New single-family house (KFW70)/aerated concrete vs. sand-lime brick/what to use?

Hello construction expert,

....You don’t exactly make an exchange with yourself easy if you always retreat to your calculation methods....

At least something reliable. Surely one can generally chat about it, but what is it really worth? Nothing!

.... - how am I supposed to follow you there, since I am currently not an engineer? Especially as you are in no way willing to present your results publicly and above all free of charge for the benefit of the users of this forum in a comprehensible manner?..

You hide behind numbers/formulas? Or on the other hand deny that it is - quite simply - no apocalypse to accept a different opinion as such? ....

My posts are not intended to collect applause, on the contrary, I put my finger on the wound, which apparently does not suit some at all!
I am not only active as a building services planner, energy consultant, but also as an expert! What I frequently encounter, especially regarding system technology, defies description. The greatest potential for deficits is found in system technology. Most general contractors/general planners impose almost everything on gullible builders. They pick something off the shelf and cobble it together, for which a juicy discount contract was previously agreed with a manufacturer, completely independent of whether this solution is actually suitable for the individual construction project.
The actual later consumption of the builders is not stated in any contract! A rogue who thinks ill of this The whole thing is completely independent of any embellishment in energy saving regulations or KfW proofs.
I am certainly able to learn and willing to correct myself! So present an example of a construction contract you mediated where consumptions are defined so that the builder later actually has a real legal chance to pull the culprit by the ears in case of excessive costs!

You may be many things; an easy-going character probably not.

I wouldn’t want to contradict that. My aim is not primarily affability, seeking applause, but rather enlightenment regarding necessities. Apparently, I am not completely wrong about that. Some have understood, others have not.

Regards

....- also a lot of expertise as well, but I have NEVER read anything concrete from you....

Most of the time, the initial data situation simply does not allow it. Moreover, it is well known that every construction project is specific; how could concrete details lead to a general conclusion? At best, trends can be presented, which I have done sufficiently several times!
Anyone who wants to base a concrete investment decision on general, mostly anonymous chatter should go ahead. Their decision!

....Why don't you post 2-3 sample calculations of energy certificates, which in your opinion are often incorrect?...

Who would that help, since each case is individual and specific and a general transferability is not possible at all? Furthermore, there is a certain difference between certificates and attestations. Compare the date of your certificate with that of the final construction completion (acceptance, notification to the lower building authority)!
The fact is also that many builders do not understand certificates or attestations at all. They are not to be blamed, but rather the creators, as sufficient explanation is usually lacking.
Thus, builders actually believe that the stated final energy demand corresponds to the amount to be paid! Big mistake!!!

...Why no homepage showing your references?...

Don't worry, it has been in the drawer for a long time and might still come this year. So far, there was no necessity for it. However, I could certainly save myself a lot of work on individual explanations. You are certainly right about that.

...It would be nice if the next 1400 postings were more fruitful....

In what respect? Questioner X wants a reliable statement, where not even a basic investigation is available/conducted? What sense would that make? I gladly leave the anonymous chatter without any guarantee to others!

Regards

Hello €uro,

My posts are not intended to collect applause, on the contrary, I put my finger on the wound, which apparently does not suit some at all!

You want to deliberately misunderstand me

The later actual consumption of the builders is not in any contract! A rogue who thinks evil here The whole thing is also completely independent of any polishing in the Energy Saving Ordinance or KfW certificates.

I know what you mean – but a coin always has two sides

I am certainly capable of learning and willing to correct myself! Just present an example of a construction contract you mediated where consumption is defined, so that the builder later has a real legal chance to really hold the cause accountable for excessive costs!

I will not do the devil’s work to use the crystal ball in consultation talks, completely unaware of the daily life/behavior of the interested party. I inform the interested parties about our procedure (listing this here would be too much and the admin would rightly see it as advertising), carefully estimate based on known parameters (if at all comparable) a realistic range from/to/if *with reference* to the required, chargeable calculations. Every interested party is free to contact our references and have the statements verified for their truthfulness or not; we/I am/are not TGA planners. And please, no more sly insinuations; neither my partner nor I are present at these talks/visits, nor is there cash involved. Since we both already had this topic, I can hopefully assume that you are willing to believe this without proof. We/I do not like to be blackmailed!

Regarding the calculations for sizing and later consumption, our – then – customers naturally have access to the creator and can intervene or complain at any time; “pulling by the ears,” as you put it.

My goal is not primarily amiability, seeking applause, but rather clarification regarding necessities.

That is not what it’s primarily about at all. The post from the user klblb makes perfectly clear what this is about. In your short replies you repeatedly use the same terms. This is little help to a questioner in a forum like this; unless you focus exclusively on generating orders.

If you really want to change something about the status quo you raise => wrong system technology, you should explain it in a way the layperson understands. Nothing more and nothing less; that’s why I am here, for example, and do not always receive applause.

Rhenish greetings

Hello construction expert.

...You deliberately want to misunderstand me ...

Certainly not, however I do understand that as an intermediary for construction services you are bound by the conditions of your provision payers!

I will not go to the trouble of using the crystal ball in consultation talks,....

That certainly is not necessary, however the individual and specific requirements of the builders should necessarily always be taken into account. Apparently there is neither time nor sufficient competence on the plant side for this.

. I inform the interested parties about our procedure ...

How is a layperson able to assess your procedure professionally to the necessary depth?

we/I am/are not TGA planners. ...

That is very clear! You predictably completely avoided my question about contractually agreed consumptions.

As far as the calculations for sizing and subsequent consumptions are concerned, our - then - customers naturally have access to the creator and can intervene, complain at any time; "pull by the ears," as you put it...

Example for sustainable review by all users?

That is not what it’s primarily about at all....

Why then? Ultimately, only the comparison of what was promised and what was actually delivered counts. The mere realization of a mostly subsequent deficit rarely helps builders because they cannot enforce it legally with reasonable effort.
Some general contractors/main contractors know this quite well. The legally uncertain position of builders afterwards is usually shamelessly exploited by general contractors/main contractors beforehand!
What prevents you from presenting an example of your construction service mediation where the contractor had a justified, legal opportunity to claim excessive consumption costs? I am curious!

The post from user klblb makes clear ...

Supportive help needed because the finger in the wound hurts too much?

If you really want to change something about the status quo you have presented => wrong plant technology, you should also explain it in a way that the layman understands. ...

Gladly:

Best regards.

Hello €uro,

How is a layperson able to professionally assess your approach in the necessary depth?

You would certainly be surprised how many of our BV are accompanied by external, educated expertise

I see you are in a playful mood

Rhenish greetings

Hello €uro,...You would certainly be surprised how many of our construction projects are accompanied by external, studied expertise ...

So what? Guttenberg and his associates even have doctorates, the ADAC, TÜV, etc. have various graduates in their dependent entourage!
Now finally bring the contract example of Schenk Construction Consulting, where builders could hope for legally binding rectification due to the accompanying, studied expertise!
If the studied accompaniment is so competent, it should actually be child's play to reflect this accordingly in the contract design.
I am very curious!

Best regards