Isolation at 1 euro: Elise Lucet demonstrates escrology!

[Christophe]

Energy renovation: why so many frauds?

MaPrimRénov, the bonus given by the government to finance energy and thermal renovation work, has been cut due to an increase in fraudulent excesses. But why so many frauds?

https://www.leprogres.fr/magazine-lifes ... de-fraudes

[phil12]

Energy renovation: why so many frauds?

MaPrimRénov, the bonus given by the government to finance energy and thermal renovation work, has been cut due to an increase in fraudulent excesses. But why so many frauds?

1 / Because we don't want to pay taxes so that there are more controllers

2 / Because some people have the pretext that they don't want to be flicked and are fed up with the regulations
While they will sing around the clock that they are old enough to do a good job and yet in reality 'they are only interested in their margin (ex RT 2012 no longer has this control because RT 2005 which was mandatory with safeguards was not respected by the vast majority)

3 / Because some are incompetent and not trained, in Germany there is no decennial people are at the level and if there is a problem directly responsible, it is not the insurance that pays after years. of trial if the company has not filed for bankruptcy during the proceedings!

4 / Because it's easy to open a box, and when unhappy customers come to close it and open your little sister under another name, it pays off!

5 / Because man is a wolf for man!

[Christophe]

+1

You do better analyzes than the article I cited !!

We can add what we have been saying for 15 years about this forum : premiums are more beneficial to overbilling than to the end customer ... sorry but true ... the "heart" of man is made like that ...

[phil59]

For insulation, for simple parts, we could simply "give" rolls of insulation to unwind ...

Well, the subsidy would not give work, but would be very cheap.

There would also be the resale of diverted "rolls", but hey, even if 30% would be nothing, especially since you could have it for next to nothing thanks to subsidies .... and the 30% of diversion would be less by 10% ....

In perfect fashion, it might work. In some countries it would work not too badly. In France ....

[Christophe]

People still drool over bonuses and grants, which is a financial trap in a lot of cases.

An insulation site is an investment ... which means that it pays off because it pays for itself on future heating bills.

I think that the State does not have to purely and simply subsidize this kind of work since by nature they make to earn money.

It would suffice for the State to transform its aid into a zero-rate loan guaranteed by the State and I am convinced that there would be less scheming! The entrepreneur would have nothing to do with the financial package. Too easy to overestimate the number of m² by the contractor ...

It would be enough for a few banking organizations to be partners of the State or for the State to simply create a bank dedicated to this ... (I just noticed that private internet banks are currently flourishing ... it takes 5 M € to open a banking organization in France) ... oh no, the State no longer has the right to do that I believe!

[thibr]

it's human nature
bistro / humor-t1191-13830.html

[sicetaitsimple]

Not really the subject of "insulation at 1 €", but it is the "insulation" wire that seems most alive to me in 2020.

I was very surprised by this article published on JM Jancovivi's FB page as well as on "Le Monde" (but without access for non-subscribers), on the results of 10 years of massive energy renovation work in the sector housing in Germany (340 billion € according to the article).

The result would be almost zero ...

In Germany, energy renovations to buildings have not reduced consumption

Full article:
"If the trend continues, Germany's targets for CO2 reductions in homes - down 55% by 2030 compared to 1990 levels - are unlikely to be met.

Housing accounts for a third of Germany's total greenhouse gas emissions, and 35% of energy consumption.

The finding is most depressing: despite the billions invested in the energy renovation of buildings over the past decade in Germany, home energy consumption has remained stable. Worse: not only does the drop in heating expenses not offset the cost of the work, but renovations often act as a factor in increasing rents, often disproportionate. As a result, it is the poorest households that pay the heaviest price, without any significant reduction in CO2 emissions. GdW, the largest German federation of real estate companies, which represents 6 million homes and 13 million inhabitants, is arguing for a change in strategy.

The rebound effect

In a report published in early July, the GoW noted that more than 340 billion euros have been invested in total in the energy renovation of buildings since 2010. This work, supported by the public investment bank KfW, includes the change of windows, new heating systems and insulation of facades. However, despite huge investments, energy consumption, which fell by 31% between 1990 and 2010, has since remained at the same level.
In 2010, a household consumed an average of 131 kilowatt / hour thermal per square meter. In 2018, it consumes ... 130. If the trend continues, Germany's targets for CO2 reduction in homes - less 55% by 2030 compared to the 1990 level, less 80% at 95 % by 2050 - unlikely to be met. Housing accounts for a third of the country's total greenhouse gas emissions and 35% of energy consumption.

How to explain such a poor performance?

The GoW highlights several causes. The first is the famous “rebound effect”: in better insulated housing, with fossil fuel prices falling since 2013, occupants are not encouraged to shy away from their comfort. Instead of heating to 20 ° C, they prefer to grow at 22 ° C. In addition, some renovations are sometimes ineffective. "We must abandon energy renovations and increasingly expensive insulation", Axel Gedaschko, president of the real estate federation GdW

This is the case of heaters, which, poorly calibrated, consume as much as the old ones. Insulating the facades on the south side also has a counterproductive effect if it prevents the building from heating up with the sun's rays. The president of the GdW, Axel Gedaschko, therefore recommends changing the criterion to define the virtuous habitat: we must stop looking at the theoretical energy consumption of a building, but measure the real CO2 emissions, to which we must attribute a price. “We need to move away from increasingly expensive energy retrofits and insulation, and opt for decentralized low-carbon energy manufacturing, with digital emission avoidance techniques,” Gedaschko said.

The opposition also calls for a reform of the device. "The fetish of efficiency for the energy renovation of buildings is a way of the cross, billions of euros for climate protection are disappearing, without effect," brocades Daniel Föst, of the liberal FDP party, in the daily newspaper Handelsblatt, September 30. The environmentalist party Alliance 90 / Les Verts recommends, for its part, a change in the distribution of the costs of renovations. The risk, if no reform is made, is that the less well-off categories of the population, rejected from the cities with the increase in real estate prices, no longer understand the meaning of measures to combat climate change. "