ᐅ Price difference for new construction: KfW 70 vs. KfW 55 energy standards
Created on: 27 Jan 2016 17:07
N
nils1985
Good evening, dear forum members,
I am looking for a rough estimate of the additional costs involved in building a standard new house compared to a KfW 70 or KfW 55 energy standard. The low interest rates are very attractive, but is the extra expense for a KfW-certified house really worth it? Or would it make sense to implement only parts of the KfW standard? Perhaps a fireplace and a decent gas boiler would be sufficient.
Thank you for your help!
Regards,
Nils
I am looking for a rough estimate of the additional costs involved in building a standard new house compared to a KfW 70 or KfW 55 energy standard. The low interest rates are very attractive, but is the extra expense for a KfW-certified house really worth it? Or would it make sense to implement only parts of the KfW standard? Perhaps a fireplace and a decent gas boiler would be sufficient.
Thank you for your help!
Regards,
Nils
Thank you, construction expert,
We are still at the beginning. So far, I have no further information about the prices. The plan is to build a single-family house with 130sqm (1400 sq ft). We would have everything done through a single contractor. We are not entirely sure yet whether to choose a solid (masonry) building or a prefabricated house. The price for a KfW 55 solid house is somewhat intimidating, while the prices of the prefab builders are tempting. I mainly want to find out whether the higher cost and the low-interest loan from KfW are worthwhile.
We are still at the beginning. So far, I have no further information about the prices. The plan is to build a single-family house with 130sqm (1400 sq ft). We would have everything done through a single contractor. We are not entirely sure yet whether to choose a solid (masonry) building or a prefabricated house. The price for a KfW 55 solid house is somewhat intimidating, while the prices of the prefab builders are tempting. I mainly want to find out whether the higher cost and the low-interest loan from KfW are worthwhile.
Hi,
If you really mean the earlier version of the 2014 Energy Saving Ordinance, with the building permit / planning permission submitted before the end of that year, then the answer is:
Yes, it is possible. We are currently doing it. Gas condensing boiler, no solar, but a controlled residential ventilation system with heat recovery.
Best regards,
Andreas
Goldi09111 schrieb:
Quick question: Is it possible to meet the 2014 Energy Saving Ordinance using a gas condensing boiler and a controlled ventilation system without relying on solar?
If you really mean the earlier version of the 2014 Energy Saving Ordinance, with the building permit / planning permission submitted before the end of that year, then the answer is:
Yes, it is possible. We are currently doing it. Gas condensing boiler, no solar, but a controlled residential ventilation system with heat recovery.
Best regards,
Andreas
G
Goldi0911128 Jan 2016 13:35No, I mean the currently valid Energy Saving Ordinance 2014 since we have not submitted a building permit / planning permission.
Hi,
Then it’s going to be tight. Houses are never exactly comparable, but here’s a rough estimate:
We will use a gas condensing boiler, no solar, but a controlled residential ventilation system with heat recovery, resulting in the following values:
Transmission loss 67.2%
Primary energy demand 75%
So we are slightly worse than the KfW 70 standard, which you now need to meet in order to get any building permit / planning permission at all.
We are already building with a fairly good insulation standard (wall U-value 0.16, windows with U-value 0.5), so it will be difficult to lower the primary energy demand further by adding more insulation.
You will probably have to include solar thermal systems here.
5,000 € wasted for nothing, thank the eco lobby…!
Best regards,
Andreas
Goldi09111 schrieb:
No, I mean the currently valid Energy Saving Regulation 2014 since we did not submit a building permit / planning permission application.
Then it’s going to be tight. Houses are never exactly comparable, but here’s a rough estimate:
We will use a gas condensing boiler, no solar, but a controlled residential ventilation system with heat recovery, resulting in the following values:
Transmission loss 67.2%
Primary energy demand 75%
So we are slightly worse than the KfW 70 standard, which you now need to meet in order to get any building permit / planning permission at all.
We are already building with a fairly good insulation standard (wall U-value 0.16, windows with U-value 0.5), so it will be difficult to lower the primary energy demand further by adding more insulation.
You will probably have to include solar thermal systems here.
5,000 € wasted for nothing, thank the eco lobby…!
Best regards,
Andreas
Last year, we applied for KfW 70 certification without solar and received it without any issues; even KfW 55 would have been possible with an air heat pump. We have a gas heating system with a ventilation system featuring heat recovery—nothing more. However, the insulation is quite decent.
Bauexperte schrieb:
A fireplace is purely for comfort; wood is expensive and only pays off if you can obtain it cheaply or for free. Besides, in a modern single-family home, even the four candles on the Advent wreath provide plenty of warmth.
Regards, BauexperteGreat post overall (as always).
Of course, the point about wood is 100% correct.
I could bring out my formula weapon and do the math (I recently did this for my boss regarding exactly the same fireplace issue—he was surprised, but still bought one and now he knows… you can’t really save money).
Conclusion: heating with wood is definitely more expensive if you buy the wood.
As I’ve mentioned several times here in the forum: this is a lifestyle item.
Bauexperte says comfort. That’s true. I have a stove like that myself. Saving money? Never. As with everything in life: enjoyment has its cost.
Best regards
Thorsten
Similar topics