Passive house as a logical consequence? Are there counterarguments?

Good evening,

You come to a sum of about 2% for that.

Honestly? I am tired, still have a lot to prepare, and gave up long ago on carrying coals to Newcastle

Rhineland greetings

Did not have to, everyone here already has their preconceived opinion, which they stick to.

Yep...you are the perfect example

I also didn't write "everything except me." But whatever, Wikipedia mentions 5%-15%, so with my 2% I was still pretty close. If Bauexperte or anyone else has verifiable figures, hopefully you’ll correct Wikipedia soon so no one ends up in trouble. In a few years, the question will be settled anyway.

Whether 2% or 5% more... both are absolutely (!) unrealistic.

If that were the case, everyone would build a passive house. But since you apparently are completely resistant to advice and won’t even listen to people like [Bauexperte], who are experts in the field...

Well, it’s your construction project and your money...

Well, if Wikipedia says so, then it must be true. It's not like anyone who can operate a computer is allowed to write something in there, right... whether they know something or not...