Last year around this time we had to pay around 98 cents for a liter of diesel.

Today we can be happy when we come out of the gas station with 1 Euro 35.

What happened?

Well, supply and demand: In the hard lockdown, the conveyor belts stood still, the traffic stopped.

Accordingly, the oil price was at a low.

Today life is pulsating again, oil and gasoline are expensive.

Rainer Hank

Freelance writer in the economy of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung.

  • Follow I follow

    But that's not all. Germany is to become climate neutral in 2045. Therefore, a penalty tax must now be paid for the emission of CO2: 25 euros per ton of CO2. Converted, that makes a liter of diesel 8 cents more expensive. That is not the end of the story: by 2025, the price of CO2 will rise to 55 euros, which will increase the price of a liter of diesel by 15 cents. The intention is clear: We want diesel driving to be soured, the switch to an electric car with bonuses made palatable. If the Greens prevail, everything will go much faster: the CO2 price is set to rise to 60 euros as early as 2023. A fuel dispute has been raging in this country for days.

    In principle, I think it's okay that gasoline and diesel are getting more expensive, even when it's in a bad mood.

    The accelerated abandonment of the use of fossil fuels (oil, gas, coal) is the decisive instrument for stopping climate change.

    Economists say that behavior is controlled through price - better than through complicated interventions and subsidies.

    Is it fair in climate policy?

    But the question remains whether the switch will be fair. When we have the impression that something is fair, we are satisfied with life and less jealous of those around us. We are also more willing to accept doing without and increasing prices, i.e. to actively commit ourselves to phasing out oil and coal. Now you could go global and point your finger at China, where CO2 consumption is increasing year after year, while we in Europe should limit ourselves. And if we restrict ourselves, that makes the price of fossil energy cheaper, which acts as an additional incentive for other nations to heat with oil and coal. The often made reference that the per capita emissions in China are comparable to ours does not catch on. The mass does it, not the individual.

    Admittedly, pointing to China could be an immunization strategy to rid us of our responsibilities. That is why I only want to pose the question of justice nationally and limit myself to the currently controversial car traffic. The higher fuel price affects everyone: poor and rich, frequent and infrequent drivers. Many politicians are of the opinion that there must be social compensation for poor people who have to take long journeys to work.

    Now it is not that the question of fair compensation has only now arisen. From this year onwards, commuters can deduct not just 30 but 35 cents (from 2024 even 38 cents) on their tax returns from the 21st kilometer. In order to decide whether this is fairer, one has to calculate. This is not trivial because income, progression and distance play a role as variables. Fortunately, there are experts like Michael Pahle, a clever economist at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK). He did the math for me and sent me a wonderful Excel spreadsheet. Let's take a commuter who drives his car from Friedberg to Frankfurt to work every day. That's a good 30 kilometers. We apply a tax rate of 30 percent and assumethat his other income-related expenses are above the lump sum of 1000 euros.