A flat-rate, per capita climate money would be a suitable instrument to offset the burden of CO2 pricing for transport and buildings.

This is the result of a report commissioned by environmental and social organizations from the University of Administrative Sciences in Speyer, which was presented in Berlin on Thursday.

Above all, the unbureaucratic and at the same time socially just approach of this model was emphasized.

"The climate premium is feasible" and "we think it is the right instrument" to return income from CO2 pricing to citizens efficiently and without high administrative costs, said the co-author of the report, Gisela Färber.

According to the report, the payment could be automated for a very large proportion of the population by merging existing data from the financial administration and the social and pension funds in a "climate premium register".

For the small remainder, an uncomplicated electronic application process would be possible for the collection, said Färber.

She advised a monthly payment of the premium in the sense of a deduction by offsetting against the tax deduction, social benefits such as Hartz IV or the pension payment.

This has the advantage that the socially disadvantaged in particular do not have to wait for payment.

Social balance needs climate protection

The general manager of the social association Paritätische, Ulrich Schneider, said that it was particularly important for the socially disadvantaged to combat global warming.

"The best pension reform is of no use at all if we don't stop climate change," said Schneider, because it was precisely those on low incomes who felt its devastating effects the most.

Likewise, however, “consistent climate policy is dependent on consistent social policy”.

The climate money is a suitable instrument for this, stressed Schneider.

He countered objections that this was socially unjust because the nurses get as much money as the chief physician.

In terms of income, the payment to the nurse is significantly higher, while at the same time their carbon footprint, on which the carbon price is based, is significantly lower on average.

"On balance, lower income groups will benefit," said Schneider.

In addition, the assertion that the current sharp increase in energy prices is primarily caused by climate protection is wrong.

Society is currently facing two challenges that have to be tackled together, said the managing director of the environmental association BUND, Antje von Broock: "The climate crisis and the fact that the social gap is widening".

In order to achieve a stronger steering effect, the CO2 price would even have to be significantly higher, but together with CO2 pricing “be developed into an effective and socially just instrument for climate protection”.

"Climate change exacerbates injustice," warned the representative of the Evangelical Church in Germany (EKD), Martin Dutzmann.

The climate money is a suitable means of “combining ambitious climate protection with a socially just transformation in our society”.

Those involved expressed skepticism about other relief proposals that – such as the abolition of the EEG surcharge – would primarily benefit people with high energy consumption.

The clients of the report also include the Climate Alliance, the German Nature Conservation Ring (DNR), Germanwatch and WWF.