One should keep in mind, the profession of this gentleman is to inspect defective facades. He notices a concentration of problems on ETICS facades (where ETICS is always equated with EPS, which is wrong). So they are all bad. However, whether actually 10, 1, or 0.01% of the facades have these problems, the good gentleman simply does not know. Where else should he know from.
What really surprises me here is the assumption that grandma’s house is so much better. It would have a better climate. I think that’s nonsense! At grandma’s, it is always boiling hot in winter when you sit too close to the “glowing” radiators that try to keep the house warm. The air is bone dry, the strong convection does the rest. That’s why these water things made of ceramic are hung on the radiators to get a little moisture into the room so that nosebleeds and dry eyes stop.
The basement is cold and damp, musty. You definitely cannot store textiles there, nor files. The pantry is nicely cool, but it molds on the outside wall. The guest toilet as well, because it has no radiator. The window is naturally always tilted open. Guests prefer to enter there in their winter coats because otherwise their glasses freeze to the skin. Comfort is below zero.
She also wastes living space with the radiators; in new buildings, one calculates >€1700 per square meter.
She didn’t insulate the pitched roof. In summer it’s blistering hot there, in winter freezing cold. Vermin have free access. The room is therefore unusable. If the roof were insulated, the first step would at least be a high-quality storage space; as it is, it’s simply dead space.
Just the gain in space alone would already be worth tens of thousands, far beyond any energy savings.
But yes, that is a troll. Or at least a troublemaker who chose complaining as a default attitude before he even knows anything about the topic. The walls are certainly 60 cm thick, hazardous waste would go on the facade, and the officials plan a huge conspiracy even before anyone has ever heard of this gentleman.
This also has nothing to do with dead fish in the stream; some simply have too much time to get worked up about crap that hasn’t even happened yet and about which they know nothing except the representation by Mr. Tin Hat.
Hello Alex,
what arbitrariness? Well, the arbitrariness of some decisions at authorities. Mr. Fischer quotes (verifiably) that the building authority sometimes decides arbitrarily, only to later backtrack.
If you have never had experience with arbitrariness in officialdom, I’m glad for you.
Why do you make other people’s problems your own? What do Mr. Fischer’s activities have to do with you?
Whether someone who argues very well for his (and many others’) interests can be portrayed as a troublemaker is beyond my knowledge.
His statements are one-sided and shortened. He does not have a broad market view but rather his individual experience, which he stylizes as universal.
Besides, he is not solution-oriented when he shouts for “abolition,” that is nonsense. Above all, he criticizes insulation on existing buildings of lower quality. He would find many of those, of course, because they are cheap to have. But that is extremely simplified and not a justification to question fundamentals.
There will always be people who arrange themselves with everything put in their way, no matter how stupid it is. And that is a good thing. Others, however, tackle the problem at its root and try to eliminate it.
Now I have to laugh. Where do you or Mr. Fischer tackle anything at its root? I don’t see it. You look for ways to circumvent the problem; you solve exactly nothing except your own problem.
Only dead fish swim with the stream.
The saying was already outdated when I wore black as a teenager.