Insulate new construction 36.5 aerated concrete?

According to prevailing opinion, the solution without additional insulation is significantly cheaper in the long term, even if a few euros more are spent on heating costs. The maintenance and renovation effort is significantly lower over the lifetime of the house.

You’re always just writing something random, aren’t you? Almost every post of yours consists of some black-and-white opinion. It's not for nothing that you had a pure troll status in the green forum.

There are studies about EPS insulation... probably the most well-known by the Fraunhofer Institute... Result: the insulation is still in the same condition after decades as it was in the beginning... Why wouldn’t it be? It’s plastic. It doesn’t rot. Of course, the prerequisite (as with everything) is proper installation.

And the U-value comments... windows have a much greater impact than the wall area... Oh man. Troll.

You always just write something, don’t you? Almost every post of yours consists of some black-and-white opinion. It’s no coincidence that you had a pure troll status in the green forum.

There are studies on EPS insulation... the most well-known probably from the Fraunhofer Institute... Result: The insulation is still in the same condition after decades as at the beginning... Why not? It’s plastic. It doesn’t rot. Of course, the prerequisite (as with everything) is proper installation.

And the U-value comments... windows weigh much more than the wall area... Oh man. Troll.

Everyone knows that plastic does not rot, but it is also clear that facades with insulation are more prone to algae, and if a cheap and too thin plaster was applied, you shouldn’t be surprised about stains after 2 years.

Correct. For me, this falls under incorrect construction.

Don't get me wrong, everything has its pros and cons, but I am allergic to this black-and-white thinking. A 36 cm aerated concrete wall is, for example, "Stone Age" in terms of insulation, including poor soundproofing. If monolithic construction is important to someone, fine, if other aspects are more important, they just build differently. We will build with clinker anyway, so neither option.

What would be sufficient coverage with plaster to prevent algae growth? Which type of plaster should be preferred?

No idea. All kinds of systems are installed in my surroundings. Even after years, the ETICS walls have no problems with algae. So I don't recognize this problem.

The Fraunhofer study even concluded that due to the decoupling between masonry and insulation, damage to the facade is less than with traditional masonry plus plaster... But I don't know exactly what "damage" refers to at the moment.

And why is that Stone Age, if it suffices for Kfw 70, even for 55, if it is shockproof, inexpensive, and mold-proof? Apart from sound insulation, I see no disadvantages. And it is simply not loud in many new development areas, so sound insulation is not always important.