ᐅ How can you bypass energy-saving regulations and avoid bureaucratic hassle?

Farilo schrieb:
Oh, okay. I’ll have to calculate that.

Where can I get information about how changes to the house’s characteristics relate to roof insulation? I mean, I don’t want to insulate a dry roof and then end up with mold and high costs.

All hope is lost.

With your line of reasoning, you won’t find any help here.
A tin foil hat might suit you better.

If the heating system is 30 years old, it needs to be replaced; otherwise, neither the chimney sweep nor the heating technician will approve it.

Additionally, certain insulation measures must be completed within two years of purchase.
Since the energy saving regulation (energy saving ordinance / building energy regulation) is mandatory, you can’t avoid or bypass it.

It is also fundamentally possible for the indoor climate and comfort of a 1950s house to feel just like a passive house.

If you don’t want that because you have some reservations, that’s fine—everyone has their own preferences—but coming to a house building forum and trying to get help on a topic that can’t be changed with outdated knowledge from the 1950s and without solid arguments is, in my opinion, inappropriate.
Two minutes on Google and you could have answered the question yourself.

There is simply no way around sensible insulation work, just as there will be no way around installing a new heating system within two years.

saar2and schrieb:
Lost cause.

With your line of reasoning, you won’t find any help here.
Wearing a tin foil hat might suit you better.

If your heating system is 30 years old, it needs to be replaced; otherwise, the chimney sweep and heating technician won’t approve it.

Also, within two years of purchase, certain insulation measures must be carried out.
Since the Energy Saving Ordinance is a regulation, you can’t bypass or manipulate it.

In terms of indoor climate and comfort, it is basically possible for a 1950s building to feel just like a passive house.

If you don’t want that because you have some kind of mental block, no problem, to each their own. But coming into a house-building forum and trying to get help on a topic that can’t be changed using outdated knowledge from the 1950s and no arguments, in my opinion, is inappropriate.
Two minutes on Google and you could have answered your question yourself.

There is simply no way around sensible insulation measures, just as there will be no way around a new heating system within two years.

Hi Saar2and,

strange... Your first comment to me was, "Lost cause." The second said, "With that argument, you won’t find any help." In the third, you mentioned a tin foil hat.

It seems you might be the one with a mental block here.

Nevertheless, thank you for your subsequent words.
I fully admit that I currently have ZERO understanding of the subject. That is why I am here in the forum to educate myself. I try, though not always successfully, to question things critically. If I offended anyone, that was not my intention. Sorry about that.

- The heating system will need to be replaced soon. Got it. Shouldn’t be a problem. Costs are manageable.

As for insulation, I am currently researching. I have just come across some information that, as a layperson, I had suspected but had trouble arguing about.
The idea that heating pipes in the house should be insulated sounds odd to me at first. I want them to provide heat. So why shield or even embed them in the walls? From a visual perspective, embedding pipes is another matter… The principles behind this need to be clarified.
The whole insulation debate is tricky... As I said, it feels a bit like the private pension debates. It sounds good initially but makes little sense for most people in the long run.

Hopefully, this forum won’t be like the pension forums where users who fell into bad pension schemes discredit anyone who criticizes them, just because they got the short end of the stick themselves.

Farilo schrieb:
Personally, I’m not too fond of walking past a 60cm (24 inches) thick wall at the house entrance either. But I don’t want to put too much emphasis on that.

What type of wall construction does your existing building have? What matters most to you about it? The material or the wall thickness? There are also solid wood constructions (search for "solid timber construction") that don’t have such thick walls, and you might also like the indoor climate since the manufacturers build using only natural, non-toxic materials. There are a few small but excellent providers for that.

A bit too much rhetoric on my part.
I apologize for that.

Heating pipes should be insulated because otherwise they release heat where they shouldn’t.
Specifically, at the radiator. The radiator transfers heat more efficiently and exactly where it is needed in the house than the heating pipes do.

If heat is already lost along the way to the radiator through the heating pipes, then you have to use more energy to achieve the same result as with insulated heating pipes.

This is called heat loss.

Farilo schrieb:
Could you explain that to me using objective parameters?

So what now? – You yourself rightly point out, in my view, that climate consists of more than just parameters.

By the way, with around 36.5cm (14 inches) of aerated concrete (or sand-lime brick or other common types of masonry, sometimes in a double-wall construction), you can meet the energy saving regulations even without foam adhesive or an air conditioning system like the Starship Enterprise. Energy saving regulations are not the same as passive house standards.

---

https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/

I am currently watching videos by Konrad Fischer.
He somehow really speaks to me.

Well…

I’ll try to summarize what I think I have understood from this forum so far:

- For existing houses built some time ago, there is basically NO mandatory insulation requirement unless I alter a certain percentage of the façade. Then I would have to insulate.

- Heating systems must be replaced after 30 years, unless the chimney sweep confirms the existing system meets certain values.

- Solar/photovoltaics are only necessary if I want to achieve a specific KFW standard.

Is this roughly correct? Or am I still completely off track?

Sometimes I get the impression there might be another way to build according to the energy saving regulations without using, for example, extremely thick insulated walls, photovoltaics/solar, or other advanced technologies. However, I never read exactly how that would work.

My goal is a simple and straightforward construction method without extensive or extreme ETICS (External Thermal Insulation Composite Systems) for the extension and to maintain the current condition of the existing house. (I have to replace the heating anyway since the extension needs to be connected.)

The roof construction method of the existing building should also be continued in the new extension. Is that possible without insulation?

Best regards