New construction - How to build economically sensibly?

Other aspects must then have a stronger impact (if the hypothesis that identical houses cost so differently is true).

Of course that's true. In my opinion, there are two reasons for this:

a) Labor costs accumulate over the entire value chain, at the end of which there is a house. This results in higher proportions of wages in the costs than one might generally believe. Regional differences in craftsmen's labor costs therefore have a strong effect.

b) Realization of margin due to supply and demand. In metropolitan areas, building land is scarce and expensive; those who build here have money, there is high demand pressure from solvent buyers. Craftsmen can charge high prices and still be fully utilized, so they will do so.

I would be interested to know whether prefabricated houses that are identical cost the same everywhere. It is possible that in metropolitan areas this might be more advantageous than using regional construction companies. But laying tiles, painting work, etc., will still be much more expensive there. The value of own labor therefore increases depending on the area.

Prefabricated house providers like Scanhaus Marlow regionalize their prices. SH is the basis, like MVP, for Bavaria, for example, a significant surcharge. They also know where the hammer hangs. Karsten

- did you know that today is World Cat Day?

That was still missing in this thread: the typical AfD delusions. The Greens have not been in power for ages.

Well. Remove the "green," then it’s correct. You don’t save CO2 by building and/or driving a big car instead of a small one or even a bike. Not even with a passive house + Blue Motion SUV...

At most, you can manage more efficiently relative to the size by investing in technology. But this must save enough to justify its production.

As a homeowner with a garage, I see the future in solar, although right now – and here Nordlys is also right – it (still) doesn’t pay off financially.

Electric cars will become technically cheaper to manufacture so fast that nobody who doesn’t know the background can imagine it. In 10-15 years, combustion engines will also be crushed price-wise (unless the state intervenes with tariffs, taxes, God knows what). And then the combo of solar from your own roof + car will open up whole new possibilities. And yes, from a CO2 standpoint, solar is of course better. The heating gas doesn’t beam itself neutrally into the system, not to mention the combustion. And if you generate solar power, a heat pump makes sense.

At least as a homeowner who can or wants to afford it, you should consider these thoughts. Economically, gas + combustion engine are still ahead for a while.

Thank you for the factual contribution. I'm not quite with you, I see the batteries more critically, today we have issues because of oil, then because of rare earth elements.... I would have wished that the industry had focused more on H as a drive. Emission then H2O. AfD. willo is turning off. I am very far away from AfD. Rather with FDP. Solar certainly still has a lot of potential, but I see the greatest potential in wind, at least here in northern Germany. Also: solar roofs are somehow ugly. Don't like them.

Solar definitely still has a lot of potential, but I see the greatest potential in wind, at least here in northern Germany. Besides: solar roofs are kind of ugly. I don't like them.

I don't find solar panels uglier than wind turbines at all. And they're better for birds too.

I'm not quite with you, I see batteries more critically, today we have issues because of oil, then because of rare earths.... I would have wished the industry had focused more on H as a drive. Exhaust then H2O.

There are good reasons why the battery and not the fuel cell won the race.

Regarding rare earths: wrong. Batteries from Tesla, for example, contain 0.0% rare earths. Zero. Nada. None. For cost reasons, other manufacturers will copy that, Tesla has released the patents.

Compared to electricity, H2 has three major disadvantages: transport, storage, poor overall system efficiency. All three of these are vastly better with electricity. The distribution grid for electricity already exists for the most part, one for H2 does not.

In addition, H2 is extremely diffusive, can embrittle materials, must be stored very cold and under enormous pressure. Plus, it is highly flammable (the Hindenburg was filled with H2). So I'm supposed to have that stuff under 300 bar under my butt while driving?

All these things reduce the overall efficiency, work must be done everywhere (compression, cooling, transport) that eats into the effective energy for actual driving.

Electricity is much more efficient here. And before anyone says: "It's illogical to transport electricity from burning fossil fuels, I might as well use the combustion engine." Wrong!

Did my own test drives with cars to get real consumption. The energy content per volume of fuel is known. The calculated conclusion: If you didn't refine the oil into fuel, but simply burned it in modern oil power plants and powered e-vehicles with the electricity, you'd need a factor of 3.5 less oil. The overall system efficiency is that much higher. Except for the engineers around me, no one understands this and no one can imagine it. The "official announcements" in the German press are completely different...

The breaking point will come with the price. When batteries are cheap enough, the combustion engine is dead. The whole car itself will then be cheaper. The entire engine with all its moving parts and potential sources of error: gone. The business model of car manufacturers with their authorized workshops: gone. What will be really interesting is how to get the electricity for charging in densely populated centers.

A home builder can already prepare for this future.

Ever checked the weight of electric cars? With 50kg of petrol/diesel I can drive 500 to 1000 km, with 500kg! battery a maximum of 400 km, in cold weather maybe only 200 km. I refuel 50kg of petrol in a maximum of 5 minutes including payment, the electric car stands at least 30 minutes for charging... To the engineers here: Ever heard of energy density?