ᐅ We are planning to build in 2022; the planning phase is beginning.

A three-sided fireplace is also planned for us.
Depending on the brand of the insert you want or are offered, the price ranges from 8,000 to 12,000.
It is important to ensure that the insert is not chosen too large, as otherwise the room or floor can overheat too quickly. You would then need to open the windows and reduce the fire. However, the fireplace insert does not tolerate that well because it does not operate at its optimal efficiency and thus does not burn properly. Over time, this can damage both the fireplace and the chimney.

If people consider a fireplace to be essential, they should clarify the basis of this view: if it is based on recent experiences, then they simply have a different opinion than I do and a good chance of sticking to it in practice. However, if it stems from experiences in a home built around 1980 (or otherwise from the era before modern energy saving regulations, basically "prehistory"), then they will probably only use it to create a white Christmas and otherwise mostly avoid heating up a room by using it while leaving windows wide open. In that case, they will regret having spent so much money on such expensive fuel. I recommend a fake fireplace not primarily because it is cheaper, but because it’s not a flaw, but sometimes even a feature, that a placebo contains no active ingredient — here meaning: no side effect. A fireplace simulation warms the occupants mentally without physically heating them. I have only driven a Twingo once as a rental, but I have spent a lot of time with the Uno and Corsa, as well as the Agila, which is nowadays often the case only with Mercedes models, unlike before 1993 without exception. Currently, I am considering a Panda.

---

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

So, I completely misunderstand this then? I’m happy to be corrected!

A huge fireplace costing 15,000€ won’t get as hot as a small Swedish stove that only costs 2,000€?
I definitely don’t want to use it for heating and I also don’t want to be melting away during a TV evening...
In that case, I’m much better off with a small stove where I can just throw in a few logs that burn slowly and steadily, right?

exto1791 schrieb:

So am I completely misunderstanding this?
A huge built-in fireplace costing €15,000 (about $16,200) won’t get as hot as a small wood stove that only costs €2,000 (about $2,160)?

Partly. Both will get hot, but the difference is how long it takes for the heat to be released. Naturally, a built-in fireplace is so expensive because much more work is involved in installation. You can’t really compare that to a regular wood stove. You can also buy a “cheap” built-in fireplace for a lot of money, but let’s leave that situation out for now.
If you want to keep it simple, take the example of an expensive wood stove versus a cheaper wood stove:
The expensive stove is definitely better suited for heating because it has more mass—that means more material used (thicker steel walls, soapstone included, etc.). That’s usually what the price reflects. Because of the mass, it takes longer for the stove to heat up itself, and then it slowly releases the heat into the room. A cheaper wood stove lacks this material and therefore releases heat “all at once” into your room. This provides quick warmth but the room cools down quickly once the fire burns out.

exto1791 schrieb:

In that case, wouldn’t I be clearly better off with a small stove where I just throw in a few logs that burn slowly?

You can’t really say that in general. You can’t just throw “a few logs” into the stove and expect it to work well. For wood to burn cleanly and properly, a certain temperature must be maintained in the firebox, which you only get if you maintain a good fire. If you don’t burn cleanly, soot and smoke will form, and the fire won’t look very nice in the fireplace. I don’t want to overstate it—it’s not rocket science—but generally it is harder to maintain a small, clean fire than to just heat at full power.

But you’re not alone in this situation. Nowadays, almost no one buys a fireplace to heat their entire house and replace their main heating system. 99% of buyers get wood stoves simply because they want one. Stove manufacturers know this and have adapted accordingly. If I were you, I’d get advice at a stove showroom, where they can recommend something suitable. For €2,000 to €4,000 (about $2,160 to $4,320), you can get a good-looking stove (not primarily for heating).

And compare the heating output of the fireplace with that of your house. Houses typically have 4 to 7 kW, and small wood stoves around 5 kW. You can imagine the resulting temperature in a room, and no, underfloor heating cannot adjust down quickly enough.

There are also really good fake fireplaces, weak ethanol fireplaces, and even 4K fireplace Blu-rays.

I don’t want to come across as a big environmentalist, but we really need to stop constantly burning things!

rdwlnts schrieb:

Environmental activists say we really need to stop burning things all the time!

This is not an issue with wood stoves if the combustion is clean (enough fuel, dry wood). Since 2015, wood stoves must meet certain regulations to be installed at all. Because many older fireplaces do not comply with these standards, they had to or must be taken out of operation. Every chimney sweep can measure fine dust and other emissions and will confirm that these concerns are unwarranted for new stoves.

Edit: All of this is defined in the Federal Emission Control Act (Bundes-Immissionsschutzgesetz).