KfW - construction: is it necessary or not?

well, maybe you just have to ask yourself what you want (living quality / comfort / indoor climate etc.)

If then (as was the case for us) a wooden house with controlled residential ventilation and photovoltaics results,
then the path to a KfW40(+) house is not far away anymore (financially)



Our funding volumes (see above) are certainly not! comparable to a
"normal" EHF. But I currently still trust my gut feeling that
tells me I am building my KfW40+ semi-detached house more cheaply than strictly according to the Energy Saving Ordinance or KfW55.

The ecological effect is also very important to us. That means we also sometimes
make one or another decision that has nothing to do with funding but
is ecologically better (but more expensive). That’s not always possible, but often.
(e.g. floor coverings, wall coverings/paints etc.)

We like the idea that our house is relatively self-sufficient.

You are self-sufficient if you have no grid connection. The rest is just window dressing. As soon as you have to feed even 1kWh into the grid in summer because you don’t consume it yourself, you are exactly one thing 100% not: self-sufficient.

no big discussion, I think

Maybe not for you.

a fossil fuel (which also makes you so dependent on foreign countries) can in my eyes never even remotely be ecologically comparable to a heat pump

Three villages away there is a large biogas plant that does not generate electricity, feed into the grid, and cool the waste heat, but rather conditions the biogas and feeds it into the natural gas grid. In the downstream network, there is currently hardly any industry, but almost exclusively household customers. So the gas that comes out of my tap is only in exceptional cases Russian gas; completely independent of the chosen tariff. Exactly the opposite with electricity. I pay for good hydropower green electricity but am located in the catchment area of a nuclear power plant, and thanks to gentlemen Kirchhoff and Ohm, that is exactly what comes out of the socket here.

Especially with the appropriate insulation.

Have you ever looked at how much gray energy is in such an EPS-KfW55 little house? You can hardly burn that much over the entire service life of a modest energy-saving ordinance house.

There are actually people who feel more comfortable if their house has a good ecological footprint.

Yes, unfortunately most of that has little to do with mindfulness towards the environment, but rather with the fact that people like to place themselves on a morally superior level in order to judge the actions and values of those thinking and acting differently in a kind of self-righteousness.

I think there is a reason why one is subsidized and the other is not.

The reason is unfortunately far too often: lobbying.

Okay, so to summarize:
KFW = nonsense
BAFA = nonsense
Going for alternative energies in new construction = nonsense

And anyway: Whoever claims that they build ecologically and do so simply because it is important to them, is only doing it to point fingers at others. Gas is great, that Germany wants to move away from fossil fuels by 2050 – stupidity? Biogas plants and the huge cornfields are great, and gas overall – fantastic!

Everyone satisfied?
(Just out of interest: What exactly is the problem if it is important to me and I build that way (no, no EPS insulation, don’t worry)? So why does one have to forcibly try to convince me that it’s all nonsense? And who here is actually being missionary?)

Okay, so in summary: Kfw = nonsense BAFA = nonsense Switching to alternative energies in new buildings = nonsense

I actually agree with you there. If it’s only about ecology, then it’s all nonsense, because buying a used house is the most ecological option.

Okay, so to sum up: Kfw = nonsense BAFA = nonsense Going for alternative energies in new construction = nonsense And anyway: Whoever claims to build ecologically and does so simply because it is important to them is only doing it to point fingers at others. Gas is great, that Germany wants to move away from fossil fuels by 2050 – stupidity? Biogas plants and the huge cornfields are great and overall gas – fantastic! Everyone satisfied? (Just out of interest: What exactly is the problem if it’s important to me and I build that way? So why must one forcibly try to make me realize that it’s all nonsense? And who is actually on a mission here?)

um.....WHERE does it say that? I don’t read that from anyone; neither from the pro nor the contra side. That’s EXACTLY what most people here were about, that it’s NOT black-and-white, as you apparently perceived it. Your slightly aggressive response surprises me somewhat, and the words "forcibly" or "nonsense" come exclusively from you. It was mostly about differentiation, from what I’m reading. Having a different opinion doesn’t mean that your project or your attitude is nonsense. I share the ecological attitude but am critical (a difference from being grumpy) and do learn something from the discussion. I don’t believe anyone here wants to ruin your project just because they allow themselves to have a different or differentiated opinion.

We originally only wanted to build according to the Energy Saving Ordinance and not meet any KFW standard. However, the general contractor usually builds his houses so that they would "achieve good KFW70 values" anyway – I know, KFW70 no longer exists, only as a reference.
By the end of our negotiations, with our special equipment, we had already put together a house that would have been close to the KFW55 standard.
For financial reasons, we then decided to do that because of the subsidized loan.
€120,000 at 0.75% is already nice, of course, but for us, it made sense with the grant.
To meet the standard, we only needed perimeter insulation (an additional €2,550) and the energy consultant (an additional €3,500).
Half of the energy consultant fee is reimbursed by KFW, so in the end, the energy consultant only costs us €1,750.
1,750 + 2,550 = €4,300 additional costs, but for that, we get an €18,000 repayment bonus.