Hello everyone,
During the planning phase of building a house, you inevitably come across forums about home construction and topics related to energy standards. I have already read several books and browsed various websites on the subject. I should mention that I am not a professional in this field. What I have noticed is that the entire topic of "economic / ecological home construction" is heavily influenced by commercial interests. The so-called "smart" consumer is often misled by marketing terms and a government-led campaign for "CO2-efficient building." Books or websites dealing with this subject often do not provide clear, comprehensive assessments.
In the "better" literature, insulation materials are compared in terms of insulation value and whether they are expensive or affordable. However, I still cannot determine what makes the most sense for my individual case. I simply do not want to spend excessive amounts of money, especially on things that do not add value, such as polystyrene insulation. If additional costs for a particular heating system are reasonable over a feasible period, then yes.
Our current goal is to build a simple single-family home with about 130 - 140 sqm (1400 - 1500 sq ft). The house should cost around €200,000 (without outdoor landscaping, floor coverings, land, or additional construction-related costs; our expectations are modest).
I am interested in knowing, based on the current state of technology, what is the most energy-efficient and cost-effective building option?
Energy-saving regulation / building standards according to KfW, yes or no, and if yes, which level?
Solid construction or prefabricated house?
Condensing boiler technology or heat pump?
Thank you very much for your answers!
Best regards
During the planning phase of building a house, you inevitably come across forums about home construction and topics related to energy standards. I have already read several books and browsed various websites on the subject. I should mention that I am not a professional in this field. What I have noticed is that the entire topic of "economic / ecological home construction" is heavily influenced by commercial interests. The so-called "smart" consumer is often misled by marketing terms and a government-led campaign for "CO2-efficient building." Books or websites dealing with this subject often do not provide clear, comprehensive assessments.
In the "better" literature, insulation materials are compared in terms of insulation value and whether they are expensive or affordable. However, I still cannot determine what makes the most sense for my individual case. I simply do not want to spend excessive amounts of money, especially on things that do not add value, such as polystyrene insulation. If additional costs for a particular heating system are reasonable over a feasible period, then yes.
Our current goal is to build a simple single-family home with about 130 - 140 sqm (1400 - 1500 sq ft). The house should cost around €200,000 (without outdoor landscaping, floor coverings, land, or additional construction-related costs; our expectations are modest).
I am interested in knowing, based on the current state of technology, what is the most energy-efficient and cost-effective building option?
Energy-saving regulation / building standards according to KfW, yes or no, and if yes, which level?
Solid construction or prefabricated house?
Condensing boiler technology or heat pump?
Thank you very much for your answers!
Best regards
Heating. The popular air-to-water heat pump has the advantage that no gas connection is needed and the technology is now well developed. The downside is that in severe winters it may heat entirely with electricity, it always consumes more electricity than a gas heating system, the compressor is a component that might not last 10 years without repairs, and otherwise it requires neither maintenance nor chimney sweeping. Economically, it is a bet that gas prices will rise faster than electricity prices. With current price levels, it is less efficient than a condensing boiler.
Insulation. If you build with solid masonry, adding insulation is an extra step. If you use thicker blocks instead, you save that step; although the blocks cost more, you save on labor. This is cost-effective. Therefore, monolithic construction is preferable to external thermal insulation composite systems (ETICS) / external wall insulation. The highest quality is certainly a double-shell wall with mineral wool insulation, an air gap, and a brick or sand-lime brick facade. You get what you pay for.
Mechanical ventilation systems with heat recovery certainly provide the comfort of constantly fresh air without opening windows. Economically, these systems are not worthwhile, as the additional cost is too high.
The key is good walls, careful roof insulation, and high-quality windows. Karsten
Insulation. If you build with solid masonry, adding insulation is an extra step. If you use thicker blocks instead, you save that step; although the blocks cost more, you save on labor. This is cost-effective. Therefore, monolithic construction is preferable to external thermal insulation composite systems (ETICS) / external wall insulation. The highest quality is certainly a double-shell wall with mineral wool insulation, an air gap, and a brick or sand-lime brick facade. You get what you pay for.
Mechanical ventilation systems with heat recovery certainly provide the comfort of constantly fresh air without opening windows. Economically, these systems are not worthwhile, as the additional cost is too high.
The key is good walls, careful roof insulation, and high-quality windows. Karsten
ypg schrieb:
With a budget of 200,000 for the entire house, it will be economical, either like @Nordlys with 36 cm (14 inch) Ytong blocks, or otherwise with Poroton bricks and polystyrene insulation. Gas heating combined with solar is the most cost-effective heating method. With your budget, there’s very little room for flexibility.This language tends toward bias. The term "cheap" often implies low quality. Let’s use terms like economical or cost-effective instead. Ytong blocks are not inferior; a white window functions just as well as a gray one. A 400,000 house can have the same concrete in the foundation slab as a 200,000 house. A Tegalit roof tile does not seal any better than a Harzer tile. A 25 cm (10 inch) tile does not shower differently than a 50-dollar-per-square-meter option. KNX smart lighting controls do not emit different light than a standard switch. A plastic front door is not energetically less efficient than aluminum or wood. A fingerprint sensor is not more secure than a good lock. Softwood roof soffits protected with brackets are not worse than the ones made from plastic panels. And so on.
B
Bauherr20187 Aug 2017 14:20First of all, thanks for your quick responses. I wasn’t familiar with REGEL-air. By "efficient," I mean that I will only make additional investments that will pay off well before 50 years and are not too expensive. Is a prefab house not an option? (just wondering)
77.willo schrieb:
What does “efficient” refer to? Primary energy or money? And what does “pointless” refer to – saving CO2?As long as that question remains unanswered, it’s actually difficult to help.
Edit: You beat me to the response. Do you really mean over 50 years? Over such a long period, you can calculate a wide range of economic outcomes, or none at all. I only need to adjust a small assumption (electricity price increase up or down by one percent), and suddenly you see huge effects over that timespan... It’s like crystal ball gazing.
Another example: Over a 50-year perspective, almost any photovoltaic system becomes economically viable. Does that mean you want to have the largest possible photovoltaic system on the roof?
Bauherr2018 schrieb:
that I will only make additional investments that will pay off in less than 50 years Then you shouldn’t build, as it will never pay off.
It is a luxury that you must be able and willing to afford.
Anyone considering making compromises should think carefully about what they are actually saving for. In the end, some rental apartments might be better equipped than their own house.
You can save on anything that can be changed later. However, everything installed beneath plaster and screed should be done properly from the start.
B
Bauherr20187 Aug 2017 14:27Nordlys schrieb:
The language here is somewhat biased. “Cheap” always carries a connotation of low quality. Let’s say affordable. Good value. A Ytong block is not inferior, a white window is not functionally worse than a gray one. A 400 kg (880 lbs) house can have the same concrete in the foundation slab as a 200 kg (440 lbs) house. A Tegalit roof tile does not seal better than a Harzer tile. A 25 mm (1 inch) tile does not behave differently when showered on than the 50 euro per square meter version. KNX does not make light different than a light switch. A plastic front door is not energetically worse than aluminum or wood. A fingerprint sensor is not more secure than a good lock. Softwood roof decking protected with brackets is not worse than plastic panels. And so on. We are rather minimalist ourselves; for example, triple-glazed plastic windows or standard fixtures that look good are enough for us. However, I do invest more in the roof tiles (glazed clay roof tiles), because I prefer something robust there.
Similar topics