GAS / SOLAR or GAS / Ventilation + Heat Recovery

Hello,

we currently have an offer for a new building.
We have been given the choice for the heating:

Gas/Solar
or for a price €1000.- cheaper (compared to Solar) a
ventilation system Lunos-E2 with heat recovery.

Now I am quite at a loss as to what the better decision is.
However, I tend towards ventilation with heat recovery (instead of Gas/Solar with simple ventilation).
Price is not decisive.

Ideas/questions/advice?

Regards,
M.

Would both be suitable for KfW70, according to your provider? Or does it not matter to you?

Personally, I would take both regardless, I could rather do without solar. But I once heard that you should definitely at least plan the possibility for solar (i.e. installation possibly later). Oh... oops, I just read: you would also have ventilation with gas/solar... I wanted to give the tip not to do without ventilation because of the risk of mold.

Well, I have no arguments, no numbers either, it’s more of a gut feeling... a fact-based answer will surely come later

ok, the thing with the cables going up to the roof is definitely a good argument. KfW70 remains in both cases. From the savings potential (I suppose), both should be about the same?

...The potential savings (I suppose) should be about the same for both?

Hardly. Where does that assumption come from? Did the HVAC planner calculate that? Furthermore, I doubt that a KfW approval will be granted if the EEWG requirements are not met! In case of violations, the fines are just as high here as for breaches of the Energy Saving Ordinance.

best regards

Hello €uro,

In case of violations, the fines here are as high as for violations of the Energy Saving Ordinance.

But the Energy Saving Ordinance can be so easily complied with on paper...

I often wonder these days whether the inspectors are all asleep...

Rhenish greetings

Hello construction expert,

...The Energy Saving Ordinance can be so easily complied with "on paper" ...

not only that, with KfW it is comparable, as far as it exclusively concerns the paper form. Differences still arise. With KfW, at least the documents are checked for plausibility. With the Energy Saving Ordinance, no, at best the completeness of the papers is ticked off. That a clerk at a lower building authority is completely overwhelmed both in terms of time and expertise is probably the norm.
Where there is no plaintiff, there is no judge. However, what is stupid about the whole story (Energy Saving Ordinance, EEWG) is that externally the builder is responsible.
With KfW funding at least partially, the creator is also on board, but not with the execution.
Only from KfW 55 onwards is construction supervision required.

Best regards