The old slogan “Elections change nothing” has always been wrong. It becomes even more absurd when we take a look at Thuringia through the climate lens, as we are doing today: After all, the federal state in the heart of Germany has been leading the country in cutting emissions and expanding renewables – but should the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) take over after next Sunday’s election, that will probably be the end of it. And the Christian Democrats have also slowed down climate policy to such an extent that this election in Thuringia could change a lot – and not just the societal climate.
On the other hand, people elsewhere have little choice: We report on new alarming data showing how rising sea levels will wipe island states in the Pacific off the map unless far less carbon emissions are released into the atmosphere soon. And how scientists advise abandoning coastal regions all over the world in case of doubt. There is also new bad news about how the climate crisis spoils harvests in Germany. And what tricks environmental organizations are using to take the EU to court over its climate targets.
It’s not always a pleasant thing to read, but it’s important and intriguing. We’ll stay tuned for you.
Thuringia has made considerable progress in climate action and could become one of Germany’s first net-zero federal states – but only if it maintains its pioneering position. So far, the state has reduced more carbon emissions than any other federal state, has a high share of renewables in its electricity mix, few carbon-intensive power plants, hardly any heavy industry and vast natural areas. However, this path could be jeopardized next weekend if the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) or the conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU) win the elections. Both parties have so far shown little interest in a consistent climate policy in Thuringia.
Thuringia is a nationwide leader in reducing emissions: According to the Ministry of the Environment, energy-related emissions have declined by 63 percent between 1990 and 2023. By 2020, the state had already met the EU requirements (minus 55 percent) for 2030 and is close to the German target for 2030 (minus 65 percent). This drastic reduction was achieved by
Unlike lignite states such as Saxony or Brandenburg, over three-quarters of the approximately 12.5 million tons of CO2 emissions in Thuringia (as of 2020) do not come from electricity generation, but from transport, households, industry and agriculture. Following a sharp decline in the early 1990s, emissions have declined, albeit to a lesser extent – unlike in Saxony and Brandenburg, for example, where emissions have practically not fallen for 20 years.
However, Thuringia’s forest ecosystem (around half of the state’s area is forest) also shows signs of concern. It changes from a safe “sink” that stores CO2 to an emitter; according to the Ministry of the Environment, the balance is approximately even. There is also no foreseeable solution for transport in Thuringia, which is the only sector with emissions above the 1990 figures, apart from EV subsidies.
Thuringia is also one of the leaders in Germany when it comes to the share of renewables: Almost 62 percent of electricity generated in the state came from wind, solar, biomass and hydropower in 2020. Thuringia has the advantage of being home to a third of Germany’s pumped storage capacity. A Nordhausen University of Applied Sciences report in 2021 confirmed that the energy system transformation is feasible and that “a climate-neutral Thuringia is realistic and affordable.” However, this would require:
The coalition government of the Social Democratic Party, Greens and the Left Party emphasizes that it has set many things in motion. For example, it has anchored renewable energy expansion and carbon reduction targets in the Climate Act and the EIKS energy strategy. However, only 0.6 percent of the required 1.8 percent of the state’s area for wind energy by 2027 has been achieved. Municipalities receive money per capita from the “Climate Pact” for investments in climate action. Green Environment Minister Bernhard Stengele told Table.Briefings: “Climate action and economic strength go hand in hand if we get it right. We have already achieved a lot in the last ten years,” for example, in the expansion of solar energy, the promotion of community energy and the financing of local authorities. “If we don’t continue like this, if we fall behind on climate action, it will be to the detriment of everyone.”
However, much work remains: The Climate Act and strategy have yet to be monitored. The Climate Act must also be adapted to the federal target of achieving net zero emissions by 2045 (previously “in the second half of the 21st century”). And a report by management consultants prognos and the Leipzig Institute for Energy providing a detailed path calculation for zero emissions in all sectors will only be published this fall after the election. This leaves important decisions on further developments in the hands of the next parliament and the next government in Erfurt.
An “Appeal by the Thuringian Climate Council” for the upcoming state elections emphasizes the state’s chances of achieving net-zero development. In it, the state government’s panel of experts stresses that Thuringia is one of the “regions most affected by climate change in Germany” with a warming of 1.7 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial levels. They warn that heat, heavy rain, floods and forest fires jeopardize people’s lives, the economy and harvests. While the state is innovative and, along with Saxony, has the best potential in Germany for the utilization of solar energy, it needs to invest more in the expansion of renewables, efficiency and adaptation to climate change, they say.
Thuringia could make an “important contribution to climate action without compromising living standards,” the experts, led by Jena hydrologist Kai Uwe Totsche, explained. “The upcoming legislative period is crucial for climate action,” the statement on the state election continues. “Inform yourself about the parties’ strategies and plans and consider the urgency of climate action and adaptation when casting your vote.”
However, it is precisely the strategies and plans of the political parties that cast doubt on an ambitious course towards net zero. After all, the AfD and the CDU, which are leading in the polls, have so far tended to slow down climate action in Thuringia. The AfD denies the causes of man-made climate change and fundamentally criticizes climate action. In Thuringia, it calls for halting wind power expansion, no new power lines or efficiency targets, it wants Russian gas and a return to nuclear power – which is out of Thuringia’s power as it is only a federal state.
Although the CDU in Thuringia supports the expansion of renewables, it refers to “technology-open solutions” and opposes “excessive utopian demands in climate policy.” As recently as the end of 2023, it voted together with the AfD in favor of a motion by the Free Democratic Party (FDP) in the Thuringian state parliament that practically banned the development of wind energy in forests – and pushed it through against the votes of the minority governing coalition. This makes the goal of tripling wind capacity in the state, as required for achieving net-zero emissions, very doubtful.
A new UN study warns of rapidly rising sea levels. It reports that small island states, particularly in the Pacific, are at serious risk of sinking as sea levels in these regions are rising much faster than globally. The damage and risks for people, infrastructure and the economy are increasing and food security is jeopardized. And water levels and losses will continue to rise.
Since the early 2000s, the seas have risen faster than at any point in the last 3,000 years. The causes are believed to be melting land ice, increasing temperatures and the expansion of seawater. The UN warns that the rise is continuing to accelerate, threatening hundreds of millions of people. Rising sea levels are already causing billions in economic damage every year. If the climate crisis cannot be stopped, millions of people could become climate refugees in just a few decades.
At first glance, it may only be a few millimeters, but it will severely affect humanity. Compared to the turn of the century (1993 to 2002), sea level rise has more than doubled in the last ten years – from 0.21 to 0.48 centimeters per year. The main cause of this is man-made climate change and the burning of fossil fuels, which have historically been responsible for 69 percent of CO2 emissions and, in recent years (2013 to 2022), for almost 90 percent.
Many small island nations could soon sink or become uninhabitable. In large parts of the western tropical Pacific, sea levels have risen 10 to 15 centimeters in the last 30 years, almost twice as fast as the global average, according to a new report on the southwest Pacific by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). The report found that some islands were affected by coastal flooding ten times more frequently than in 1980. The sea is also warming much faster than the global average in large parts of the region. Storms are becoming increasingly violent. In 2023, the Southwest Pacific experienced a total of 34 “hydrometeorological hazard events,” meaning extreme storms, floods and droughts that affected more than 25 million people and caused 4.4 billion US dollars in economic damage.
The economic consequences are grave:
According to the scientists at Climate Analytics, if current climate policy is maintained, global warming could reach 2.7 degrees by 2050 and sea levels could rise by 56 centimeters by 2100 compared to 2020. By comparison, most Pacific islands are, on average, only one to two meters above sea level. If warming can be limited to 1.5 degrees and net-zero emissions are achieved by 2050, the sea will rise by 38 centimeters by 2100.
The WMO concludes: “Climate change threatens the future of Pacific islands.” This is why Tuvalu has already signed a resettlement agreement with Australia. Every year, 280 of Tuvalu’s 11,000 inhabitants can relocate to the neighboring country. Other countries in the region have association agreements with the USA (Micronesia, Marshall Islands, Palau) and New Zealand (Cook Islands, Niu,e), allowing their citizens to settle there. Australia and New Zealand have also launched an immigration lottery where visas can be won, as reported by Le Monde Diplomatique. However, not all island populations have such emigration options.
The UN predicts that storm surges and flooding will continue to worsen in the future. Seaports are also threatened by rising sea levels, which could impact global trade. Large coastal cities on all continents are also at risk.
The UN warns that sea level rise is irreversible:
During a visit to Tonga on Monday, UN Secretary-General António Guterres called on wealthy countries to drastically cut carbon emissions and quickly phase out fossil fuels. In its study, the UN calls on countries to
The Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) had already called for “trillions of US dollars” for the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) at the COP interim conference in Bonn. Moreover, they demanded improved access to international climate finance for small states. “The institutions that channel this money to us are not built with the context-specific aspects of SIDS and LDCs in mind – they are built for bigger countries because they want bigger impact,” complained Michai Robertson, Senior Advisor to AOSIS. The group of countries demands ending funding for fossil fuel projects.
The transition to battery-powered electromobility is the most important political measure for the climate problem of transport – especially because it can be implemented much faster than a broader mobility transition, which is also necessary. However, contrary to the global trend, Germany’s demand for electric cars is not growing as quickly as expected.
This creates problems for local manufacturers, who earn most of their money with large combustion engines. By 2025 at the latest, when new fleet limits come into force across the EU, they could face fines in the billions – unless they can significantly increase their EV sales. However, after the abrupt end of the purchase premium and in light of the current budget debate, the prospects for this currently seem poor.
Yet there is a completely budget-neutral way to give electromobility in Germany – and, in turn, climate action in the transport sector – a new boost: The update to the EU Renewable Energy Directive for transport (RED) must be transposed into national law by next spring. The lead Ministry of the Environment is currently working on a draft, which is expected to be presented in the coming weeks. This is an opportunity to promote both climate protection and e-mobility.
However, the RED must be fundamentally reorganized in its German legal implementation to achieve this.
The RED specifies how much renewable energy must be used in transportation. In Germany, this has so far been regulated via the GHG quota system. Since 2015, it has obliged oil companies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by a certain amount. If oil companies do not meet the quota themselves, they can compensate for this by paying money to providers of more eco-friendly energy sources – for example, charging electricity providers, who generally use green electricity, or the biofuel industry. The costs are an incentive for green innovations. To this end, the GHG quota system provides a budget-neutral framework.
That sounds good in theory, but a large proportion of the compensation payments end up going to suppliers of biofuels that are not green at all. Contrary to what is often claimed, more than half of these fuels still come directly from the farmland. Several studies confirm that, in many cases, they are even more harmful to the climate than fossil fuels. Because their official carbon footprint is incomplete, the quota system still classifies them as low-GHG.
The use of biogenic fuels from arable land could even increase in the future. A significant proportion of the limited land available in Germany is already being used for fuel production.
Meanwhile, there are many assurances that biofuels come largely from residues, so-called “advanced biofuels.” However, in 2022, almost half of them came from Asian palm oil mill residues, although the EU actually no longer wanted to promote palm oil (no data is yet available for 2023). On top of this, there is a scandalous fraud system in which oil from China is simply reclassified as waste.
This means the German GHG quota system does not live up to its political claim. The existing compliance options neither deliver proper climate action nor promote green innovations. Those bearing the brunt – apart from the climate – are the consumers who finance the system at the filling station.
In the current situation, it would be absolutely wrong to generally increase the mandatory share for renewables in transportation, as the automotive industry recently proposed. This would only support non-green biofuels with even more money.
Electromobility is the means of choice for climate action. To better promote it, RED must be consistently restructured in its German legal implementation. Fuels from farmland must be excluded from the GHG quota, and waste and residual materials must be strictly limited. This is legally possible. The emissions balance must finally be calculated in an honest manner. Imaginary reductions of 90 percent would then no longer be recognized.
Charging electricity must become the central commodity on the GHG quota market – for example, by giving it a higher weighting in the quota system or increasing the minimum purchase quantity. This is the only way to improve the charging station business model and make the GHG quota payment to EV owners more reliable. Both are important incentives for electromobility.
The argument that all options are needed does not count here: The targets for renewables in transport can be met without fuels from farmland. Anyone who wants to use biofuels in their cars could still do so. However, given the limited budget available for climate action, why should this be subsidized by the state when electromobility for cars and trucks can be promoted instead?
Biofuel fraud must be consistently prevented. The latest example of fraud in upstream emission reductions shows how difficult it is to verify climate action using certificates. The controlling authorities must send a clear signal to the market: Fuel and GHG reduction volumes must no longer be recognized in Germany if there is no opportunity for on-site audits of the producing plants in other countries.
RED in transport enables climate action innovations and the promotion of electromobility without requiring additional money from the federal budget. Therefore, all federal ministries should have a common interest in making the RED a genuine transformation instrument.
Nikolas von Wysiecki is deputy head of transport policy at environmental organization NABU.
The old slogan “Elections change nothing” has always been wrong. It becomes even more absurd when we take a look at Thuringia through the climate lens, as we are doing today: After all, the federal state in the heart of Germany has been leading the country in cutting emissions and expanding renewables – but should the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) take over after next Sunday’s election, that will probably be the end of it. And the Christian Democrats have also slowed down climate policy to such an extent that this election in Thuringia could change a lot – and not just the societal climate.
On the other hand, people elsewhere have little choice: We report on new alarming data showing how rising sea levels will wipe island states in the Pacific off the map unless far less carbon emissions are released into the atmosphere soon. And how scientists advise abandoning coastal regions all over the world in case of doubt. There is also new bad news about how the climate crisis spoils harvests in Germany. And what tricks environmental organizations are using to take the EU to court over its climate targets.
It’s not always a pleasant thing to read, but it’s important and intriguing. We’ll stay tuned for you.
Thuringia has made considerable progress in climate action and could become one of Germany’s first net-zero federal states – but only if it maintains its pioneering position. So far, the state has reduced more carbon emissions than any other federal state, has a high share of renewables in its electricity mix, few carbon-intensive power plants, hardly any heavy industry and vast natural areas. However, this path could be jeopardized next weekend if the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) or the conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU) win the elections. Both parties have so far shown little interest in a consistent climate policy in Thuringia.
Thuringia is a nationwide leader in reducing emissions: According to the Ministry of the Environment, energy-related emissions have declined by 63 percent between 1990 and 2023. By 2020, the state had already met the EU requirements (minus 55 percent) for 2030 and is close to the German target for 2030 (minus 65 percent). This drastic reduction was achieved by
Unlike lignite states such as Saxony or Brandenburg, over three-quarters of the approximately 12.5 million tons of CO2 emissions in Thuringia (as of 2020) do not come from electricity generation, but from transport, households, industry and agriculture. Following a sharp decline in the early 1990s, emissions have declined, albeit to a lesser extent – unlike in Saxony and Brandenburg, for example, where emissions have practically not fallen for 20 years.
However, Thuringia’s forest ecosystem (around half of the state’s area is forest) also shows signs of concern. It changes from a safe “sink” that stores CO2 to an emitter; according to the Ministry of the Environment, the balance is approximately even. There is also no foreseeable solution for transport in Thuringia, which is the only sector with emissions above the 1990 figures, apart from EV subsidies.
Thuringia is also one of the leaders in Germany when it comes to the share of renewables: Almost 62 percent of electricity generated in the state came from wind, solar, biomass and hydropower in 2020. Thuringia has the advantage of being home to a third of Germany’s pumped storage capacity. A Nordhausen University of Applied Sciences report in 2021 confirmed that the energy system transformation is feasible and that “a climate-neutral Thuringia is realistic and affordable.” However, this would require:
The coalition government of the Social Democratic Party, Greens and the Left Party emphasizes that it has set many things in motion. For example, it has anchored renewable energy expansion and carbon reduction targets in the Climate Act and the EIKS energy strategy. However, only 0.6 percent of the required 1.8 percent of the state’s area for wind energy by 2027 has been achieved. Municipalities receive money per capita from the “Climate Pact” for investments in climate action. Green Environment Minister Bernhard Stengele told Table.Briefings: “Climate action and economic strength go hand in hand if we get it right. We have already achieved a lot in the last ten years,” for example, in the expansion of solar energy, the promotion of community energy and the financing of local authorities. “If we don’t continue like this, if we fall behind on climate action, it will be to the detriment of everyone.”
However, much work remains: The Climate Act and strategy have yet to be monitored. The Climate Act must also be adapted to the federal target of achieving net zero emissions by 2045 (previously “in the second half of the 21st century”). And a report by management consultants prognos and the Leipzig Institute for Energy providing a detailed path calculation for zero emissions in all sectors will only be published this fall after the election. This leaves important decisions on further developments in the hands of the next parliament and the next government in Erfurt.
An “Appeal by the Thuringian Climate Council” for the upcoming state elections emphasizes the state’s chances of achieving net-zero development. In it, the state government’s panel of experts stresses that Thuringia is one of the “regions most affected by climate change in Germany” with a warming of 1.7 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial levels. They warn that heat, heavy rain, floods and forest fires jeopardize people’s lives, the economy and harvests. While the state is innovative and, along with Saxony, has the best potential in Germany for the utilization of solar energy, it needs to invest more in the expansion of renewables, efficiency and adaptation to climate change, they say.
Thuringia could make an “important contribution to climate action without compromising living standards,” the experts, led by Jena hydrologist Kai Uwe Totsche, explained. “The upcoming legislative period is crucial for climate action,” the statement on the state election continues. “Inform yourself about the parties’ strategies and plans and consider the urgency of climate action and adaptation when casting your vote.”
However, it is precisely the strategies and plans of the political parties that cast doubt on an ambitious course towards net zero. After all, the AfD and the CDU, which are leading in the polls, have so far tended to slow down climate action in Thuringia. The AfD denies the causes of man-made climate change and fundamentally criticizes climate action. In Thuringia, it calls for halting wind power expansion, no new power lines or efficiency targets, it wants Russian gas and a return to nuclear power – which is out of Thuringia’s power as it is only a federal state.
Although the CDU in Thuringia supports the expansion of renewables, it refers to “technology-open solutions” and opposes “excessive utopian demands in climate policy.” As recently as the end of 2023, it voted together with the AfD in favor of a motion by the Free Democratic Party (FDP) in the Thuringian state parliament that practically banned the development of wind energy in forests – and pushed it through against the votes of the minority governing coalition. This makes the goal of tripling wind capacity in the state, as required for achieving net-zero emissions, very doubtful.
A new UN study warns of rapidly rising sea levels. It reports that small island states, particularly in the Pacific, are at serious risk of sinking as sea levels in these regions are rising much faster than globally. The damage and risks for people, infrastructure and the economy are increasing and food security is jeopardized. And water levels and losses will continue to rise.
Since the early 2000s, the seas have risen faster than at any point in the last 3,000 years. The causes are believed to be melting land ice, increasing temperatures and the expansion of seawater. The UN warns that the rise is continuing to accelerate, threatening hundreds of millions of people. Rising sea levels are already causing billions in economic damage every year. If the climate crisis cannot be stopped, millions of people could become climate refugees in just a few decades.
At first glance, it may only be a few millimeters, but it will severely affect humanity. Compared to the turn of the century (1993 to 2002), sea level rise has more than doubled in the last ten years – from 0.21 to 0.48 centimeters per year. The main cause of this is man-made climate change and the burning of fossil fuels, which have historically been responsible for 69 percent of CO2 emissions and, in recent years (2013 to 2022), for almost 90 percent.
Many small island nations could soon sink or become uninhabitable. In large parts of the western tropical Pacific, sea levels have risen 10 to 15 centimeters in the last 30 years, almost twice as fast as the global average, according to a new report on the southwest Pacific by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). The report found that some islands were affected by coastal flooding ten times more frequently than in 1980. The sea is also warming much faster than the global average in large parts of the region. Storms are becoming increasingly violent. In 2023, the Southwest Pacific experienced a total of 34 “hydrometeorological hazard events,” meaning extreme storms, floods and droughts that affected more than 25 million people and caused 4.4 billion US dollars in economic damage.
The economic consequences are grave:
According to the scientists at Climate Analytics, if current climate policy is maintained, global warming could reach 2.7 degrees by 2050 and sea levels could rise by 56 centimeters by 2100 compared to 2020. By comparison, most Pacific islands are, on average, only one to two meters above sea level. If warming can be limited to 1.5 degrees and net-zero emissions are achieved by 2050, the sea will rise by 38 centimeters by 2100.
The WMO concludes: “Climate change threatens the future of Pacific islands.” This is why Tuvalu has already signed a resettlement agreement with Australia. Every year, 280 of Tuvalu’s 11,000 inhabitants can relocate to the neighboring country. Other countries in the region have association agreements with the USA (Micronesia, Marshall Islands, Palau) and New Zealand (Cook Islands, Niu,e), allowing their citizens to settle there. Australia and New Zealand have also launched an immigration lottery where visas can be won, as reported by Le Monde Diplomatique. However, not all island populations have such emigration options.
The UN predicts that storm surges and flooding will continue to worsen in the future. Seaports are also threatened by rising sea levels, which could impact global trade. Large coastal cities on all continents are also at risk.
The UN warns that sea level rise is irreversible:
During a visit to Tonga on Monday, UN Secretary-General António Guterres called on wealthy countries to drastically cut carbon emissions and quickly phase out fossil fuels. In its study, the UN calls on countries to
The Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) had already called for “trillions of US dollars” for the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) at the COP interim conference in Bonn. Moreover, they demanded improved access to international climate finance for small states. “The institutions that channel this money to us are not built with the context-specific aspects of SIDS and LDCs in mind – they are built for bigger countries because they want bigger impact,” complained Michai Robertson, Senior Advisor to AOSIS. The group of countries demands ending funding for fossil fuel projects.
The transition to battery-powered electromobility is the most important political measure for the climate problem of transport – especially because it can be implemented much faster than a broader mobility transition, which is also necessary. However, contrary to the global trend, Germany’s demand for electric cars is not growing as quickly as expected.
This creates problems for local manufacturers, who earn most of their money with large combustion engines. By 2025 at the latest, when new fleet limits come into force across the EU, they could face fines in the billions – unless they can significantly increase their EV sales. However, after the abrupt end of the purchase premium and in light of the current budget debate, the prospects for this currently seem poor.
Yet there is a completely budget-neutral way to give electromobility in Germany – and, in turn, climate action in the transport sector – a new boost: The update to the EU Renewable Energy Directive for transport (RED) must be transposed into national law by next spring. The lead Ministry of the Environment is currently working on a draft, which is expected to be presented in the coming weeks. This is an opportunity to promote both climate protection and e-mobility.
However, the RED must be fundamentally reorganized in its German legal implementation to achieve this.
The RED specifies how much renewable energy must be used in transportation. In Germany, this has so far been regulated via the GHG quota system. Since 2015, it has obliged oil companies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by a certain amount. If oil companies do not meet the quota themselves, they can compensate for this by paying money to providers of more eco-friendly energy sources – for example, charging electricity providers, who generally use green electricity, or the biofuel industry. The costs are an incentive for green innovations. To this end, the GHG quota system provides a budget-neutral framework.
That sounds good in theory, but a large proportion of the compensation payments end up going to suppliers of biofuels that are not green at all. Contrary to what is often claimed, more than half of these fuels still come directly from the farmland. Several studies confirm that, in many cases, they are even more harmful to the climate than fossil fuels. Because their official carbon footprint is incomplete, the quota system still classifies them as low-GHG.
The use of biogenic fuels from arable land could even increase in the future. A significant proportion of the limited land available in Germany is already being used for fuel production.
Meanwhile, there are many assurances that biofuels come largely from residues, so-called “advanced biofuels.” However, in 2022, almost half of them came from Asian palm oil mill residues, although the EU actually no longer wanted to promote palm oil (no data is yet available for 2023). On top of this, there is a scandalous fraud system in which oil from China is simply reclassified as waste.
This means the German GHG quota system does not live up to its political claim. The existing compliance options neither deliver proper climate action nor promote green innovations. Those bearing the brunt – apart from the climate – are the consumers who finance the system at the filling station.
In the current situation, it would be absolutely wrong to generally increase the mandatory share for renewables in transportation, as the automotive industry recently proposed. This would only support non-green biofuels with even more money.
Electromobility is the means of choice for climate action. To better promote it, RED must be consistently restructured in its German legal implementation. Fuels from farmland must be excluded from the GHG quota, and waste and residual materials must be strictly limited. This is legally possible. The emissions balance must finally be calculated in an honest manner. Imaginary reductions of 90 percent would then no longer be recognized.
Charging electricity must become the central commodity on the GHG quota market – for example, by giving it a higher weighting in the quota system or increasing the minimum purchase quantity. This is the only way to improve the charging station business model and make the GHG quota payment to EV owners more reliable. Both are important incentives for electromobility.
The argument that all options are needed does not count here: The targets for renewables in transport can be met without fuels from farmland. Anyone who wants to use biofuels in their cars could still do so. However, given the limited budget available for climate action, why should this be subsidized by the state when electromobility for cars and trucks can be promoted instead?
Biofuel fraud must be consistently prevented. The latest example of fraud in upstream emission reductions shows how difficult it is to verify climate action using certificates. The controlling authorities must send a clear signal to the market: Fuel and GHG reduction volumes must no longer be recognized in Germany if there is no opportunity for on-site audits of the producing plants in other countries.
RED in transport enables climate action innovations and the promotion of electromobility without requiring additional money from the federal budget. Therefore, all federal ministries should have a common interest in making the RED a genuine transformation instrument.
Nikolas von Wysiecki is deputy head of transport policy at environmental organization NABU.
