Home financing ever possible? Probably not!

If we get a proper winter again, which cannot be ruled out. With temperatures for weeks of a maximum of -10 and at night -20 degrees, that is exactly when heat pumps will reach their limits. If then heating has to be done electrically for weeks. If the grids then have to be regulated, it will get cold in the place.

Is there a grandfather clause for houses built today or will everyone switch to hydrogen in 15 years?

If you want to cap rents and impose the costs on the landlord. That would be pure socialism. Do you want to demolish all the old buildings in German cities and rebuild them? How do you want to renovate there? Many houses were insulated in the past. The most beautiful façades made of natural stone were sacrificed to an insulation craze and irretrievably destroyed. Why? Because it was tax advantageous and because the costs could be passed on to the rent. These measures alone have led to a significant increase in rent prices.

Sure, the tenant also saves 3.50 euros in heating costs per month. But they have to pay 30 percent more rent. Every month.

On the other hand, an oil heating system never breaks down. Repairing is surely allowed. What can go wrong?
The oil burner. I replace that. The old boiler rusts through. Yes. I can renew it with an old burner that I replace again two weeks later.

I keep it simple. I have a Viessmann Vitodens oil heating system. I will now buy and store a used, identical heating system for 1000 euros. This heating system has been installed millions of times. No one will notice if I replace it. Then I will have peace for the next 30 years.

And if everyone panics and switches away from heating oil, it will also get cheaper.

Apartment buildings can perform better in comparison because the ratio of living space to exterior surface is better. A tenant there has only one exterior wall instead of four.

Nevertheless, your writing clearly shows that landlords must also be held responsible. I do not think it is right that all heating costs fall solely on the tenant. 350kWh/m2? Whatever, the tenant pays it.

Some kind of progressively increasing cost-sharing would be appropriate. Because I claim that facade insulation on apartment buildings is not disproportionately expensive relative to the living space and compared to single-family houses. It should be financially feasible. Also in the example with 120kWh/m2. On the other hand, converting to underfloor heating I consider nonsense.

Again..it's about[inquote="motorradsilke, post: 623458, member: 53312"]
If his quite effective heating breaks down, he should replace it with a heat pump.
[/QUOTE]

No, he will repair it and many others will do the same. And that makes sense in this case, because the consumption is within the "normal" range.
By the way, I would be interested in numbers on how many retirees this would affect and how many actually cannot afford it. Especially here in the forum, people often talk about expected inheritance.

Nope, he repairs it and many others will do the same. And in this case that is also reasonable because the consumption is within the "normal" range.

If the heating system is repairable. At some point it isn’t anymore or a repair is no longer economical, and under normal circumstances, the heating would be replaced. If the new law comes into effect, even the most uneconomical repairs will still be carried out.

If the new law comes into effect, even the most uneconomical repair will still be carried out.

That would solve the problem, wouldn't it? Great, then we can now look ahead optimistically again.

In this case, uneconomical operation is almost impossible if the other option would mean a complete renovation of the house.