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
Alex85 schrieb:
If you build for this amount – it might be possible – then you won’t have money left for economically or environmentally sensible options. Hello Alex85,
So you also confirm that it works.
Of course, with minimal equipment (whatever that means personally for each individual).
@Steffen80: Is Alex85 a liar now, too?
Farilo schrieb:
So you also confirm that it works.I don’t rule out the possibility that it doesn’t work.
I believe that anyone who plans this is fooling themselves and will end up with only half a house. Exceptions prove the rule.
Farilo schrieb:
Is Alex85 a liar now too?Who knows -_-B
Bauherr20187 Aug 2017 19:12Nordlys schrieb:
Guys, what do we really know? He says he lives in SH. That could be Norderstedt or Wedel, which would be expensive, or Süderstapel, which would be quite cheap, and they would give him fully developed land for 40 €/sqm (40 €/square meter).
He says he wants to spend around 200,000 € for the house. Without additional costs, without land, without utility connections or landscaping, etc. So basically turnkey. Here in SH, all builders sell houses with slab foundations but without painting, wallpapering, or fitted kitchens. He doesn’t say he can’t spend more. He only asks: Is it worth it—economically, not emotionally or ecologically—to pay the extra for, say, KfW 55 or even 40 standards? And he wants to know whether it’s better to have a solid (brick/masonry) build or prefabricated construction. He says a simple house would be fine; they’re not picky.
I tried to give a factual answer to his questions. Then he gets hit with an outrage wave—from "neverever" to "better rent," to "price-wise impossible," to "you don’t have a choice anyway." And our house has to serve as the example: "If you want that, you’ll end up where he ended up." (Meanwhile, what we built is completely normal in our neighborhood; everybody here builds at roughly that level.)
I want to make this clear: I’m not saying that anyone spending 500,000 € in Wiesbaden is crazy. That may just be the standard there, and it’s not going to change. But please accept that it’s different elsewhere. And yes, I still believe the KfW standards are incentives to use better insulation, newer or more expensive technology; they are linked to subsidies, but these subsidies are more than offset by price increases from construction companies, so economically, in my opinion, it doesn’t make sense. I am open to counterexamples. I can say: Okay, I was wrong. Doesn’t hurt my pride. KarstenFirst of all, thanks for that!
By the way, I clicked the wrong option before—I actually live in ST (Saxony-Anhalt).
Regarding construction costs:
I have already received several offers, including one from Helma.
This is roughly the house in question:
- Approx. 142 sqm (1,529 sqft) net floor area (127 sqm (1,367 sqft) living space)
- Gable roof with 42° pitch
- Knee wall 0.875 m (35 inches)
- KfW 55 standard
- Brick masonry, 17.5 cm (7 inches) thickness
- External thermal insulation composite system 160 mm (6 inches), WLG 035
- Triple-glazed windows, Ug 0.5 W/(m²K)
- Secondary entrance door
- Underfloor heating / heating (Nibe exhaust air heat pump F730 with central exhaust air and decentralized supply air including domestic hot water storage of 180 liters (48 gallons)) <-- I definitely want this changed!!!!
- Clay roof tiles
- Colored exterior plaster
- Brick cladding on house corners (standard inclusion)
- Freestanding wooden staircase
- Multimedia network installation
Cost = 218,000 €
W
winnetou787 Aug 2017 19:21As I have mentioned somewhere before, here in deep Brandenburg, a price under 200,000 is quite normal.
I am only talking about a turnkey house without painting and flooring.
I am paying for a 112 square meter (1,205 square feet) L-shaped bungalow with a covered terrace, glazed clay roof tiles, electric aluminum roller shutters everywhere, geothermal heat pump,
Otherwise everything quite standard, Ytong 36.5 cm (14.4 inches) blocks.
Fixtures are reasonably good from Grohe,
Switches by Busch-Jaeger, tile price 35 euros per square meter (3.25 per square foot) included.
Soil replacement 35 cm (14 inches) and additionally 30 cm (12 inches) backfilling up to street level.
Otherwise everything normal, window sills in Beta rose color, etc.
Additionally, there is an extra charge of 3,800 euros for a steeper roof pitch.
Turnkey price: 169,200 euros.
Flooring and wall finishes are done as owner’s work, and then it’s all good.
The house will be completely finished for around 180,000 euros.
And with that, I am already quite high for this region.
Standard bungalows are built here for 139,000 euros.
I am only talking about a turnkey house without painting and flooring.
I am paying for a 112 square meter (1,205 square feet) L-shaped bungalow with a covered terrace, glazed clay roof tiles, electric aluminum roller shutters everywhere, geothermal heat pump,
Otherwise everything quite standard, Ytong 36.5 cm (14.4 inches) blocks.
Fixtures are reasonably good from Grohe,
Switches by Busch-Jaeger, tile price 35 euros per square meter (3.25 per square foot) included.
Soil replacement 35 cm (14 inches) and additionally 30 cm (12 inches) backfilling up to street level.
Otherwise everything normal, window sills in Beta rose color, etc.
Additionally, there is an extra charge of 3,800 euros for a steeper roof pitch.
Turnkey price: 169,200 euros.
Flooring and wall finishes are done as owner’s work, and then it’s all good.
The house will be completely finished for around 180,000 euros.
And with that, I am already quite high for this region.
Standard bungalows are built here for 139,000 euros.
To 11ant.
I don’t quite understand your post this time. You can roughly calculate this. If a modern house needs about 8000 kWh of gas and the additional cost for reducing consumption by 7400 kWh is 10,000, and the KfW adds 5,000, you have 5,000 left to save. How many years will that take? Is it worth it? After all, warm is warm. The savings effect is hardly a comfort gain.
And yes, the surroundings also influence things. If everyone builds urban villas, that’s normal. Here, that is a complete exception. If you can only get plots around 400 square meters (4,300 square feet), a dense building style feels normal; here, that’s impossible with a floor area ratio of max 0.25. If everyone has large garages, you assume that’s how it has to be. Here, a house with a garage is a rare minority. If you’ve grown up since childhood accustomed to flying flags on certain occasions, like Guild Day or Confirmation, a house just has a flagpole or holder — which is very unusual in NRW. If everyone always had external roller shutters, people build them. I don’t know them; no one here has them.
If you often have steep slopes, basements become normal; if you have high groundwater levels, as here, no one does that. This also leads to price differences. But the biggest result from wage costs. A painter’s company charges 40 gross here, in Hamburg 60. That adds up. Karsten
I don’t quite understand your post this time. You can roughly calculate this. If a modern house needs about 8000 kWh of gas and the additional cost for reducing consumption by 7400 kWh is 10,000, and the KfW adds 5,000, you have 5,000 left to save. How many years will that take? Is it worth it? After all, warm is warm. The savings effect is hardly a comfort gain.
And yes, the surroundings also influence things. If everyone builds urban villas, that’s normal. Here, that is a complete exception. If you can only get plots around 400 square meters (4,300 square feet), a dense building style feels normal; here, that’s impossible with a floor area ratio of max 0.25. If everyone has large garages, you assume that’s how it has to be. Here, a house with a garage is a rare minority. If you’ve grown up since childhood accustomed to flying flags on certain occasions, like Guild Day or Confirmation, a house just has a flagpole or holder — which is very unusual in NRW. If everyone always had external roller shutters, people build them. I don’t know them; no one here has them.
If you often have steep slopes, basements become normal; if you have high groundwater levels, as here, no one does that. This also leads to price differences. But the biggest result from wage costs. A painter’s company charges 40 gross here, in Hamburg 60. That adds up. Karsten
W
winnetou787 Aug 2017 19:22If I drive 70 km (43 miles) closer to Berlin from here, it costs 30,000 more—that's just how it is.
Similar topics