There are mixed prospects for climate protection ahead of the start of two important summits.
On the one hand, the leading industrialized and emerging countries (G20) want to intensify their efforts; on the other hand, China, as the largest emitter, has not intensified its reduction plans as much as hoped.
At the weekend, the heads of state and government of the G20 meet in Rome, after which they will meet with other colleagues at the world climate conference in Glasgow.
From Sunday onwards, almost 200 countries will meet there, who committed themselves in Paris in 2015 to limiting global warming to a maximum of 2 degrees compared to the pre-industrial era, if possible to 1.5 degrees.
Hendrik Ankenbrand
Business correspondent for China based in Shanghai.
Follow I follow
Christian Geinitz
Business correspondent in Berlin
Follow I follow
Now the maximum goal should become the new benchmark.
"We recognize that the effects of climate change at 1.5 degrees are much smaller than at 2 degrees and that immediate action must be taken to keep 1.5 degrees within reach," reads a draft of the G's final statement -20 summit, from which news agencies quoted.
"We are committed to meeting the existential challenge of climate change." However, the formulations will remain controversial until the summit, including the admission that the G20 are responsible for three quarters of annual greenhouse gas emissions.
Beijing is disappointing hopes
China's recent reduction announcements have caused disappointment. The country, which makes up 18 percent of the world's population, contributes almost 27 percent to emissions. On Thursday, Beijing presented its updated Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) against global warming. This shows that China is not significantly tightening its 2020 targets. The intended carbon neutrality will remain until 2060. By 2030, CO2 emissions are expected to peak. What is new is that by then, emissions are to be reduced by more than 65 percent compared to the comparative value from 2005. So far, the goal had been between 60 and 65 percent.
Western states and non-governmental organizations, however, had expected significantly more. Greenpeace China boss Li Shuo was disappointed in an interview with the FAZ. China has missed a valuable opportunity to give the debate at the climate protection conference a powerful boost by setting sharper goals. The Beijing activist had hoped that China would promise to reduce the absolute level of emissions by 2025 instead of 2030. Li didn't think this was very likely. But the government could at least have announced a much larger reduction in emissions compared to 2005. Here, too, there has now been at best a modest improvement. The fact that China is failing as a leading force in climate protection is casting a "shadow" over the conference in Glasgow, said Li.
Dispute over subsidy reduction
In Germany, meanwhile, there are disagreements in the possible future federal government to reduce subsidies in transport.
The Greens want to abolish state aid that harms the climate.
You refer to the exploratory paper of the "Ampel" from the SPD, Greens and FDP, in which it says that high tax funds can be released "that we check the budget for superfluous, ineffective and environmentally and climate-damaging subsidies and expenditures".
The Green MP Sven-Christian Kindler told the German Press Agency that the cut in subsidies was “good for the climate, it opens up budgetary leeway and ensures fair competition”.
Kindler is a member of the finance and budget working group in the coalition negotiations.
The FDP has obliged the “traffic light” to adhere to the debt brake and not to introduce any new taxes, which is why, from their point of view, the reduction in subsidies is important.
Party leader Christian Lindner refuses to give up the commuter allowance.
The cancellation of the financial aid should "not become a tax increase for the working middle," said Lindner of the Rheinische Post.
The president of the DIW economic research institute, Marcel Fratzscher, said on Deutschlandfunk that many of the 70 billion euros in subsidies for fossil fuels could be eliminated.
The Federal Environment Agency spoke of 65 billion euros, which would also include aid from federal states and municipalities.
It is "paradoxical" that the state promotes climate protection and at the same time climate-damaging modes of production and behavior.