KfW BEG funding stopped 261, 262, 263, 264, 461, 463, 464

I just read in the W..........e the example of a guest author who spent 11,000 euros on an energy consultation that she no longer needs. She will get 8,000 euros of these 11,000 euros back from the state. For a worthless document. But it probably doesn’t matter much since she will now not build her office building after 40+ years and thus save money elsewhere.

Another one of those things. 11k for an energy consultation. These people have enriched themselves so much from the funding... Unbelievable.

I do believe that it will come back. The wave of outrage is simply too big now, and as a new government, they want to shine. But with EH55, I wouldn't count on anything anymore; it was supposed to expire anyway next week. Maybe with EH40, 40+ will probably come back but certainly significantly reduced. And I can also well imagine that it will then be more strongly limited in time and reduced bit by bit every year, completely disappearing in 2-4 years.

In the past, multi-story residential construction was very successful in creating social hot spots. The currently common flat-roof stepped-story blocks that are thrown up en masse will be regarded in a few decades as building sins just like the prefabricated slab buildings of the past. Instead of subsidies, it would be important for politics at all levels to accept the problem that there is too little living space and that areas must be created for it. Without implementing ecological fantasies like plus-energy, biodiversity, or car-free neighborhoods. The fuss about the planned Hafner district here in Konstanz is symptomatic of how no living space is created even though it is urgently needed. Here, it is currently not the money that is lacking but that any development is possible at all.

As if only the environmentalists make everything more expensive. When investors tear down existing buildings and then only rebuild in the luxury or high-price segment or as hotels ("can"), something is wrong. And that is mainly due to the exorbitant land speculation driven by sheer greed for profit. No municipal building authority stands a chance against the legal trickery of specialized law firms. Or the farmer who demands 8,000 €/sqm for his meadow as anticipated building land and thus blocks urban planning projects for years.

Maybe there’s something in new construction, but then certainly not standards as easily achievable as KFW 55, maybe passive house. At least that’s how I would find it good.

I hope not. In my opinion, passive house is a pretty wrong path. Dribbling out another 5 kWh per year and square meter for a big effort. And if no one was at home all day in winter, the heating element in the ventilation has to turn on in the evening. Where else should the heat come from?

As if only the eco-friendly make everything more expensive

It’s not just about making things more expensive with Hafner but especially also about delaying. Konstanz was already notorious in 2007 when I moved here. Back then, students were sleeping in gyms one after another because nothing was available. Hafner would have been overdue back then, but it feels like every year only a new draft is made about how great everything could be done instead of simply starting at some point.

When investors demolish existing buildings and then only rebuild in the luxury or high-price segment or as hotels (“can”), something is going wrong.

You are absolutely right. There are also old little houses here that have been torn down and now something for 8000€/sqm is being built. But obviously the market allows it. In this case, more living space is actually being created, before there were often single-family houses there. But of course, it’s clear that an investor has nothing to gain if he then sells the apartments for 4000€ when the market yields much more, but the higher standard does not actually cost that much more. This could definitely be undermined by a sufficient supply.

I was just reading in the W..........e the example of a guest author who spent 11,000 euros on an energy consultation that she no longer needs. She gets 8,000 euros of these 11,000 euros back from the state. For a worthless document. The difference of 3,000 euros is apparently not so bad, because she will now not build her office building after 40+ years and will thus save money elsewhere.

Should I give you some examples from my commercial sector? Construction costs €42 million, sale unleased €75 million, "KfW 55 subsidy on top" €4 million. Construction costs €39 million, object remains in own inventory (estimated sale price approx. €60 million) with KfW 40EE, subsidy €7 million + €3 million for job creation. There you don’t need to have any sympathy and no one has to cry seriously there either. Sure, those complain especially...

But now as a serious question. What should the ministry have done? Just continue as before and in the end, everyone from the opposition to the Federal Audit Office would have demanded a crucifixion for waste and gifts to the Green clientele Bullerbü homeowners.

Of course, it all sounds anything but nice, but if you have financed so tightly, then you just had bad luck. The general contractor can also go bankrupt, someone can become unemployed/unfit for work, the soil is contaminated, and the landfill fees are endlessly high, or whatever. There are thousands of examples that are not chewed over on 68 pages.

However, the examples you mentioned are not politically motivated nor initiated by political actors belonging to a party that has repeatedly been noted for disapproving the construction of single-family homes. Aside from that, no one can be sure without a soil investigation that the soil is not contaminated; however, some people do rely on deadlines mentioned by the government in various (not just funding) programs. Personally, I no longer know what I can still rely on with this government and what not, when the next blow will come. Even with an approved construction project, without funding, I am terribly afraid that everything can be taken away from me again.

People for whom things are - theoretically - already good enough.

Yes, how well off we are and what a rich country we are, we hear often. Why is the home ownership rate significantly higher in countries we financially support? People who build usually make sacrifices and free up apartments for fellow citizens who cannot build or do not want to make these sacrifices.

... Oh, the post was accidentally sent too early. ...