CO2 Carbon Footprint Gas Heating vs. Heat Pump in New Buildings

The calculation is broken down very transparently above - please tell me where it is "nicely" calculated, that is the real question.

You are projecting the present into the future, electricity price, gas price, CO2 penalties - compensations, durability and prices of the systems. I see an error tolerance of +/-30% because of the future and political decisions. That is where I can nicely calculate the result to my goal.

The accounting trick is that price optimality does not reflect resource optimality. If it were really about environmental protection, all "compensation" measures would also be taken even if people only installed heat pumps. Instead, there is window dressing. Of course, every emission that does not have to occur is superfluous and therefore harmful even if it is compensated. Because the reference is never the current state, but what could have been done better instead. Economic calculation and climate balance are not congruent.

So if it were really about environmental protection, then according to my calculation, I would claim that one should install the gas bill and invest the saved 20,000 euros in CO2 compensation. That could compensate about 700 tons of CO2. Unless CO2 compensation is fraud, but as I said, the discussion goes too far for me at this point.

So if it were really about environmental protection, then by my calculation I would claim that you should include the gas bill and invest the saved 20,000 euros in CO2 compensation. That could compensate for about 700 tons of CO2. Unless CO2 compensation is fraud, but as I said, the discussion goes too far for me at this point.

Correct. And that could be consistently thought through to the end: until you live in small apartments in a multi-family house, where the heating works much more efficiently per person centrally. And all the money you wanted to spend on buying a house you invest in environmental and/or climate protection. There is a reason why this does not happen. Almost no one will do what you have logically recognized above – even though, of course, you are factually right.

You factor the present into the future, electricity price, gas price, CO2 penalty payments - compensations, durability and prices of the systems. I see an error tolerance of +/-30% there, because of the future and political decisions. I can easily calculate the result to fit my goal

So if I understand your post correctly, this is about possible costs in EUR. Ok, then I come to the conclusion that I save 19,000 euros today (20k - 1k for the CO2 compensation) and then have to buy expensive gas in the future instead of cheaper (possibly even self-generated) electricity. That's true, but 19,000 euros seems generous to me.

And actually, it was not about really wanting to save EUR, but that gas heating currently has such a bad CO2 reputation. My claim is that the CO2 footprint can be (over)compensated - and clearly so in this calculation. If that is actually wrong, then the discussion makes no sense. But I don't believe that.

First, I would check the offers ... regarding the price aspect.

and then ... we simply can no longer afford to continue blowing CO2 into the air. That should be avoided wherever possible, because I quote

Die ersten 10 Prozent verschwinden schnell, aber es ist nicht sehr viel. Der zweite Teil dauert Jahrhunderte bis Jahrtausende, aber das sind nur 80 Prozent“, sagt Ed Boyle, Professor für Ozeangeochemie am MIT. Er sagt, dass das letzte Kohlendioxid, das in die Atmosphäre gelangt, Zehntausende von Jahren braucht, um wieder zu verschwinden.

And it wasn't really about me wanting to save EUR, but rather that gas heating currently has such a bad CO2 reputation. My claim is that you can (over)compensate the CO2 footprint - and significantly so in this calculation. If that is actually wrong, then the discussion doesn't make sense. But I don't believe that.

You can overcompensate: Just as you wrote to me in your last reply. Buy greenland for the price difference between gas heating and heat pump, plant trees, and make sure nothing is deforested during your lifetime. Or buy and operate solar systems. Buy a flue gas desulfurization for an African coal plant. What doesn't work is to sensibly "compensate" anything for the 1000€. Simply because the whole concept of emissions at one point + compensation elsewhere is not coherent.