Leak: German Government Drafts Weak Climate Protection Program

Time is ticking for the federal government: by the end of March it must present a climate protection program in which it explains how it intends to meet the climate targets. That is at least what the Climate Protection Act says. It is not easy, because currently Germany, according to the Umweltbundesamt, misses its climate target for 2030 by 35 million tons of CO₂, which is almost 6 percent more climate damage than legally allowed. By 2040, the Expert Council on Climate says, it will be 554 million tons of CO₂ or 20 percent too much.

The now has a draft of the climate protection program, about which Spiegel first reported. This early version has many gaps. It becomes clear: the government does not have an idea of how the climate targets could still be reached. Observers agree.

The draft is a disappointment, says Swantje Michaelsen, transport-policy spokesperson of the Green Bundestag faction. Violetta Bock, climate-policy spokesperson of the Left in the Bundestag, puts it more sharply: The draft is “not a climate protection program, but a collection of ideas without a backbone.” Jürgen Resch, managing director of Deutsche Umwelthilfe DUH, regards this early version as an “honest reflection of the government’s powerlessness to take climate protection measures.”

DUH had only two weeks ago secured a ruling before the Federal Administrative Court that should give the federal government serious cause for concern: the court ruled that the government may not present a climate protection program that is evidently inadequate. In the concrete case it concerned the program of the 2023 traffic-light government. Resch called the ruling a “resounding slap in the face” for the federal government.

Buildings and Transport Breach EU Targets

The present draft contains a wealth of measures. The appendix, listing the CO₂ savings potential as well as the economic and social consequences of the individual measures, runs to 222 pages. Whether that is enough to close the CO₂ gaps for 2030 and 2040 is not evident from it: for many measures there is no indication of how much CO₂ they can save.

“The draft reveals the same methodological flaws as the Climate Protection Program 2023, to which we achieved the Federal Administrative Court’s decision,” said Resch.

Particularly in the transport and building sectors, the government would have to take drastic steps: according to the Expert Council on Climate, those sectors will emit 224 million tonnes more CO₂ by 2030 than EU law permits.

In the transport sector, “on first glance some things read well,” said Green MP Michaelsen. “But unfortunately, hardly any of it is reflected in the actual policies of the black-red coalition.” The 800 million euros noted in the draft for expanding cycling infrastructure are in the federal budget only to a “fraction.” Likewise, the Deutschlandticket should be kept in the long term. “Only unfortunately it will become more expensive for passengers every year, so rising subscription numbers will not materialize,” Michaelsen criticized.

When you look at the proposed climate protection measures in the building sector, another problem becomes evident: the draft does not address that climate protection is currently under strong pressure at both the German and European levels. The EU-wide CO₂ price for heating and fueling has been postponed by one year. The CO₂ price for electricity and industry is to be handled more leniently, according to a proposal by the EU Commission. And the CDU and CSU want to weaken central climate protection provisions in the reform of the Building Energy Act.

DUH: Will “Naturally” Sue Again

Undeterred, the draft includes a proposal to direct subsidies for heating replacement and building renovation more toward low-income households.

“Now to put new measures for the building sector on display, for which there are neither the political majorities nor the corresponding financing commitments, is irresponsible,” said Left party member Bock. “This kind of wishful-thinking politics will not help people with their current worries about exploding rents and heating costs.”

“To meet the requirements of the Climate Protection Act, significantly broader measures are needed,” said Jürgen Resch of DUH: a renovation offensive for schools, kindergartens and other public buildings; a speed limit that “takes effect immediately and costs nothing”; and a redesign of the subsidies for heating replacement from the current percentage-based funding to a fixed amount.

Should the final Climate Protection Program not appear clearly more ambitious than the leaked proposal, DUH will, of course, sue again, Resch said. “It’s absurd that we even discuss what coercive measures we must employ. Who should follow the laws if not the federal government?”