Estimate electricity consumption with heat pump

so by stating my total network-related electricity in kWh, I am speaking plainly - right? I don’t have to and will not mislead anyone. Why should I do that? Moreover, I am not even from the "photovoltaic" faction but simply because I can calculate ;-) and back then I also received a ton of subsidies on the side. I don’t have to fudge the numbers to make it fit for me. Unfortunately, the conditions have changed recently. With a new acquisition, it would look completely different, and maybe I would even make different decisions? Anyone who believes that such a small photovoltaic system makes you self-sufficient in winter also believes that managing directors run businesses (uhhhmm, lemon fold lemon folds)

But since I even stated the price per kWh, everyone can calculate for themselves (with their current numbers) how it would look distributed over the year for them. But I am happy to provide interested parties with my entire data set (Excel). I record monthly. For myself, for the billing with Westnetz (feed-in tariff), as well as for billing with my company (electricity charged in company cars)

By the way, anyone who gets annoyed for longer than a one-time 15 minutes about the (sales) tax return is doing something wrong ;-) Every subsequent one is copy/paste.

I said down to 0%... and that will definitely happen on rainy days in autumn or winter, that the photovoltaic output is close to 0. You are deceiving yourself

I don't understand. 50% self-sufficiency is a great thing. So on average, half of the annual consumption is covered by photovoltaic electricity at 6-8 cents instead of the current 25.8 cents (which you can currently contract) or whatever price. I am also happy about every year 2,500 kWh of self-consumption at production costs of 6 cents. That's at least 500€ saved electricity costs every year. Plus 7,500 kWh fed in at 8 cents = 600€. How are you deceiving yourself then?

By the way, anyone who gets annoyed for longer than just once 15 minutes over the (sales) tax declaration is doing something wrong ;-) Every subsequent one is copy/paste.

For new installations it is omitted anyway. The argument is not very convincing.

Whoever believes that such a small photovoltaic system makes you self-sufficient in winter also believes that managing directors run businesses

Exactly. Very few photovoltaic systems make anyone self-sufficient, that is probably not the goal either. But they do contribute something. And you can very easily calculate what yield the photovoltaic system will generate in a year; there are now good empirical values for that, and what that saves you in grid usage and brings in feed-in tariffs. You just have to compare that against the investment for the photovoltaic system. It’s actually not that difficult.
If you want to be exact, you also include maintenance for a broken inverter here and there.

As I said, the exact value doesn't matter to me at all, and whether it’s ultimately called Passive House or KFW40 is also irrelevant to me. I just received an energy certificate for a regular house from them.

Considering that mainly builders are represented here, these are relatively astonishing answers for the questioner.

The final energy demand in the energy demand certificate refers to the amount of the energy carrier consumed in the house, not to the amount of heat entering the house! The primary energy demand takes into account the resource usage and emissions of the respective energy carrier used, including the impacts in the supply chain (transport, generation, etc. - for example, wood has a factor of 0.2, natural gas 1.1, and electricity 1.8)

The energy carrier used is always indicated in the energy certificate and thermal insulation proof. In this case, it is electricity, since the primary energy demand is 17 kWh/m²a – electricity is rated with a factor of 1.8 (probably differing here due to rounding to whole values).

The KfW value for the KfW40 house also refers to the primary energy demand, not the final energy demand.

Furthermore, the final energy demand (and also the primary energy demand) does not refer to the living area of the building, but for energy demand certificates to a not directly measurable usable building area. This (normally) results from 1/3 of the heated volume Ve. This value is always larger than the living area (except with very flat ceilings), so that for example, at 150 m² of living area you get (as an example) 200 m² of usable area – the absolute final energy demand is thus greater than 10*150 kWh/m²a!

In this example, 10 kWh/m²a of electricity per year are required. With 200 m² of living area, this would result in about 250 m² of usable building area to which this value refers. According to the energy certificate, you therefore need about 2500 kWh of ELECTRICITY to heat the building. However, reality can deviate upwards or downwards here due to different usage (hot water) or suboptimal operation of the heat pump.

I have read this three times now and must admit that it confuses me more than it helps. That means the same building envelope is classified very differently for final energy demand, depending on whether I generate the heat by gas (~1:1) or heat pump (1:3.6)? The factors for primary energy demand do correct this a bit, but in the example, gas would still be 1.1 and the heat pump 0.5 kWh primary energy per kWh of heat?