that additional mechanical ventilation is necessary; otherwise, windows must be opened several times a day, summer and winter, for airing out
- Whether this ventilation is manual or automatic is a matter of comfort
- Whether this ventilation includes heat recovery or not is a question of economic efficiency
When considering economic efficiency, cleaning costs must be included. A reputable provider who only sells controlled residential ventilation estimated these costs at 700 EUR, with a recommended cleaning interval of at least every 5 years. However, in the demonstration house, the first cleaning was done after only 2 years because a microbial test detected contamination in the supply air exceeding the limit values (I don’t know the exact limits, but if the seller says cleaning after 2 years was necessary, I take their word for it—the company does not sell a house without controlled residential ventilation).
Depending on whether you divide the 700 EUR over 5 years or 2 years, the annual maintenance costs come to between 140 and 350 EUR.
The unit itself consumes electrical energy, approximately 250–400 kWh_el per year, which costs between 63 and 100 EUR annually.
The controlled residential ventilation system is a technical device; assuming a service life of 15 years, removal and disposal of the old unit, a new unit, and commissioning are estimated at around 5,000 EUR. This results in an annual depreciation of 333 EUR. If the ventilation system is expected to last 20 years, with disposal, new unit, and commissioning costs totaling 4,000 EUR, then depreciation is 200 EUR per year.
For new filters, maintenance, and minor repairs, I estimate a flat rate of 100 EUR.
Total annual costs in the best case scenario: 140 + 63 + 200 + 100 = 503 EUR
Total annual costs in the worst case scenario: 350 + 100 + 333 + 100 = 883 EUR
The savings effect is roughly estimated at about 2,000 kWh_thermal up to over 3,000 kWh_thermal. 2,000 kWh_thermal equate to 2,000 kWh of gas at 5.5 cents or 400–500 kWh_el at 20 cents (heat pump tariff) or 25 cents (household electricity). This results in savings of about 110 EUR (gas), 125 EUR (air-source heat pump with household electricity), or 80 EUR (ground-source heat pump with heat pump electricity).
At 3,500 EUR savings, this corresponds to 193 EUR (gas), 219 EUR (worst-case heat pump), or 140 EUR (best-case heat pump).
If you compare the best-case controlled ventilation with the worst-case heat pump, you get 503 EUR - 219 EUR = 284 EUR. The other way around is 883 EUR - 140 EUR = 743 EUR.
No matter how you look at it, controlled ventilation with heat recovery cannot even save the running costs. Therefore, in my opinion, the best system—especially to avoid hygienic problems in the house—is exhaust air modules in wet rooms combined with window rebate ventilation or an external wall air inlet. Decentralized controlled ventilation systems with heat recovery do not have such high cleaning costs, but even they would never recoup the additional cost of heat recovery. Additionally, these devices must be placed in bedrooms and living areas, which creates noise. Pure exhaust air systems without heat recovery are suitable in rooms where quiet noises are less disturbing (kitchens, toilets, utility rooms, bathrooms) and can even be switched off for hours (bathroom). Modern window rebates work without drafts and reduce sound insulation by only 1 to 2 dB. Anyone living in a quiet residential area probably doesn’t mind.
I look forward to the discussion, but please keep it relevant to the topic. I am not questioning the necessity of non-user-dependent mechanical ventilation; my focus is only on central heat recovery. Central heat recovery requires the duct system, which incurs high cleaning costs, as well as a complex technical device with limited service life and high costs (unlike a standard exhaust air module without heat recovery). Controlled ventilation without heat recovery operates without the duct system.
- Modern houses are built so tightly that additional mechanical ventilation is necessary; otherwise, windows must be opened several times a day, summer and winter, for airing out
- Whether this ventilation is manual or automatic is a matter of comfort
- Whether this ventilation includes heat recovery or not is a question of economic efficiency
When considering economic efficiency, cleaning costs must be included. A reputable provider who only sells controlled residential ventilation estimated these costs at 700 EUR, with a recommended cleaning interval of at least every 5 years. However, in the demonstration house, the first cleaning was done after only 2 years because a microbial test detected contamination in the supply air exceeding the limit values (I don’t know the exact limits, but if the seller says cleaning after 2 years was necessary, I take their word for it—the company does not sell a house without controlled residential ventilation).
Depending on whether you divide the 700 EUR over 5 years or 2 years, the annual maintenance costs come to between 140 and 350 EUR.
The unit itself consumes electrical energy, approximately 250–400 kWh_el per year, which costs between 63 and 100 EUR annually.
The controlled residential ventilation system is a technical device; assuming a service life of 15 years, removal and disposal of the old unit, a new unit, and commissioning are estimated at around 5,000 EUR. This results in an annual depreciation of 333 EUR. If the ventilation system is expected to last 20 years, with disposal, new unit, and commissioning costs totaling 4,000 EUR, then depreciation is 200 EUR per year.
For new filters, maintenance, and minor repairs, I estimate a flat rate of 100 EUR.
Total annual costs in the best case scenario: 140 + 63 + 200 + 100 = 503 EUR
Total annual costs in the worst case scenario: 350 + 100 + 333 + 100 = 883 EUR
The savings effect is roughly estimated at about 2,000 kWh_thermal up to over 3,000 kWh_thermal. 2,000 kWh_thermal equate to 2,000 kWh of gas at 5.5 cents or 400–500 kWh_el at 20 cents (heat pump tariff) or 25 cents (household electricity). This results in savings of about 110 EUR (gas), 125 EUR (air-source heat pump with household electricity), or 80 EUR (ground-source heat pump with heat pump electricity).
At 3,500 EUR savings, this corresponds to 193 EUR (gas), 219 EUR (worst-case heat pump), or 140 EUR (best-case heat pump).
If you compare the best-case controlled ventilation with the worst-case heat pump, you get 503 EUR - 219 EUR = 284 EUR. The other way around is 883 EUR - 140 EUR = 743 EUR.
No matter how you look at it, controlled ventilation with heat recovery cannot even save the running costs. Therefore, in my opinion, the best system—especially to avoid hygienic problems in the house—is exhaust air modules in wet rooms combined with window rebate ventilation or an external wall air inlet. Decentralized controlled ventilation systems with heat recovery do not have such high cleaning costs, but even they would never recoup the additional cost of heat recovery. Additionally, these devices must be placed in bedrooms and living areas, which creates noise. Pure exhaust air systems without heat recovery are suitable in rooms where quiet noises are less disturbing (kitchens, toilets, utility rooms, bathrooms) and can even be switched off for hours (bathroom). Modern window rebates work without drafts and reduce sound insulation by only 1 to 2 dB. Anyone living in a quiet residential area probably doesn’t mind.
I look forward to the discussion, but please keep it relevant to the topic. I am not questioning the necessity of non-user-dependent mechanical ventilation; my focus is only on central heat recovery. Central heat recovery requires the duct system, which incurs high cleaning costs, as well as a complex technical device with limited service life and high costs (unlike a standard exhaust air module without heat recovery). Controlled ventilation without heat recovery operates without the duct system.
Guddi, then calculate 5 times 10 minutes = 50 minutes per day for ventilation. That amounts to 304 hours per year. Multiply this by your personal hourly rate (how many euros per hour you earn working) and then compare it to the financing cost for the ventilation system. You might also want to consider depreciation of the system. I am convinced that the mechanical ventilation system pays off.
I would say that’s a bit exaggerated. After all, I’m not waiting until I can close the windows again—I can do other things in the meantime.
For example, I don’t vacuum every day like some people do. With your example, I also shouldn’t shave or would have to drive short distances under 2km (1.2 miles) instead of walking.
For example, I don’t vacuum every day like some people do. With your example, I also shouldn’t shave or would have to drive short distances under 2km (1.2 miles) instead of walking.
D
DragonyxXL5 Jan 2016 09:36jaeger schrieb:
That seems a bit exaggerated, I would say. After all, I’m not just waiting until I can close the windows again; I can take care of other things in the meantime. Well, in principle, you can attend to the other windows during that time. In our case, there are 10 windows to open across various rooms. By the time you’ve run through the whole house and picked up flying leaves, you could already start closing the first window again (after 10 minutes). As has often been mentioned here in the forum, if someone isn’t actually home most of the day, ventilation tends to be neglected. You won’t spend 300 hours a year ventilating, but at best half that, and with some luck, you might avoid mold. Then you can pat yourself on the back and say you did everything right. However, the risk certainly cannot be dismissed and exists in any new build without mechanical ventilation with heat recovery.
We live in an apartment and have mold issues because we cannot ventilate and heat properly. In other words, we can’t meet the apartment’s needs. For the future, I have decided that it is more important to me to live healthily, avoid unpleasant odors in the house, and above all, that the house serves me. Having heat recovery is a nice added benefit that spares me from needing solar thermal systems.
This is what it looks like, and you’re literally throwing money out the window... even though air is a poor energy carrier. Still, with manual ventilation, you quickly lose a few cubic meters of warm air (for example, 23°C (73°F)) outside and replace it with the same amount of cold air (for example, -10°C (14°F)) coming in... these are the current temperatures here where I live.
This results in a temperature difference (delta) of 33°C (59°F), which the house and heating system have to compensate for, multiple times per day.
With my centralized mechanical ventilation system with heat recovery, I only have a delta of about 3°C (5°F) under the same conditions—if I can trust the temperature sensors—and I always have fresh air inside the house...
This results in a temperature difference (delta) of 33°C (59°F), which the house and heating system have to compensate for, multiple times per day.
With my centralized mechanical ventilation system with heat recovery, I only have a delta of about 3°C (5°F) under the same conditions—if I can trust the temperature sensors—and I always have fresh air inside the house...
Similar topics