The celebrations could be dreary. Two days before the Federal Republic celebrates the Day of German Unity, the citizens face a considerable burden. The new gas levy will start on October 1st. It will be 2.4 cents per kilowatt hour. For a family of four, that would mean additional costs of around 600 euros per year – until 2024.
But the motto of October 3rd – unity – would also be good advice for gas. More unity is needed in the measures, in the interaction of burdens and relief. A comprehensive concept that creates clear incentives to save and at the same time provides targeted cushioning. And that, in a way, as the day of German energy unity, no later than October 1st.
It is undisputed that the top government is trying to get the problems under control. But the efforts are not enough and are now too often lost in party-political trifles. It is enough that gas supplies are already a black box and no one knows how Russia will behave in the coming months. It’s time to at least get rid of the national black box.
The levy starts on October 1st. However, it is not clear when it will appear on consumers’ bills, and that could also differ depending on the contractual situation. Even more tricky is the situation with gas prices themselves. Some suppliers are already adjusting their discounts because of the high purchase prices.
Top jobs of the day
Find the best jobs now and
be notified by email.
The economist Veronika Grimm estimates, however, that half of the 20 million households that heat with gas only find out about it from their utility bills. And that is usually based on the previous year. Households would not be surprised by the high prices until 2023, when winter is already over.
Machete for the gas contract jungle
And that’s not the only difficulty. In some apartment buildings, the gas consumption is apportioned to the area of the apartments. And more than half of medium-sized companies have energy contracts that run for several years – as long as their suppliers can keep up.
More on the subject:
German gas consumers are therefore moving at many different speeds. This makes it almost impossible to react with pinpoint accuracy, on both crucial levels.
First when saving: The federal government always emphasizes that there is no need for any further financial incentives to save on gas, as prices are already high. However, the high costs now have no saving effect if they arrive later. The gas surcharge is still too low to make any significant changes to this.
In order to be able to set up a realistic savings plan, Robert Habeck would have to be given a machete to hack his way through the thicket of the contract jungle.
The minister should be able to decree that suppliers can largely pass on price increases directly, while landlords should be able to pass some of them on to consumers in a timely manner. They should bear the other part themselves in order to make investments in new heating systems more attractive.
Savings bonuses should also play a role for those who do not bear their gas costs themselves, i.e. recipients of basic security. Together with the many correct, non-financial measures that Habeck has otherwise initiated, more than 20 percent gas could be saved in order to get through this and the next winter without any problems.
Targeted relief, in terms of amount and timing
The situation is better than many feared, but the gas storage target of 75 percent was reached three weeks earlier than planned. But that is a false security. The German storage facilities are not large enough to handle the winter with them alone.
Second, when unloading. To put it bluntly: together with the gas surcharge, the suggested steps would be a hard blow for many households. But so are the high prices – you just don’t know when and with whom. With the clear concept, on the other hand, a unit could be created between savings incentives and relief.
Clear relief is of course needed for citizens with little or no income. But that alone will not be enough. Especially people with property such as poorly insulated single-family houses will feel the effects particularly. As is well known, there is no way for direct payments to these sections of the population. That’s why alternatives are needed. One possibility would be a price cap for a certain amount of gas.
In addition, Habeck’s machete could be used to make savings on the market prices. Even such a lid would not be particularly accurate. But an imprecise reaction is better than an unclear initial situation.
Incidentally, the debate about cold progression must be separated from this. This is not about relief, but about avoiding further burdens. The question here is: can and want to afford it? With the gas concept, this question does not even arise.
More: RWE benefits from rising energy prices – and doubles profits