Germany is struggling to get people on-board with a green energy movement that involves banning high footprint domestic heating systems (e.g. gas boilers)-- thus forcing people to migrate to heat pumps. A low-income family who was interviewed said it would cost €45k to install a heat pump in their terraced home in Bremen.

That price tag sounds unreal. I am baffled. What’s going on here? I guess I would assume an old terraced German home would likely have wall radiators that circulate hot water. Is the problem that a heat pump can’t generate enough heat to bring water to ~60°C, which would then force them to add a forced-air ducting infrastructure? Any guesses?

(note the link goes to a BBC program that looks unrelated, but at the end of the show they switch to this issue in Germany. I’m not sure if that show is accessible… I see no download link but that could be a browser issue)

  • SteefLem
    link
    86 months ago

    We have a house from the 1920s. The isolation in these houses are non existent or minimal. I isolated things i could access like the roof. But still i can really isolate the walls because since they are double walls (2 walls with a space between them) there is a lot of debris on the bottom which has to be cleared before they could be filled with isolation (expensive) if thats even possible if not (in our case it isnt) then i would have to put isolation on the outside which is a min of €20k. And i would have to isolate the floor another €8k and even then the house isnt 100% isolated. Then the cost of the heatpump which is about €10k to €15k in our case. And then if i really want off gas i also have to do some sort of boiler for water which i dont really have space for. So all in all it would be cheaper to build a new house then to retrofit my 100 year old house. And there are a lot of old houses here. Heatpumps in its current form are just not feasible for “normal” people.

    • Hyperreality
      link
      fedilink
      6
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I worked in the industry and real-estate.

      These houses were never designed to be insulated or airtight, and (controversial take) IMHO often shouldn’t be fully insulated. I lived in a larger old house, and we’d heat a limited amount of rooms. The rest of the house was largely unheated and not properly insulated, allowing moisture to come and go. You simply dress accordingly. That’s why people were always wearing multiple layers and three piece wool suits back in the day.

      Eg. some old houses use lime mortar instead of cement. Lime mortar is more porous than cement, so it absorbs and wicks moisture. If you insulate that improperly, you’re asking for problems, because moisture will build up behind the insulation or get absorbed into it.

      Same thing for the roof of an old property. They were designed to circulate air. Water gets under the tiles, the wooden structure get damp, but it’s not a big problem, because the air and moisture can evaporate and escape. People will poorly insulate their roof, then end up with disastrous moisture/rot issues, resulting in very expensive structural damage.

      TLDR: If you insulate these properties improperly, the chance of rot or moisture issues is not negligble, and arguably you should ask yourself if it’s even a good idea to insulate at all, rather than simply adapting your lifestyle and heating a limited amount of rooms.

      • @TBi
        link
        46 months ago

        I agree with you. But there are breathable insulation types for these older houses. So they can be used. These are more expensive so should have higher tax breaks when applied to houses that need them.

        Also I agree with the wearing extra clothing part. One extra jumper never hurt anyone.

        • Hyperreality
          link
          fedilink
          5
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          You are basically correct.

          But allow me to rant, for which I apologise. Feel free to ignore, it’s not that interesting, and I’m not an expert.

          The main thing is (properly installed) moisture barriers, if necessary increasing ventilation, getting rid of any moisture, choosing the right insulation for the right job, etc.

          Eg. rockwool is very absorbant and is even used in hydroponics, but if you pop it in an attic, use a decent moisture barrier, but ventilate it well, it’s not a disaster if it gets a bit moist sometimes. Meanwhile, in an (almost always) damp basement, forget using rockwool. Even using PUR/PIR foam is likely to cause issues, even if you use the best and most professionally installed moisture barrier. Better off using XPS. Meanwhile, when it comes to wall insulation in older houses, spraying foam into the intrawall cavity(inner wall, space, outerwall), can also cause issues.

          The problem is that people will hire a company with a load of good reviews. They’re friendly, they’re affordable, afterwards the house is nice and warm and well insulated. Everything’s covered up, so even if you were an expert, it’s not as if you can check if they didn’t half arse their job or if they aren’t well intentioned morons who installed a moisture barrier the wrong way around so it only allows moisture in rather than letting it out… But years later, when the damage starts becoming apparent, when people start falling ill from mould, or the concrete has become so weak so you have a pothole in your living room, the company likely doesn’t exist anymore. And it’s not as if you can hire a company with 50 years experience, because some of these kinds of insulation are quite new, and not everyone has experience working with older houses.

          Eg. Lime mortar started being being phased out at the beginning of the 20th century, so it’s no surprise someone who’s ‘only’ 40 wouldn’t know it has different properties than portland cement.

          And for professionals who do know their shit, do it properly, and charge accordingly, it’s not unlikely the homeowner will go with the cheaper offer because they don’t think it’ll make a big difference but can save thousands.

          • @TBi
            link
            36 months ago

            Good read and good points. Thanks for sharing/ranting!

    • @Squizzy
      link
      46 months ago

      Cavity filled insulation is very common and relatively cheap. I know people who did it themselves with an expanding foam gun and multiple cases of foam.

      • MuchPineapples
        link
        36 months ago

        If you have a cavity, which a house from the 1920s probably doesn’t have.

        • @Squizzy
          link
          36 months ago

          He specifically stated he had a cavity. If you don’t you can do external cladding insulation and internal insulation.

        • Hyperreality
          link
          fedilink
          3
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          They sometimes do, but some of these older brick houses use lime mortar which is far more breathable. Allows moisture in and out. Some older houses are also not that water tight anyway or often have moisture issues.

          If you use the wrong foam, it absorbs that moisture. Bad. Think mouldy sponge. If you use the right foam, but don’t ensure ventilation and tackle moisture issues? Still bad. If you don’t mix the foam right or use too much? Possible structural damage. Or the foam’s flammable which is an issue in an old house with old electrics.

          The person you’re responding to mentions people doing it themselves with an expanding foam gun, which as someone who worked in the industry gives me the shivers tbh. I mean, maybe they’ll get lucky, but I wouldn’t buy that house. If they used the wrong foam or did it wrong, it’s not as if you’re going to be able to remove it or start over. It’s there forever now.