In 20 years, every current system will have reached the end of its lifespan. Then you can switch again, to whatever the current state of technology is.
Put differently: Can you afford these gimmicks from a budget perspective? None of the options make sense purely from an economic point of view. You pay extra everywhere just to ease your environmental conscience
1. Then you have heated for 20 years with one of the most economical systems there is.
2. Why should gas become "brutally" expensive by then? [...]
Of course, these are both good arguments. Why not use what is available now as efficiently as possible and then switch to whatever in the future.
Apart from that, the argument about economic viability just made me realize that a combined heat and power plant might actually be questionable in our case.
Certainly, electricity consumption will be higher in a house than in an apartment, but in the end, it only becomes economical if you consume as much of the electricity yourself as possible. And if I look at the fact that the payback in our case basically only happens through the electricity costs, then the calculation suddenly looks quite different. I might only just manage to recoup that within the lifetime of the fuel cell, if at all, and then you really have to ask yourself whether it's all that sensible.
Green is always welcome, but putting a big financial burden on yourself ... hm.
In these nice model calculations, I overlooked that households sometimes have extremely high electricity consumption. That our consumption rises from 1500kWh at 90m² to 4000kWh just because we live in a house with a few more square meters is unrealistic.
Too bad, now the whole project is in jeopardy again. I really should have done the math properly beforehand,