How can one circumvent the Energy Saving Ordinance and avoid bureaucratic madness?

...
Why I shouldn’t or “am not allowed” to keep the windows open all day, we find unpleasant. Too much to pay attention to, too much technology, too much everything that is complicated.

...

But you are allowed. Who says you are not allowed to open windows? That is once again one of those often repeated old wives' tales about the reputation of controlled residential ventilation, but it has little to do with the Energy Saving Ordinance or insulation.

About the model houses: I didn’t notice it back then, but what I noticed because we ourselves lived in a town with a former model house park: the houses stand for 10, 15 years and at some point change the company. Where a Mr. Hanno sits, no Mr. Hanno built... and you are also told that the house is not up to today’s technical standards.

Well, I rather believe in the placebo effect when you have developed a fundamental aversion.
When we sit with friends, for example, they do not have our comfort temperature... others have no underfloor heating, so my feet are cold. Others have too few windows for me, so everything feels damp all the time. But I can’t say that the house has a fundamentally bad climate. The size and height of a room also play a role.

Regarding the mentioned cursed Energy Saving Ordinance:

You are talking about good houses where my grandmother once considered central heating installed as good technology, which was fed with heating oil. I don’t want to know what the current owners pay out every month in this unsanitary house. I once heard that the thriftiness makes the residents resort to ear protectors and heating pads. They freeze because hardly any insulation keeps the frost from sneaking into the house.

By contrast, my other grandmother would have gladly had such complicated technology as this heating. She had a coal stove, it was cozy warm, just the way you want it, but in the morning it was cold and you could see your breath. That was because no insulation kept the heat.

Insulation can be made very simply: with a stone. One stone insulates better than another. If poorly insulating stones were found in nature back then, they built thicker, about 60-80 cm thick. Old churches, fincas, ... everywhere where people naturally had to build without technology, these stones insulate and regulate the temperature. Quite naturally. The floor was insulated with straw. Whether there is a good climate in a church because of that, I can’t say. Whether you can endure it well in a finca without technology, also not.
But everywhere where cold is an issue, radiators on wheels are placed, which consume a lot of electricity. I don’t know anyone who would want to do without the comfort of a good heating system in a house that retains heat.

I believe that if you renovate and expand your own hut, as a private person you don’t have to comply with the Energy Saving Ordinance. But I don’t know for sure.

But I think you develop aversions because building according to the Energy Saving Ordinance costs money, more than simply expanding.
No question is stupid, but before complaining further about why pipes are insulated, a lot of input is needed first.

Regards, Yvonne

Hello ypg,

well, at the moment I can’t do more than admit that I have no idea.

Well, I can inquire. And that’s what I’m doing here.

I do agree with you that one/ I has to be careful not to develop a fundamental aversion to "new" construction methods or insulation techniques.
My "problem" is just that I don’t see the economic efficiency! As I said, the principle is similar to the Riester pension. It makes sense somewhere on paper and occasionally for a few cases, but generally it’s completely nonsensical.

If I heavily insulate a house to keep the heat inside and thus save energy, then I first have to advance the money. Because this insulation costs money. And not a little.

Now I have insulated it and the climate, simply warm and dry, is not pleasing. So now I have to install a fresh air system. That costs money.

Now I’m sitting in a very well-insulated building with fresh air supply. Ok.
That I can/shouldn’t have the windows open like in an old grandma’s house should be admitted. Because it is uneconomical.

So, now I watch the video by the aforementioned gentleman and realize that the whole insulation thing is rotting. So I have to redo it. And that, although the actual insulation has not even paid for itself yet. So uneconomical (and possibly unhealthy because of mold).

Personally, I see it like this:

If I want to "afford" a house, then I also have to expect higher monthly additional costs than in an apartment, which is insulated on all sides by other inhabited units.
Now I’m cold in this grandma house. Then I just turn on the heating and pay for it in reality. If warm, then heating off.

Where is the problem?

That way I have a proven house construction which does not rot/mold and at a fair price. Heating costs exist. And one can then talk about the type of heating and the energy source required for it…

If only it were that simple…

Now I’m just hearing from Fischer that there is actually the possibility of "exemption from the Energy Saving Ordinance"... I’ll listen further to what he says... we’ll see

If you hire Google, you do not necessarily only get neutral sites, there is also a lot of propaganda involved. Therefore, use as many neutral sites as possible, a few critical ones are okay, but evaluate them yourself later. The jack of all trades is rare. There is often a good middle ground. Good night. Best regards in brief

Hello, despite 27 posts, no one has said the essential thing yet, which actually surprises me.

Of course, you can build "without [Energieeinsparverordnung]." This possibility is, of course, offered to you by the legislator. The applicable law therefore provides for exceptions and exemptions. The problem with this is probably convincing the appropriate authority of this intention.

This particularly concerns undue hardship and disproportionate investments regarding the requirements of energy saving. And with that, I wish you good luck with the argumentation. A bit of a cozy living climate, a breathing house, and some aluminum hat philosophy won't help you here. You have to shine with facts (physical and economic).

The legal basis can be found in §25 of the [Energieeinsparverordnung] 2014, Section 6 (also applies to the [Energieeinsparverordnung] 2016).

And just for your information: five minutes of googling would probably have been enough to find this out even without the help of this forum.

I have to say that this fisherman already has a few good arguments on his side... My god.

This fisherman is also known in construction like a colorful dog. Just like Oliver Knöbel on the Reeperbahn.

But it doesn’t help you. The application for exemption must be made by your architect, supported by corresponding individual case-related figures.