Anyone who buys a house from the 70s and wants to bring it energetically on par with today's energy-efficient houses is told by the energy consultant between the lines that they can do it for their green conscience if they like, but financially and despite subsidies it won't pay off. The average residential building in Germany has a demand of around 150 kWh/(m2a) and falls into class E (source: Verbraucherzentrale). This can perhaps still be expected as a standard from the buyer of an existing property, but certainly not the leap from an energy guzzler to energetic modernity.
It doesn't seem to be that far off. Nordanney is also bringing his house from the 60s into the modern age, and I doubt he is putting money in purely out of hobby. I also deliberately left out a concrete number at this point. It is clear that the big jump is from 300 to 80 kWh and any further optimization then has an increasingly unfavorable cost-benefit ratio. But costs do not scale linearly either.
By the way, dealing with average values doesn't help anyone. Anyone insulating the facade will not stop at 6cm just because they have reached the average of all buildings, but will use more material. The effort for bonding and plastering remains the same, whether it is 6cm or 16cm insulation.
So far, energy transition policy has been rather nebulous. Hardly anyone knew what the best solution for their house was, nor what the measures would cost them in total. Only now, as the fog is clearing and people are gaining an overview of the legal requirements, the market and the technical possibilities, having conversations with craftsmen, getting quotes, etc., are they realizing that they won't get away with just a few thousand euros.
I can partly understand that, and I also have little understanding for the back and forth in politics while at the same time creating artificial time pressure (before the summer break, starting 2024...). I am also annoyed by the strong focus on heat generation instead of the building envelope.
But when you look at the end goal, net zero in 20-30 years, it should be clear to everyone that this cannot be achieved with a few small improvements. This is a major effort for the whole country. That has been clear for a long time if one wanted to listen.
And just one thing on democratic decisions. A large part of Germans reject the Building Energy Act (76%).
Sure. As long as it's abstractly about "more climate protection," everyone is for it. As soon as it concerns their own wallet, everyone thinks someone else should pay for it. Cognitive dissonance and the St. Florian principle, after all. This is true for every specific measure proposed so far. Whether wind farms or power lines nearby, driving or flying less, driving more efficient cars, insulating houses...
Only photovoltaic systems on one’s own roof seem to receive approval. At least as long as the bill for the feed-in tariff is not shown separately as a Renewable Energy Act surcharge.
