Carbon heating vs. heat pump
Carbon Surface Heating vs. Heat Pump – Economic Efficiency
Comparison of power consumption, investment costs, funding logic, and PV self-consumption – with a real reference case.
Recommended if you already know the living space, building standard, and PV data (if applicable).
1) Reference Case
Property: detached house, very good efficiency standard, 82 m² living space.
Use: all rooms constant 22 °C (24/7).
Hot water: external (instantaneous water heater), not included.
PV: 10 kWp installed.
2) Comparison: Consumption, Costs, Funding, PV
| Criterion | Carbon Surface Heating | Heat Pump |
|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption Space Heating | 1,615 kWh/year (measured) | ≈ 300–700 kWh/year (practical range) |
| Investment Costs | ≈ €8,000 | ≈ €30,000 (incl. underfloor heating/control/installation) |
| Additional Investment HP | – | ≈ €22,000 |
| Funding Logic | Eligibility for funding possibly via building standard (overall concept) | often directly eligible as an individual measure (depending on the program) |
| PV Self-Consumption | tends to be higher | tends to be lower |
| Maintenance & Complexity | very low | higher |
Would you like to know what this means for your building? We create an individual economic efficiency analysis based on your key data.
Request Economic Efficiency AnalysisNote: This page is a building-specific example and does not replace individual planning or a binding funding review.
3) Amortization
Definition: Amortization period = Additional investment heat pump ÷ annual electricity cost savings (space heating only).
| Scenario | Savings (kWh/a) | Savings (€/a) | Amortization |
|---|---|---|---|
| Without PV effect (only kWh difference) | ≈ 1.015 | ≈ 355 € | ≈ 62 years |
| With PV effect (typical grid current reference) | ≈ 410 | ≈ 144 € | ≈ 153 years |
The PV effect varies depending on the control strategy, load profile, and storage (if applicable).
4) Decision Support
- Focus on paid kWh: The decisive factor is the actual electricity consumption billed.
- Investment vs. Savings: In very efficient buildings, the absolute electricity savings are limited – the investment dominates.
- PV Usage: Direct electricity can make good use of PV self-consumption.
- Funding Logic: Eligibility for funding often results from the building standard (overall concept).
- Complexity: Lower complexity can reduce maintenance and risks.
5) FAQ
Is carbon surface heating eligible for funding?
Under certain conditions: yes. Eligibility for funding is often based on the building standard achieved (overall concept) - not necessarily on an individual "heating" measure. The applicable funding conditions and evidence in each individual case are decisive.
Why do you consider kWh/year and not just efficiency indicators?
Customers pay for the kWh that arrive at the meter. Especially with very low heating loads, the absolute amount of energy is small - in this case, the overall calculation of investment and operation is decisive.
Does the result apply to every building?
No. This is an example calculation for a specific building. The result may differ if the heating load is higher, the area is different, the usage profile is different or there is no PV. Individual planning is recommended.
Would you like your own numbers? Send us a brief description of the living space, building standard, and PV status – we will create an individual assessment.
Request Individual Calculation