Install chimney as a precaution

Hello!

My wife and I are currently planning the construction of a single-family house (KFW 55, approx. 175 m² living space, heat pump).

We are unsure whether to have a chimney installed.

We would primarily use a stove for coziness. So it’s more about the look and less about an additional heat source.

Theoretically, an electric fireplace would also serve this purpose.

Against a "real" stove speaks the fact that it would probably emit large amounts of pollutants and wood as a fuel is partly criticized.

The financial aspect plays a rather minor role for us in this matter.

Since it would be nearly impossible to retrofit an interior chimney later on, we are considering having a chimney installed as a precaution. Of course, it would still need to be sealed at the top. An exterior chimney is not an option due to the floor plan.

We might still initially opt for an electric fireplace.

[B]Now my actual question:[/B]

Can an interior chimney be left unused long-term/forever, or are disadvantages for the house to be expected?

I imagine that moisture might penetrate unnoticed somewhere or thermal bridges might occur…

We would be very grateful for your opinions and tips! :)

You don’t use a chimney that is in use every day all year round either. At least in the summer, it stands unused for months. Many people don’t use their fireplace daily either. However, I think if you decide against a proper fireplace now because of alleged pollutant emissions and criticism of wood, you won’t see it any differently in a few years. The trend is increasingly moving in this direction. And the requirements for fireplaces and stoves are increasing. We would have only been allowed to use our fireplace from the old house, which we installed in 2005, until 2024.

I also think that the requirements regarding pollutant emissions will have to be raised in the future. The DUH has now taken out their frustration on diesels. In addition, the CO2 balance is (short-term) poor as soon as the beetle-infested wood has been burned.

Yesterday I rode my bike in the city and when I returned, my wife didn’t want to believe where I had been because I was supposed to have smelled like a campfire.

Maybe a gas fireplace could be considered? My wife originally really wanted a fireplace as well. But the chimney didn’t fit into the floor plan. Now we watch fire on Netflix and YT.

I also think that the requirements will have to be raised in the future regarding pollutant emissions. The DUH has now taken out its frustration on diesels. In addition, the CO2 balance (in the short term) is bad as soon as the beetle-wood has been burned.

Yesterday I was cycling in the city and my wife didn’t want to believe where I had been after I returned, since I was said to smell like a campfire.

Maybe a gas fireplace can be considered? My wife originally really wanted a fireplace too. But the chimney didn’t fit into the floor plan. Now we watch fire on Netflix and YT.

Would you mind explaining the CO2 balance? As far as I know, a tree releases the CO2 upon burning that it absorbed during growth. It doesn’t really get any more neutral than that, if you neglect the CO2 emissions from fetching it from the forest.

I love that smell, which is also why, in my eyes, neither a gas fireplace nor, especially not, YT or Netflix are comparable.

Would you like to explain the CO2 balance? To my knowledge, a tree releases the CO2 upon burning that it absorbed during its growth. It doesn't really get more neutral than that, if you neglect the CO2 emissions from harvesting it in the forest.

With that argument, crude oil and lignite are CO2 neutral as well. It always depends on the time frame considered. We need to reduce CO2 now and in the coming decades. The fact that the tree regrows over 100 years in a rolling process simply doesn't help in our situation. "Of course," your firewood would eventually become coal or oil and thus largely no CO2.

With that argument, crude oil and lignite are also CO2 neutral. It always depends on the observation period. We have to reduce CO2 now and in the coming decades. The fact that the tree regrows over 100 years in a rolling manner simply doesn't help in our situation. "Of course" your firewood would eventually also become coal or oil and largely no CO2.

Well, the tree dies even if we don't cut it down and then releases the same amount of CO2 as it decomposes, without its energy being used. And for the used tree, new trees are planted that absorb CO2 again. No comparison to oil and gas.