In the 2021 federal election campaign, the four parties that had realistic hopes of participating in the government outbid each other with climate protection promises. It was not only the Greens who promised the voters – seemingly free of charge – to save the global climate. The Union’s “government program” also spoke of “new prosperity – with sustainable growth towards a climate-neutral industrial country”. The SPD and FDP made very similar promises.
And so it was hardly surprising at the end of last year that the word “climate” appeared no fewer than 198 times in the 144-page coalition agreement of the traffic light government, either alone or in conjunctions such as “climate crisis” or “climate protection”. Just a year ago one could get the impression that the SPD, Greens and FDP believed that they were in a position to save the global climate on their own.
Today it seems like something from a different time that a majority of Germans voted for parties that championed climate protection and thus the rapid phase-out of fossil fuels. Meanwhile, the fight against the climate crisis itself is in crisis.
On this point the activists of the “Last Generation” are right. That is why politics now needs a good new story that strengthens individual willingness to change personal behavior and accept rising energy costs. In the end, it’s all about making renunciation palatable.
Top jobs of the day
Find the best jobs now and
be notified by email.
On closer inspection, the previous policy narratives prove to be weak. Politicians who stage “Germany as the savior of the world climate” give the impression that it depends on German climate and energy policy whether the desired 1.5 or two degree target for global warming can still be achieved.
Germany alone is not decisive for the future of the global climate
The fact is that the German economy is responsible for just two percent of global CO2 emissions. Even if Germany could reduce its own emissions to zero, this would not help the global climate.
Prof. Bert Rürup is President of the Handelsblatt Research Institute (HRI) and Chief Economist of the Handelsblatt. For many years he was a member and chairman of the German Council of Economic Experts and an adviser to several federal and foreign governments. You can find out more about the work of Professor Rürup and his team at research.handelsblatt.com.
The emerging economies of China and India are decisive for the future of the global climate, as these two countries, each with their 1.4 billion inhabitants, are responsible for more than a third of global CO2 emissions. All forecasts predict a noticeable increase in greenhouse gas emissions for the foreseeable future, not least because these two countries are primarily relying on inexpensive coal to cover their growing energy requirements, despite the expansion of “renewables”.
The second narrative, “To be a role model for the world”, suggests that Germany must achieve the climate and energy transition in order to draw a blueprint for the other countries. Even before the Ukraine war broke out, Greens pioneer Ralf Fücks described this as inconsistent.
“On the nuclear issue, we thought we were phase-out pioneers. Today we find ourselves rather on a special path. That should at least make us more open to the debate – the others aren’t all idiots. But we act as if we were the only ones in possession of the truth.” It is probably not without reason that no other industrialized country follows the – supposed – example of Germany in its energy policy solo effort.
While the first two popular narratives were based on idealistic motives, the third justification pattern, “Germany as a pioneer in climate protection technology”, is based on hoped-for economic advantages. German companies could achieve pioneering profits if they became global technology and market leaders – with state subsidies. This narrative has accompanied German politics since the introduction of the Renewable Energy Sources Act at the turn of the millennium.
The German photovoltaic industry fell victim to cheap Chinese competition.
(Photo: imago images/Harry Koerber)
In fact, thanks to massive subsidies, a photovoltaics industry flourished in Germany in the 2000s – and just as quickly became history again. The industry fell victim to the technological catching-up process of Chinese competitors, who conquered the market with their significantly lower prices.
A narrative for the everyday benefits of carbon-neutral conversion
It is likely that the new favorite idea of German climate protection policy, the expansion of hydrogen electrolysis (Power-to-X) based on renewable energies, could face a similar fate. Because the production costs of this technology are so high that hydrogen electrolysis cannot survive without massive public funding for the time being. Plants for the production of green hydrogen only make economic sense in regions where the sun shines most of the time – for example in the desert regions of North Africa or the Middle East.
What is missing in Germany is a convincing narrative that focuses on the concrete everyday benefits of the climate-neutral restructuring of the economy for the vast majority of citizens and their children and grandchildren. Ultimately, it’s about the prospect of a better life. Various studies show that a high level of everyday relevance is the decisive factor for acceptance among the population and thus for active political action.
>> Read here: Hydrogen, the beacon of hope, is so harmful to the climate
More tangible than the important but abstract “protection of the global climate” would be a cleaner local environment in a communication strategy, for example in the form of improved air quality through the extensive renunciation of fossil fuels. In addition, electric vehicles are not only more environmentally friendly than combustion engines, they are also significantly quieter.
In particular, people who live on the outskirts of large cities will benefit from the expansion of local transport. Another plus point: Wind and sun are inexhaustible, clean and domestic energy sources that make Germany more independent of energy imports than it is today.
People with low incomes fear growing financial burdens as a result of the climate-neutral restructuring of the economy, and rightly so. A credible narrative is therefore needed that energy prices will drop noticeably after switching to renewables.
The big problem is that getting there will be very expensive. A credible mechanism is therefore also needed through which the winners from this transformation process actually compensate the losers. Only then will there be sufficient public support for the energy transition.
In addition to clever engineering, social balance, an orientation towards facts and economic incentives, the climate change also needs good marketing that is based on the reality of people’s lives. Because without public acceptance, the energy transition is doomed to failure.
More: Hydrogen, the beacon of hope, is so harmful to the climate