Is it profitable to build a passive house??
Is it profitable to build a passive house and when it will pay off??
When deciding to build a passive or low-energy house, we think about it, whether higher investment costs are justified? Personally, I consider this question to be a mistake, because it really all depends on specific solutions. Let's see some examples:
1. heating - in Polish conditions, a passive house must have some heating source, there is no strength. Now let's have a look - you can use an ordinary house to heat a passive house, cheaper heater (plugged into a ventilation system, for example), you can use heating cables in the floor or ordinary electric heaters. All these devices are relatively cheap. On the other hand, an investor with a gesture can buy a heat pump that costs 20 times more. In most cases, such a solution will be devoid of any economic sense, but if energy consumption is more important to someone than economic calculation, he will get it. Then it really has no chance to pay back.
2. windows - as I wrote in other posts, in one house we can spend on "passive" windows 50 thousand, in another - 15 thousand. The difference in heating costs - negligible. A model solution of a passive house with large glazing from the south will cost - profitability is debatable for many investors.
3. ceiling insulation - in a one-story house with an unused attic, we can "passively" insulate the ceiling by arranging mineral wool of appropriate thickness by ourselves, and it will be a cheap solution. We can also use it by road, modern over-rafter insulation - and it is already expensive.
4. elimination of a thermal bridge at the junction of foundations and walls - you can use cheaper isomur material or more expensive foam glass. Of course, the more expensive solution is better, but is it enough for it to return within say 20 years?
There can be many more such examples. It follows from my observations, that nowadays it is most profitable to build an almost passive house, maybe not meeting all the assumptions of the model passive house, but with very low operating costs. Of course, with properly selected and economically justified solutions.
In addition, there are two points to consider:
a) profitability means something different for everyone. For one, a 20-year payback period will be sufficient, for another - 10 years is too long. Added to this is the type of funding source (e.g.. an expensive loan reduces our investment profitability)
b) An investor who is convinced, that he will live in a built house for the rest of his life looking at operating costs. But who can say that today? Home is a commodity, on which we can lose or gain in the future when selling. Building a "traditional" house today (when, with relatively little investment, we can build at least energy-efficient) it's like a shot in the heel - what is still avant-garde today will be the standard in a few years (also as a result of regulation in the European Union). It is worth remembering this.