In-roof solutions are considered damn expensive. Could you at least reveal how high the price per kWp is? Net, of course. Preferably with a counter calculation for the above-roof system and roof tiles.
19500 additional costs. The house with gas would have around 1000,- gas costs per year and 2000 kWh electricity per year for two people, correspondingly more for three etc. The KfW 40 plus house saves the gas, 19.5 years until break-even, but due to geothermal heat pump and controlled residential ventilation, the electricity demand will certainly double. So in the end, you are clearly in the area of 30 years until break-even. If you now also calculate what would happen if you hadn’t invested your 19500,- in KfW 40 but instead in ETFs on the DAX or S&P over 30 years, then it becomes totally unprofitable. K.
Nothing more needs to be written on this topic.
Of course you can... but you don’t have to.
Just build 40+ nicely and be a "part of the solution".
The only question is: part of which problem?! Probably the one of the new Porsche for the builder, insulation dealer, heat pump manufacturer, etc...
I come to almost 10% higher costs. The kWp price comparison falls short, as I save a lot of tiles, don't need additional mounts, no electrician has to go on the roof, etc. In return, I get a nicer roof and a house that can be extinguished, since the voltage stays below 120V. In the end, the house is also of higher quality, so the money spent has good value.
I come to just under 10% higher costs. The kWp price comparison falls short because I save a lot of tiles, don’t need additional mounts, no electrician has to go on the roof, etc.
In return, I get a nicer roof and a fire-extinguishable house, since the voltage remains under 120V.
In the end, the house is also of higher quality, so the money invested has good value.
I would strongly doubt that. You can just give a price, no one here forbids that. We were also interested in an in-roof solution for aesthetic reasons, but the IDE additional costs were so immense that considering the lower yield, it was almost questionable whether it would even pay off.
Apart from that: a tile costs nothing, so you hardly save anything there, the mount also costs nothing and an electrician doesn’t have to go on the roof even with an on-roof solution.
Fire protection is also much more critical with an in-roof solution. Such a thing is usually only of higher quality for oneself.
It definitely looks nicer, but actually only if you have roof windows; otherwise, you can hardly see the difference from 20 m away.
The rooftop solution is installed on mine and I can hardly see any part of the system when I am on the property. From my point of view, it is just money wasted pointlessly. The aesthetically questionable value won't be paid to you afterward anyway. With a photovoltaic system, it's only about amortization, nothing more and nothing less. Besides, rooftop solutions have better efficiency in summer due to better ventilation. I've heard.