ᐅ Radiators or underfloor heating: Which option is recommended in these circumstances?
Created on: 8 Mar 2018 17:29
J
jundb
Hello,
we are about to purchase/build a solid masonry semi-detached house of 142 sqm (1526 sq ft), KfW55 standard, from a developer. Standard/included are radiators on the first floor + second floor + attic, optionally there is underfloor heating for €5700 (plus presumably property transfer tax) only(!) on the ground floor (is that so, no need to argue about that).
I am inexperienced with underfloor heating myself, I have nothing against it, but I have not dreamed of it for decades (unlike a fireplace…) and I am used to radiators and have always managed well with them so far. Please no fundamental discussions about underfloor heating or radiators, medically, swollen feet, dust, “thermal comfort,” it “shouldn’t” be more expensive, etc., I fear there would only be back and forth here. I want to know your opinion on whether underfloor heating under these(!) circumstances makes sense, that is a real approx. €6000 (about $6500) extra cost, only on the ground floor (so only for the living room, kitchen, hallway, guest toilet (and these 4 areas would be controlled separately)) and in addition (regardless of financial or energy benefits or not, it is an old dream) a fireplace in the living room.
What I have read so far, I think:
- In terms of energy consumption, there is not much difference, more efficient due to low temperature operation, fine, but radiators are not that bad in a well-insulated new KfW55 house either. Somewhere on a professional sanitary trade association page I read about 10% less energy with underfloor heating in a new build, but since it is only one of three floors, maybe 5%, that is max about €50 (about $55) per year.
- My wife prefers underfloor heating so far, but without rational reasons or much experience, simply out of curiosity for something new and supposedly better. She often feels cold like many women, even when the room is warm, and I could imagine that in such phases she would prefer a radiating radiator that warms noticeably rather than a rather constant and slow to heat up underfloor heating. On the other hand, the fireplace would help with that.
- Since we generally prefer it rather cool/use little heating, I even imagine in the summer half of the year it could be better without underfloor heating if we want to cool down faster during a sudden weather change or, conversely, heat the living room within 1-2 hours during a sudden temperature drop.
- Another possible point against underfloor heating: the build quality and coordination of many subcontractors with this developer is not always great. Radiators, as far as I know (or am I mistaken?), are not as sensitive; not much can go wrong there, but a poorly installed underfloor heating system would, I believe, be unpleasant.
- The only real bigger argument for underfloor heating on the ground floor for me personally is the space gain from removing the radiators. We need to take a closer look at where they would be and how much they would be in the way; we do not yet have detailed plans. In the guest toilet and hallway, I don’t really care (since they would be used little anyway), leaving the one in the kitchen (I’ve also often heard that people simply left it out in open kitchen concepts like ours are planned). Then only the one in the living room remains.
Without the extra cost, I would take underfloor heating, but as it is and only to save 1-2 radiators on the ground floor, it does not seem worthwhile for us (under the described circumstances!).
Now it's your turn...
Thanks & regards
Jo
we are about to purchase/build a solid masonry semi-detached house of 142 sqm (1526 sq ft), KfW55 standard, from a developer. Standard/included are radiators on the first floor + second floor + attic, optionally there is underfloor heating for €5700 (plus presumably property transfer tax) only(!) on the ground floor (is that so, no need to argue about that).
I am inexperienced with underfloor heating myself, I have nothing against it, but I have not dreamed of it for decades (unlike a fireplace…) and I am used to radiators and have always managed well with them so far. Please no fundamental discussions about underfloor heating or radiators, medically, swollen feet, dust, “thermal comfort,” it “shouldn’t” be more expensive, etc., I fear there would only be back and forth here. I want to know your opinion on whether underfloor heating under these(!) circumstances makes sense, that is a real approx. €6000 (about $6500) extra cost, only on the ground floor (so only for the living room, kitchen, hallway, guest toilet (and these 4 areas would be controlled separately)) and in addition (regardless of financial or energy benefits or not, it is an old dream) a fireplace in the living room.
What I have read so far, I think:
- In terms of energy consumption, there is not much difference, more efficient due to low temperature operation, fine, but radiators are not that bad in a well-insulated new KfW55 house either. Somewhere on a professional sanitary trade association page I read about 10% less energy with underfloor heating in a new build, but since it is only one of three floors, maybe 5%, that is max about €50 (about $55) per year.
- My wife prefers underfloor heating so far, but without rational reasons or much experience, simply out of curiosity for something new and supposedly better. She often feels cold like many women, even when the room is warm, and I could imagine that in such phases she would prefer a radiating radiator that warms noticeably rather than a rather constant and slow to heat up underfloor heating. On the other hand, the fireplace would help with that.
- Since we generally prefer it rather cool/use little heating, I even imagine in the summer half of the year it could be better without underfloor heating if we want to cool down faster during a sudden weather change or, conversely, heat the living room within 1-2 hours during a sudden temperature drop.
- Another possible point against underfloor heating: the build quality and coordination of many subcontractors with this developer is not always great. Radiators, as far as I know (or am I mistaken?), are not as sensitive; not much can go wrong there, but a poorly installed underfloor heating system would, I believe, be unpleasant.
- The only real bigger argument for underfloor heating on the ground floor for me personally is the space gain from removing the radiators. We need to take a closer look at where they would be and how much they would be in the way; we do not yet have detailed plans. In the guest toilet and hallway, I don’t really care (since they would be used little anyway), leaving the one in the kitchen (I’ve also often heard that people simply left it out in open kitchen concepts like ours are planned). Then only the one in the living room remains.
Without the extra cost, I would take underfloor heating, but as it is and only to save 1-2 radiators on the ground floor, it does not seem worthwhile for us (under the described circumstances!).
Now it's your turn...
Thanks & regards
Jo
And what does the builder charge extra for all the other stuff, the various extras you typically install in a new build? Are only 20 x 20 cm (8 x 8 inches) tiles included, and is the installation of 30 x 60 cm (12 x 24 inches) tiles subject to a huge surcharge? Larger bathtub, walk-in shower? Ask about that and decide afterwards, especially since the house doesn’t seem to justify the cost.
Could the builder possibly be Deutsche Reihenhaus? It sounds a bit like that to me, even though as far as I know it would be new that you can even choose underfloor heating on the ground floor.
If it is them, don’t let yourself get stressed out here. Their houses are very comfortable to live in, and you won’t be missing out on many extras (there are hardly any to choose from). In some areas, the standard is surprisingly good.
I am actually a big fan of underfloor heating, but honestly, I’m not sure if I would choose it under these conditions. I might even pay the price (I try not to focus too much on individual items but on the overall package and the final figure in the bottom right), but only for the ground floor? On the other hand, my parents built their house the same way back in the 1970s: underfloor heating in the living room/dining area/kitchen, radiators in the other rooms. In my experience, the house simply has underfloor heating. Not “a bit of underfloor heating,” not “a mixed system.” It’s just an underfloor heating house.
If it is them, don’t let yourself get stressed out here. Their houses are very comfortable to live in, and you won’t be missing out on many extras (there are hardly any to choose from). In some areas, the standard is surprisingly good.
I am actually a big fan of underfloor heating, but honestly, I’m not sure if I would choose it under these conditions. I might even pay the price (I try not to focus too much on individual items but on the overall package and the final figure in the bottom right), but only for the ground floor? On the other hand, my parents built their house the same way back in the 1970s: underfloor heating in the living room/dining area/kitchen, radiators in the other rooms. In my experience, the house simply has underfloor heating. Not “a bit of underfloor heating,” not “a mixed system.” It’s just an underfloor heating house.
If you decide to go for it, I wouldn’t mix systems. Stick with underfloor heating, especially if you use district heating.
Even if you’re not asking for advice, I would recommend not rushing things. Especially when it’s a life decision.
What I completely understand is the desire to avoid a long commute. In the Frankfurt area, you inevitably have to make compromises in that regard.
Even if you’re not asking for advice, I would recommend not rushing things. Especially when it’s a life decision.
What I completely understand is the desire to avoid a long commute. In the Frankfurt area, you inevitably have to make compromises in that regard.
With a local heating system using a pellet boiler, you will be dealing with supply temperatures of around 70-80°C (158-176°F) at your house transfer station, and return temperatures of roughly 40-50°C (104-122°F). In your case, underfloor heating will not save energy because your house side can operate with supply temperatures up to 60°C (140°F) without any change in efficiency.
For underfloor heating with lower supply temperatures, you would need a different house transfer station, which is likely more expensive and partly explains the higher additional cost of the BT.
For underfloor heating with lower supply temperatures, you would need a different house transfer station, which is likely more expensive and partly explains the higher additional cost of the BT.
Joedreck schrieb:
What is absolutely understandable to me is the wish not to have a long commute.I can really relate to that desire. I would also be willing to make compromises to save every minute of commuting time. (In fact, I have done so myself.)
Anyway, in my opinion, a mixed system installation is really not a good idea. I would stick with underfloor heating.
Similar topics