Hello,
Or the next generation will thank us for the energy reserves stored on the house wall, or or...
Hardly, because by then the ETICS will be outdated ...
And why should that stuff be removed again at all? Service life of 20 years? I’m hearing that for the first time, where does that number come from?
I would have expected those questions from other users; not from you (which is probably because my question to you about your professional qualification is still open and I do not prematurely assume anything of anyone).
You have to look beyond the horizon a bit; meaning, inform yourself on sites from neighboring countries. Where polystyrene is prohibited as facade insulation; if no other foreign language is spoken, the Swiss sites will suffice in a pinch. Interesting in this context: the research institute Prognose commissioned a study on behalf of KFW to show the advantages and disadvantages. Well, after publication the higher-ups at KfW did not like the result and promptly published a counterstatement; of course to great applause from the insulation industry, which earns billions with their styrofoam boards. An honest remark to : concerning the Fraunhofer Institute I have come down to earth; disappointed.
The specialist conference at the EMPA Academy in Dübendorf on March 22, 2000, mainly revolved around known building damages caused by mold fungi inside buildings and algae growths on facades. The actual causes were not revealed to the conference participants. A co-cause of these damages is in fact EMPA itself, because by one-sidedly favoring pure thermal insulation materials for alleged energy savings in heated buildings, it disregards the recognized rules of construction art. EMPA, as the research department of ETH, has neglected the constructionally necessary investigations in this area for years. The formation of mold fungi and algae on exterior walls is the direct result of using unsuitable materials applied to facades to reduce energy consumption.
Polystyrene is predominantly used for external insulation.
The durability of the applied plastic plaster is low because organic binders are not weather-resistant. To avoid stress cracks, generally only light or white plasters are used, which largely reflect sunlight, resulting in a poor utilization of passive solar energy.
Polystyrene as a facade insulation material poses an unacceptable fire risk, as several fire cases have proven, and resonance effects cause disturbing construction defects in the acoustics field. Because polystyrene is waterproof and therefore no water transport can take place in exterior walls, indoor humidity in apartments rises above 60 percent relative humidity in winter, which favors the formation of mites.
Source: Dipl.-Ing. and Architect Paul Bossert*, Dietikon
The same study also showed:
The costs of energetic building renovation clearly exceed the savings, as a study commissioned by the research institute Prognose for the state development bank KfW on costs and benefits of the energy transition shows and which is available to "Welt". According to it, the additional financial efforts for constructing especially energy-efficient residential buildings will not pay off either.
The investments could not be "financed solely from the saved energy costs," the KfW writes in the report. The federal government wants to reduce heating energy consumption in German residential buildings by 80 percent by 2050 to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Therefore, the Energy Saving Ordinance (EnEV) has been repeatedly tightened in the past. Since 1993, according to the trade association for external thermal insulation composite systems, 769.1 million square meters of insulation boards have been applied to German houses—a surface area larger than the city-state of Hamburg.
But no government has examined whether the gigantic costs make sense. The Prognose study is now the first calculation on that. To achieve the energy saving targets, "housing industry investments" totaling 838 billion euros are necessary by 2050, according to the study. However, only "energy costs of 370 billion euros can be saved," the Prognose researchers calculated.
In the end, this results in a total loss of 468 billion euros, which must be borne by owners, tenants, and taxpayers alike, who pay for the energetic conversion directly, indirectly, or via funding instruments. "The study shows that the energy-saving requirements are utterly bereft of economic reason," says Thomas Beyerle, chief researcher at the real estate company IVG. For a single-family house built to the current Energy Saving Ordinance standard, calculations by the German Energy Agency show that of total costs of 400 euros per square meter of living space, 115 euros are attributable to the energy-saving additional costs alone. For an especially efficient new building that uses only 55 percent of the theoretically allowed energy consumption, the square meter price rises to 540 euros—of which 250 euros are due to the additional energy-saving measures. There is no end in sight to price increases: in 2014 and 2016, the federal government plans to raise the requirements by another 12.5 percent each time.
Source: Financial news and dts news agency 2013
Why a maximum of 30 years (sorry, was a typo) is very well described in this book:
Thermal Insulation Ordinance and Economic Efficiency. Comparison of Thermal Insulation Composite Systems and Cavity Walls Menkhoff, Herbert; Essen; self-published
A whole 40 sqm a day, I also once knew such a slow company...
:rolleyes:
Dismantling = removing the system, clipping off the dowels, chiseling off the remaining mortar lumps
That takes its time and has absolutely nothing to do with the executing craft business.
Rhine regards