Germany is often seen as an international leader in terms of Climate Protection, and deservedly so. Year after year, it takes one of the first positions on the Climate Change Performance Index, which compares the emission trends and climate protection policies of the world’s Top CO2 Emitting Nations.
But all that glitters is not gold, and the country might be less exemplary than it seems.
Two years ago, Angela Merkel’s accomplishments within the German Presidency of the European Council, and her propellent role during the
G8 summit in Heiligendamm, had awarded her with the name of ‘Climate Chancellor’.
But this title has been out-dated for a long time.
When the economic crisis was at its peak, Merkel showed herself wholeheartedly concessive towards the national industry. Negotiating the European Emissions Trading Scheme in Brussels, she said that she "
could not support the destruction of German jobs through an ill-advised climate policy". Amongst other measures, the German government invested € 5 billion in a car scrappage scheme that helped the automobile industry much more than the environment.
During the 2008 European Council’s negotiations about the new climate change and energy package, the German chancellor has not only buckled but had "an active share in lowering the ambitiousness of the agreement", according to an expert from the green political Think Tank ‘Heinrich Böll Foundation’.
The new EU agreement stuck to the previously set aim of cutting 20 percent of their Carbon emissions by 2020, and 30 percent if other industrial countries would pull their weight. But important details have been watered-down by the European leaders. Thus, it was decided that many
carbon permits would be given away free of charge to some of the EU’s most energy-intensive industries.
Independently of the EU, in August 2007, Merkel’s cabinet had agreed
to reduce German CO2 emissions by forty percent by 2020, when compared to 1990. Even though there is time left to achieve this, the country is likely to fail this self-imposed goal, indicates a Greenpeace-study from August 2009. Accordingly, Germany could only achieve a reduction of less than thirty percent, due to faults in the climate package’s implementation.
As one of the largest CO2 emitters in the world, the Federal Republic can’t content itself with internal measures. But the
€ 50 million the government announced to pay to the UNFCCC funds for developing countries seems to be peanuts given the dimensions of the task and the number of concerned countries.
Three months before the crucial
Conference in Copenhagen, it can’t be taken for granted that Germany will still hold a cutting edge. "If they don’t emit less, our whole commitment is useless", stated environment minister Sigmar Gabriel on the national broadcasting service ARD, urging countries like China, India and Brazil to act.
In the same report, Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, criticises this kind of attitude, comparing it to a game of "Chase the ace". Considering the well-known dangers anthropogenic Climate Change brings to the whole world, it is not acceptable to keep shifting the responsibility.
One thing is clear: when it comes to agreeing on a new climate treaty replacing the Kyoto Protocol, the international community is confronted with an extremely challenging task.
Even if other countries – not least Australia and the rest of the Umbrella Group – remain extremely reluctant to commit to binding international agreements, this is no reason for German politicians to slow down their efforts.
Nina Drewes is undertaking her Master’s degree in Sciences Po Journalism School in Paris and is currently on an international student exchange with the Department of Media and Communications at Sydney University. Nina has lived most of her life in Germany.
Printer-friendly version
Comments
Interesting article
Thank you for this piece, Nina.
I tend to find you tough on your country. As you say at the beginning of your article, I see Germany much more as a leader in terms of protecting the environment and finding sustainable solutions. I understand your being upset about Merkel's words during the financial crisis, but I also think it was quite crazy to set an objective of a 40% emission reduction in 2007, only thirteen years away from the 2020 deadline.
I'm afraid I don't agree entirely with Hans Joachim Schellnhuber. Of course, everyone has to do their share to fight global warming, especially the United States. But economies that have strongly developed in the past ten years, such as India or China, are not acting maturely when they say "let us develop the way you did during the 20th century. After all, western countries are responsible for most of the carbon dioxide emissions".
The second half of that statement is mostly true, but this is also because people didn't think of sustainable solutions to develop the economy then. Such solutions exist today, and are only asking to be used. But for this, politicians need to have a long-term vision, which, in politics, is unfortunately not common. For instance, India has 300 days of sunlight a year. Yet only 1% of the energy it produces is solar, and 60% of the energy India uses comes from coal...