September 20, 2019 is likely to go down in history, on the one hand as the beginning of a worldwide movement against the climate crisis, on the other hand as the farewell of an outdated policy in the form of the grand coalition.
Let's start with the latter: The price of carbon dioxide is a "paradigm shift", the Chancellor said yesterday. It was the wrong sentence in an at least phrases true rich press conference of the Federal Government. One-off fact, because CO2 emissions from European emissions trading are already priced, albeit a little too low. (Also, the now planned ten euros per tonne by 2021 will have little effect.) On the other intellectual, because the spirit of the climate package and the appearance of the Federal Government shows that the relevant actors are still fully caught up in the paradigms of the previous century and a fundamentally new Problem - the existential crisis in the relationship of man and nature - want to solve exclusively with the old tools.
It was emphasized on all sides that the climate package was a compromise between various extreme forces. Markus Söder has most clearly formulated the Leitdogmagroßkoalitionärer Politik: "The path of the middle is the path of reason." Unfortunately, this is wrong with the climate. The way of the future is the reduction of CO2 emissions to near zero by the year2050, ie in just over three decades. Reasonable is what leads, is unreasonable, what misses this goal. Compromises can and should be made self-evident, but only concerning the means. How difficult the groko falls, to penetrate this physical dimension of the climate problem, shows another formulation of the Federal Chancellor. In the future, according to the calculations of the Paris Climate Agreement, Germany still has the right to emit about seven gigatonnes (6,600 million tonnes) of CO2, which is the regular basis for assessing whether the agreed measures lead to the desired results. That sounds like a lot, but given that this country currently emits 0.8 gigatonnes per year, it becomes clear just how short the time is, how steep the emission curve must fall. So, if too little is saved in any one sector, then it is not enough to correct something, but then the price must be tightened, and you must save what you have missed so far. The cumulative nature of CO2 emissions limits the space of reasonable compromise. Here, too, the government remains in its old paradigm, Merkel, pushing everything into the future that might become hard, Danaer gifts to the successors.
So the government's attempt to do as little as possible will certainly mean that in a few years more will have to be done. The way of the middle is a steep path.
Hardly any other speaker, hardly a speaker, decided yesterday to put the main goal of the climate package in the foreground, not the reliable reduction of greenhouse gases, but the cohesion of society. Thus, apparently, all those measures state, which cancel each other out, such as the already amultamoderate increase in gasoline price by three cents with simultaneous increase in the commuter tax allowance by five cents.
Nice, but certainly no turning point
The secret author of the climate paper was evidently the fear. As much as possible a change of climate with as little feeling as possible - this was a secret motto, as if by far the biggest change in the history of the Federal Republic, the fundamental turnaround in the way of our economy, consumption, mobility and nutrition was a kind of health reform. at best, a kind of green agenda 2010. But if the impositions of the climate change should be unnoticeable, then it is just not their merits. The lowering of value added tax on train tickets brings about about ten percent reduction, a ticket from Hamburg to Munich to the previous price of 160 euros then "only" 144 euros. That's nice, but certainly not a turnaround.
Of course, a successful climate policy must try everything to keep society together. But it can and must make the contradiction between opinion majority (for climate policy) and action majority (more and more cars) fruitful, what the Groko has failed again. Instead, it follows the mendacious pattern of the past few years: in the name of the poor, cheap meat-eating, but then do it almost all; but in the name of the poor (a little less cheap) low-cost flights do all but; on behalf of the commuters, the life cycle extension for the internal combustion engine - but SUVs are also rushing through the inner cities with it. The social question is abused to spare the middle, let alone the rich.