Cerberus
2015-05-01 13:48:34
- #1
The advantage of district heating lies in densely built-up areas with many residents. As soon as the development road and house connection are far apart (e.g., more than 10 meters), the connection costs a fortune and is economically pointless.
We are currently building a house without a basement with the development road on the south side, so the utility room is on the east side. Ideal to still squeeze out extra money despite the flat rate of district heating with a contract containing the term connection point, which is heavily debated among lawyers, and to charge an additional 6,500 euros for 20 meters of piping including excavation work. Additional costs follow for a district heating shaft in the house measuring 1m x 1m, since not every district heating provider is able to arrange a house entry less expensively. There are also annual basic fees. Overall, we estimate the extra costs over 10 years to be 12,000 euros. Not to forget the planting ban for the areas covered by district heating pipes, as these can only be laid at right angles at least by one district heating provider.
District heating can be used sensibly, but it can also be abused; therefore, the AVBFernwärmeV should be amended to allow renewable energies to completely replace district heating, even if a connection obligation exists. Furthermore, the term connection point should be clearly regulated here, and it should be stipulated that expert reports on economic efficiency must not be drafted one-sidedly in favor of district heating by excluding competitive alternatives such as heat pumps in combination with photovoltaics and batteries for dubious reasons without this being mentioned in the report.
Regarding the topic of using district heating because of the costs already incurred, we will try to avoid generating additional consumption costs so they don’t get even more money. To what extent this can be managed with secondary heating sources or renewable energies despite tying contracts remains to be determined.
We are currently building a house without a basement with the development road on the south side, so the utility room is on the east side. Ideal to still squeeze out extra money despite the flat rate of district heating with a contract containing the term connection point, which is heavily debated among lawyers, and to charge an additional 6,500 euros for 20 meters of piping including excavation work. Additional costs follow for a district heating shaft in the house measuring 1m x 1m, since not every district heating provider is able to arrange a house entry less expensively. There are also annual basic fees. Overall, we estimate the extra costs over 10 years to be 12,000 euros. Not to forget the planting ban for the areas covered by district heating pipes, as these can only be laid at right angles at least by one district heating provider.
District heating can be used sensibly, but it can also be abused; therefore, the AVBFernwärmeV should be amended to allow renewable energies to completely replace district heating, even if a connection obligation exists. Furthermore, the term connection point should be clearly regulated here, and it should be stipulated that expert reports on economic efficiency must not be drafted one-sidedly in favor of district heating by excluding competitive alternatives such as heat pumps in combination with photovoltaics and batteries for dubious reasons without this being mentioned in the report.
Regarding the topic of using district heating because of the costs already incurred, we will try to avoid generating additional consumption costs so they don’t get even more money. To what extent this can be managed with secondary heating sources or renewable energies despite tying contracts remains to be determined.