Log house in solid wood or post-and-beam construction - experiences?

Thanks for your summary!

I'll take it over and add to it:

Advantages of solid wood wall:
- moisture regulating
- appearance (for fans of this construction method)
- radiates (subjective?) warmth

Disadvantages:
- expensive
- plumbing and electrical systems must be fully discussed and determined during the planning phase
- offset (in log houses)

Advantage of timber frame construction:
- short assembly time thanks to prefabricated component groups
- all costs are fixed and clear from the start

Disadvantages:
- plumbing and electrical systems must be fully discussed and determined during the planning phase
- material composition is not always 100% transparent

Only the interior walls are possible. Outside is normally plastered or clad with wood. Especially in practice, I would have gone with wood, besides white. It shouldn't look like a tavern in the Alps from 1890. We built with Wir Leben Haus. However, they build with laminated veneer lumber/cross-laminated timber. I was satisfied with the company. Currently Anitra is building with the company. It could be that the house is already erected. Nemo2008 has a blog, there are pictures from the construction phase.

...Our shell construction cost a five-figure amount more as a passive house (10-25k, I don’t remember exactly) than the same house built to KFW 55 standards. This was balanced out by the elimination of underfloor heating...

How much higher were the additional costs compared to a building built to KfW70 standards (Energy Saving Ordinance 2016)?

@Schickimicki: Oh really? The log cabin owners I have met are uncomplicated people who have pitched in themselves (partly built it themselves).

I was not talking about prejudices against log cabin owners, but about providers of all kinds of things that the eco-fash(ion)istas have discovered as a market for themselves. The Bussi-Soßeieti in my province can (in reality) compare with that of Munich (in the yellow press) and gets their spelt rolls with the M-Class.

No idea
The general contractor does not build energy saving ordinance houses
KFW 55 houses are already rare
We did not have a single comparative offer based on the energy saving ordinance
I can tell you our average prices, however we have a steep slope location which affects everything
Ready to move in from the top edge of the floor slab at roughly 2,000 euros/sqm price 2017
Not standard 08/15 included
- thicker ceiling due to slope statics
- solid oak parquet
- tiles partly 45 euros/sqm
- electric roller shutters on all windows
- oak staircase
- walk-in showers
- 1 rain shower surface-mounted
- large bathtub for 2
- secondary entrance door
- lower threshold sliding lift door
- controlled residential ventilation is unavoidable
- attic insulated and equipped with conduit pipes for later expansion
130 sockets, 4 LAN sockets, motion sensors, 4 satellite connections
5 outdoor water taps
Separate RCD for garage + separate RCD for outdoor sockets
Maybe not standard
- no underfloor heating = pure luxury in a passive house
- white plastic windows
Cost minimization
- experimental LWWP system
- stair railing own work
Price including floor slab, retaining wall as a white tank with extremely heavy reinforcement, space between old retaining wall and new filled with gravel, retaining wall insulation on slope side and floor slab 2,300 euros/sqm
Not cheap, but not an unusually high sqm price. On a flat plot it should be 2,000 to 2,100 per sqm

11ant, you are right, if you really want to be eco-friendly, you have to look very closely, people like to be fooled. What is better, a house made of Siberian larch, which requires thousands of kilometers of transport, partly on Russian freighters that run heavy oil instead of diesel, or made from local aerated concrete produced around the corner. But lucrezia specifically asks about low-emission or free of pollutants. That is her point, not necessarily generally eco-friendly. And in that regard, log houses can definitely score points.