The areas of transport and construction in particular could save massive amounts of CO2 in order to achieve the goals of the federal government. But the plans of the ministries hardly live up to the claim. Above all, Minister of Transport Wissing comes into focus – his project is “without claim”. NGOs are calling for the chancellor to intervene.
The Expert Council for Climate Issues has rejected Transport Minister Volker Wissing’s climate plan as completely inadequate. His emergency program was “already without sufficient claim,” stated the experts who examine the climate programs on the legal mandate of the federal government. The plans of Minister of Construction Klara Geywitz could not ensure the goals in the building sector either. However, their program could at least make a substantial contribution to reducing CO2 emissions.
Environmental groups reacted with outrage: environmental aid called Wissing’s plan clearly illegal and announced a lawsuit. Climate Alliance accused the government of refusing to work and called on Chancellor Olaf Scholz to intervene. Climate Minister Robert Habeck spoke of a signal from the experts: “We have an obligation to decide on the immediate climate protection program in September.” According to the Climate Protection Act, all sectors such as energy, industry, agriculture, buildings and transport have clear, annual targets for their maximum emissions of greenhouse gases. In 2021, buildings and traffic missed these.
By law, Wissing and Geywitz had to submit immediate programs to get back on track. The independent expert council checked this again with the report that has now been submitted. By 2030, Germany is obliged to reduce its CO2 emissions by 65 percent compared to 1990. Last year it was around 39 percent.
The experts complained about Wissing’s project that his plans could at best make up for the misconduct of 2021. According to the law, however, the requirements for 2022 and beyond are becoming increasingly demanding. You could never be reached with the program. The experts therefore no longer examined his proposals in depth. The building sector is also not on course for the next few years, but it may be by the end of the decade, they said. “Whether the savings can really be realized to this extent seems questionable after our examination,” said the chairman of the council, Hans-Martin Henning.
The Expert Council pointed to a lack of clarity in the law and asked for clarification. Above all, the comprehensive immediate climate protection program provided for in the traffic light coalition agreement is causing uncertainty. The coalition agreement also indicates that the goals could also be achieved across sectors and over several years. The energy sector could, for example, compensate for deficiencies in transport. Climate Minister Habeck referred to the traffic light’s plans for a more comprehensive immediate climate protection program: “All sectors must make their contribution, otherwise we will not achieve the climate targets.” This had so far failed due to the dispute in the coalition.
Habeck announced it for the end of September and emphasized with a view to the construction and transport sectors that the findings of the experts would be taken into account. Green leader Ricarda Lang also demanded a decision in September. There are many approaches in traffic, such as a reform of the company car privilege, an extension of the 9-euro ticket in local traffic or a speed limit on German autobahns. “But what you can’t do is always say ‘no’,” said Lang.
The Climate Alliance, an association of 140 organizations, accused the FDP of failure and called on the Chancellor to intervene: “Scholz must no longer let Wissing’s refusal to work on climate protection get away with it.” The BUND criticized an irresponsible, climate policy failure. The German Environmental Aid explained that the government had failed miserably and was clearly acting illegally: “Since climate protection can obviously only be enforced in this federal government through the courts, we are now going to the Higher Administrative Court of Berlin-Brandenburg.”
