District heating usage - Consumption and costs normal?

In our new development area, district heating is mandatory. Although district heating was also recommended to me if I had the choice.

Absolutely reliable No extra maintenance costs If there are defects or similar issues, the service comes immediately and repairs free of charge.

The heating system never needs to be replaced.

It is probably not uncommon that gas or geothermal energy causes significant costs after the warranty expires

But the question is in many more rural areas – what does the one-time connection cost for a new building?

For our mother, they wanted €11,000 one-time connection fee including transfer station + additionally needed hot water storage for the summer. Luckily, there was no connection obligation. And the subsidy for the system runs out (after inquiry) in about 5 years – what if there are no more subsidies? Then district heating will become a problem for us. Price per kWh nearly 4 cents. Basic fee?

Our concept now: (Passive house – planned from the start)

Brine heat pump (about €6,000) Geothermal baskets €2,000 (DIY) installation during soil/garden excavation (€1,000)

The heat pump including installation is thus cheaper than the pure district heating connection.

+ Additionally photovoltaic system 7–10 kWp.

10 kWp costs about €12,000. (Return on investment after 7–10 years – even faster with electricity price increases)

With this, heating costs/hot water costs + household electricity are supposed to be reduced to €0. Rather with a small plus.

I think more of the combo heat pump and photovoltaic than district heating.


P.S. we now get district heating for €1,000 as backup (in case our heating ever fails) without obligations

P.S. and that with district heating no maintenance costs/repairs arise – well – the costs have to be passed on to the customer...

But don’t make it look better than it is. Although zero heating costs are achievable, what extra investments have you already made? Additional costs for passive house compared to energy saving ordinance standard. Photovoltaic system, geothermal drilling, or whatever... With district heating, you build energy saving ordinance standard without a heater and pay connection fees, transfer point. Usually that is much, much less than your additional costs. Now you just have to save against that. Would I still experience that at 60?

But don't fool yourself. Although zero heating costs are achievable, what extra investments have you already made? The surcharge for a passive house compared to the Energy Saving Ordinance standard. Photovoltaic system, geothermal drilling, etc... With district heating, you build to the Energy Saving Ordinance standard without heating and pay connection costs, transfer point. Usually, that's much, much less than your surcharges. Now you just have to save against that. Will I still experience that at 60?

Passive house was a given! A large house with a large plot is being sold, and a downsizing is being done in return. Everything age-appropriate on one level.

No geothermal drilling – but geothermal baskets. That means the earthworker digs a bit more, puts in baskets, done.

Since the municipality wants a rainwater partial area of the roof to drain via a soakaway trench, perfect combination. The rainwater additionally heats the soil. We calculate with a realistic annual performance factor of 5, since source temperature is certainly above 0 degrees. More like 5–10 degrees.

2000 kWh for heating
1000 kWh for hot water.
3000 kWh : annual performance factor 5 = 600 kWh electricity demand for heating + generous margin... 1000 kWh electricity for heating + hot water.
At €0.25 per kWh – energy costs of €250 per year.

As said, every new building (that wants district heating) pays €11,000 in the building area – I find that, well – and that with a monopoly!

That means, with the saved €2,000 compared to the district heating connection, we could pay for heating/hot water for about 8 years.
Can someone tell me what district heating will politically look like in 8 years?

I don't rely on a system made attractive by EU/DE subsidies – only as long as the funding runs –.. the fact that biomass is used here isn’t to our taste anyway.

Completely forgot, from the BAFA we get at least 4000€ funding back
From 9,000€ investment it becomes 5,000€.
That means we save about 6,000€ compared to our fw connection. With that, we can heat and pay for hot water for 24 years (without price increases).
Or pay for a 5kWp photovoltaic system with it ....

[...]District heating [...] Absolutely reliable[,] No extra maintenance costs[.] If there is a defect or similar issue, the service comes immediately and repairs it free of charge. The heating system never needs to be replaced.

That is certainly not free of charge. District heating is, IMHO, a kind of all-inclusive package; you have warmth without any effort on your part regarding technology, space for the technology, maintenance, and so on. This package must(!) have its price; initially (let's say calculated over 20 years) it must be more expensive than an own gas boiler or something comparable. In favor of district heating, fixed cost dilution can have an effect. It is simply (specifically) cheaper to heat 100 houses/units with one large system than to do the same with 100 small systems. Part of this saving goes to administration, part remains as profit with the operator, and ideally, part also goes to the users.

Besides the pure cost consideration, of course, there is the feeling of having one's "own" heating system or not. And naturally, the choices are limited (district heating obligation yes/no, gas supply yes/no, Energy Saving Ordinance, Renewable Energies Heat Act).