There is to be an “autumn of decisions”, and this week will probably be the high point for the time being: When a new President and Parliament are elected in the USA today, the global climate community will be shaking with them. Today we have summarized the catastrophic consequences that a Republican victory could have for climate action and UN negotiations.
Things are also getting exciting on a smaller scale in Germany: The traffic light coalition is creaking at every turn. Should there be a new government under CDU Chancellor Friedrich Merz, what would its climate and energy policy look like? Today we write about what the CDU has in mind on this topic – in other words, which traffic light rules it would abolish, change or keep.
Then there are the global decisions: Next week, the UN Climate Change Conference will be back in session and our Climate.Table Team will be present once more. Three of us will be on-site in Baku to create an issue of Climate.Table for you every day, in collaboration with our colleagues in Berlin and worldwide – comprehensive, exclusive, relevant and in-depth, just as you would expect from us.
We are looking forward to a hectic two weeks and, as always, hope you enjoy reading this issue.
Your Bernhard Pötter
Feature
US election: How much damage Trump could do to the climate
May 31, 2017, in the Rose Garden of the White House: POTUS Donald Trump announces the withdrawal of the USA from the Paris Agreement.
The prospect of Donald Trump becoming US president again is causing great concern in the US and global climate scene. Unlike if Kamala Harris were to win the election, the consequences would likely be severe. At a time of escalating climate crisis and high geopolitical tensions, another US withdrawal from the international process would hit climate diplomacy hard. Although many observers are optimistic that the energy transition in the USAwould continue under Trump, a Trump victory could jeopardize the future of the entire COP process internationally and pose major additional problems for COP29.
Stopping the government’s climate policy
One of Donald Trump’s few consistent stances is his opinion on climate change: He believes it is a hoax and does not take it seriously. For him, energy policy means the global “energy dominance” of the USA and the massive expansion of oil and gas, including for export. From his first term in office and the radical “Project 2025” of the Heartland Institute think tank, it can be concluded that he would slow down or reverse many of the US administration’s climate decisions. Experts cannot be quoted by name with their views before the US election, but in detail, Trump probably would:
withdraw the USA (again) from the Paris Agreement and now also from the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC);
withdraw many of the Biden administration’s regulations or slow down their implementation, such as the USA’s net zero target, the regulation of power plants and the moratorium on the construction of new LNG terminals;
drastically restrict funding for climate measures in the country and internationally;
dry up funding and staffing for agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and government-funded climate research;
make the government’s climate policy undefendable in court. Conservative judges appointed by Trump could attack the jurisdiction of the federal authorities for climate regulations.
make important state climate regulations such as the CO2 regulation of cars in California more difficult or prevent them entirely.
Energy transition in the states unstoppable?
On the other hand, observers and experts in the US point out that a large part of US climate policy would continue without and against the federal government. In particular, the investment program surrounding the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) is fundamentally protected from direct access by the federal government as a law and through its construction of tax breaks. The package of around $370 billion in tax credits also provides jobs and investment, particularly in “red” US states with Republican governments. Republican members of the House of Representatives have therefore also called for the IRA not to be touched. What’s more:
The opposition from the environmental movement, progressive US states, cities, universities and parts of the business community, which rallied under the slogan “We are still in” and “America’s Pledge” during Trump’s first term in office, could be reactivated quickly. During Trump’s first term in office, the alliance promoted climate policy at US state level and acted as an unofficial US representative at the COPs.
In many states and companies, the development of renewables and the green transformation have progressed significantly further than during Trump’s first term in office. Even then, Trump’s promise to “bring back coal” proved to be false. The implementation of renewables and batteries in the electricity sector can hardly be stopped.
Bipartisan solutions on climate issues could also find majorities in a Republican-dominated Congress: promoting carbon capture from the air (DAC), CCS and CCU, expanding geothermal energy, and promoting new nuclear power.
Trump’s second term could therefore mean that the federal government freezes or reduces large parts of its climate policy, rails loudly against environmental and climate action, and primarily promotes fossil fuels. An anti-science mood in the US federal government could have a particularly negative impact on climate research, as scientists fear in surveys. However, little would change in terms of state policy, the expansion of renewables and massive investment in greentech.
Damage to global climate policy
However, many observers fear that a second term in office for Donald Trump would probably cause serious damage to international climate policy. The UN is concerned about the development, as the effects would probably be much more serious than during Trump’s first round in the White House from 2017 to 2021:
At that time, the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement dragged on for more than three years due to UN regulations. The USA practically only left the agreement from November 2020 to February 2021, when President Biden re-entered. Now Trump could lead the USA out of the agreement in just one year after a corresponding declaration.
Trump also wants to withdraw from the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). This can also be completed within a year. This would effectively mean that the USA would withdraw from the UN negotiations and would only be an observer. Its strong role in transparency, CO2 reduction and market-based elements, for example, would be missing.
Withdrawing from the UNFCCC would also mean the loss of its largest donor. The Climate Secretariat, which is already chronically underfunded, would face even greater difficulties in organizing climate diplomacy and the COPs.
Geopolitically, a US withdrawal would then make China the dominant factor in the climate negotiations. Although the country would then have to abandon its often wait-and-see attitude as an official “developing country” of the G77, it would be able to assert its interests much more strongly – for example, it would be better able to fend off demands for more transparency.
Trump’s election victory could already have a significant impact on COP29: This is because the negotiations revolve primarily around the new NCQG financial target. The USA’s share of global climate financing of around eleven billion US dollars has already been criticized by many as being far too low because it does not correspond to the historical responsibility or the economic possibilities of the world’s largest economy. A “fair contribution” would therefore be closer to 40 billion dollars. A Trump administration would probably stop or reduce large parts of the funding that has so far been provided by the US government. The US Congress, in turn, has been blocking such payments and commitments for a long time.
Mood killer for the COP29?
However, COP29 in Baku is all about finding more public and private money for urgently needed measures for CO2 reduction, adaptation and technology transfer and for international bodies. If the USA were to withdraw from the entire process in the future, not only would there be a lack of money, but the mood would also be jeopardized: The accusation that the industrialized countries are shirking climate change financing would probably become even louder. And the EU, already the largest climate financier, would probably not be able to fill this gap – especially as public budgets in Europe are also suffering from major burdens.
When the COP29 officially begins on Nov. 11 with two days of “High-Level Segment” of heads of state and government, Trump’s election victory could spoil the mood in Baku. It is doubtful whether a viable compromise on the already very difficult issue of financing could be reached in the course of the conference.
Climate policy
COP29
Energiewende
Forschung
Klimaforschung
Trump 2024
Universitäten
Translation missing.
Climate policy: What the CDU/CSU wants to do differently from the traffic light coalition – and what not
A possible part of the Union’s future energy supply is the Isar 2 nuclear power plant, which was shut down in April 2023.
Where exactly the CDU and CSU stand on climate policy was unclear for a long time. The “Mittelstandsunion”, for example, usually advocated different concepts than the “Klima-Union”, while climate expert and party vice-chairman Andreas Jung set a significantly different tone than Jens Spahn, who is responsible for the parliamentary group’s energy policy. However, the parliamentary group has now agreed on a joint discussion paper in a lengthy process, which will be presented to the public at an energy policy conference this Tuesday. And this paper aims to roll back the energy and climate policy of the traffic light coalition more than some past statements have suggested.
The paper contains a clear commitment to nuclear power. While party leader Friedrich Merz declared at the BDEW Congress in June that the issue of nuclear energy in Germany had been “decided”, the CDU/CSU parliamentary group is now calling for an examination of whether “it is still possible to resume operation of the most recently shut-down nuclear power plants at a reasonable technical and financial cost”. However, it is unlikely that the outcome will be positive: As the Federal Ministry for the Environment announced in response to an inquiry from Table.Media, the so-called primary circuit contamination has already taken place in all five of the most recently shut-down pressurized water reactors; this process makes “as a rule, a restart practically impossible”, the ministry writes on its website.
CDU wants to make energy transition more affordable
In contrast, the paper remains rather vague when it comes to the construction of new nuclear power plants: it advocates “research and development of fourth and fifth generation nuclear power plants and SMRs” (Small Modular Reactors) and is “involved in European partnerships and international initiatives”. On the other hand, the Union states a very specific – but not necessarily realistic – goal for nuclear fusion: “The world’s first fusion reactor connected to the grid should be located in Germany.”
A central demand of the paper is also to make the energy transition more affordable. “This is why all additional costs must now be put to the test for a cost turnaround”, write the authors. However, there are only a few specific points on reducing costs – such as the suggestion that long-distance power lines should generally be laid above ground again in the future and the expansion of offshore wind power should be reduced.
At the same time, however, the paper contains many demands that are likely to make the energy transition more expensive. For example, the traffic light coalition is criticized for “relying almost exclusively on solar and wind energy”, which produce by far the cheapest green electricity. Instead, the CDU/CSU is calling for a greater role for biogas, which requires many times more subsidies per kilowatt hour. In addition, the hydrogen core network should become denser than currently planned by the Federal Network Agency due to the expected demand, and the guaranteed return for network operators should be increased. The CDU/CSU rejects the division of the German electricity grid into different price zones, which many experts believe would reduce dispatch costs and thus make the energy transition cheaper.
‘Withdraw the traffic light coalition heating law’
There appears to have been a particularly long dispute over how to deal with the Building Energy Act (GEG). This topic was still left out of a draft from mid-October. The finished paper now contains the announcement that the CDU/CSU will “withdraw the traffic light coalition heating law”. There is officially no such thing as a “heating law”; what is apparently meant is the most recent amendment to the GEG, which the traffic light coalition had also argued about for a long time. There would then no longer be an obligation that new heating systems may only be installed from 2026 or 2028 if they use 65% renewable energy. However, party leader Merz had called in the summer for “many more heat pumps” to be installed than at present. In order to achieve this even without legal requirements, the CDU/CSU is relying on “reliable subsidies” in addition to the rising CO2 price.
Unlike FDP leader Christian Lindner, who has just announced in his paper that he wants to stop all financial support for climate-friendly technologies, the CDU/CSU wants to support the switch to climate-friendly technologies with funding programs – just as the governing coalition has done to date. Companies should also be able to continue to benefit from this, but “unbureaucratically and in line with the market”.
Similarities to traffic light coalition policy
In other respects too, the CDU/CSU’s demands differ less from the policy of the traffic light party than the rhetoric of the paper suggests. For example, like the BMWK and unlike the FDP, it is not aiming for an immediate abolition, but rather a restructuring of the EEG feed-in tariff. The current government is also aiming to reduce electricity tax and grid fees, although this has so far failed due to additional funding requirements. And on many points, the CDU/CSU is working towards positions that the government has long since abandoned – such as a “forced dismantling” of the gas grid or the exclusive use of green hydrogen.
And unlike Minister Lindner, the CDU/CSU is not questioningthe goal of achieving climate neutrality in Germany by 2045. They want to “correct the wrong path” of the traffic light coalition, but “not the climate target”, said CDU/CSU Vice-President Andreas Jung to Table.Briefings. “Climate action remains urgent, but it absolutely must be combined with a strong economy and social acceptance.”
To increase this social acceptance, the Mittelstandsunion (MIT) and the Climate Union recently called for the introduction of a climate fee in similar papers. However, there still seems to be a need for discussion on this within the party: The parliamentary group’s paper does mention a “climate bonus”; however, this only refers to reducing the burden on consumers and companies by lowering electricity prices. However, a climate bonus, i.e. the direct payment of part of the CO2 revenue, does not appear in the paper. According to information obtained by Table.Briefings, a separate paper is planned for this in the coming weeks.
Atomkraft
CDU/CSU
Climate policy
Energiewende
Translation missing.
News
COP16: Why the outcome is a burden on COP29
The UN Conference on Biodiversity, COP16, which was canceled at the weekend, also casts its shadow over COP29. On the one hand, the conference in Cali, Colombia, emphasized the close link between climate and species extinction. On the other hand, the delegations were unable to agree on the details of financing until the plenary was no longer quorate and the meeting had to be ended – not a good omenfor the climate conference in Baku.
Several points were clarified by consensus at the species protection conference. For example, in the future:
The proceeds from the use of genetic material from nature are shared in a “Cali Fund”;
Indigenous communities in a permanent body are to advise COPs on species conservation issues.
However, the countries were unable to agree on a review of their progress in protecting biodiversity.
Closer integration with climate action
In the preliminary final document on climate and biodiversity, COP16 called for closer integration with the climate negotiations. Among other things, it emphasizes the threat to biodiversity posed by the climate crisis, the risks of a difference between 1.5 and 2 degrees of warming, and warns against mistakes in adaptation measures (“maladaptation”). The resolution also provides for
a joint meeting of climate and species experts from both conventions in 2025,
a report on the connections between these two topics,
increased cooperation with Indigenous communities and
the development of guidelines on adaptation and social and ecological guidelines.
COP16 provided a foretaste of the tough debates in Baku, particularly on the issue of finance. These differing demands, which will take center stage at COP29 with the new planned global financial target NCQG, prevented a successful conclusion to the conference in Cali. For example, the idea of setting up a new UN biodiversity fund failed due to resistance from industrialized countries, including the EU, and debtor countries such as China, because the fund was also intended to address the debt of developing countries. bpo
COP29
NCQG
Health: Psychologists call for national climate resilience plan
The healthcare system needs to be further developed in order to better cope not only with the physical but also the psychological effects of climate change. A “national resilience plan” is needed to work out how people can deal with the stress caused by climate change as “productively” as possible. This is what the report “Psychological Perspectives on Climate Change: Strategies and Concepts” by the Association of German Psychologists calls for. It is also important that the development of a comprehensive climate awareness with “realistic risk perception” is promoted.
Psychologists and psychotherapists are therefore, on the one hand, “change agents” who should both accompany and actively promote social changes caused by climate change. On the other hand, they are also increasingly confronted with psychological challenges such as climate anxiety caused by climate change. A study by The Lancet, for example, found that 45% of young people are negatively influenced by thoughts and emotions about climate change in their everyday lives. kul
Klimaschutz
Climate lawsuits: Why DUH is once again taking the German government to court
With the measures set out in its National Energy and Climate Plan (NEKP), Germany will “massively miss”its binding EU climate targets by 2030, according to Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH). The organization therefore filed another climate lawsuit against the German government with the Berlin-Brandenburg Higher Administrative Court (OVG) last Friday.
The NECP is inadequate and violates applicable EU law, it said in justification. It lacked “comprehensible forecasts and sufficiently defined measures, making it impossible to assess the actual impact”. It also lacked a realistic assessment of the necessary investments and their financing.
DUH is particularly critical of emissions that are significantly too high in the sectors covered by the EU Effort Sharing Regulation (ESR). These are transport, buildings and land use. Back in August, the organization filed another complaint with the Berlin-Brandenburg Higher Administrative Court, asking the court to order the German government to submit a plan with “additional actions” that would be sufficient to reduce emissions in these sectors in line with EU requirements. ae
Klimaklagen
Renewable energies: How China wants to boost consumption
China aims to boost the consumption of renewable energies and has issued a new directive to this end. According to the consulting agency Trivium China, the new targets are “incredibly ambitious.” This is planned:
In 2025, electricity consumption from renewable energies is set to increase by 30 percent compared to 2023. This new target is ten percent higher than the previous target for 2025.
Electricity consumption from renewable energies is expected to reach 1.1 billion tons of hard coal units (almost nine million GW/h) by 2025.
In recent years, China has massively expanded its renewable energy generation capacity. Plans to increase demand include:
the faster expansion of power grids,
accelerating the production of green hydrogen and the electrification of the industry,
Energy-hungry industries will be relocated closer to renewable energy sources, i.e., solar, wind and hydroelectric power plants. It can be assumed that this will lead to a further shift of industries inland and closer to the deserts, where large solar and wind farms are being built.
Renewable energies are also to be used for heating and cooling buildings.
“The rate at which key economic sectors – namely industry, transportation and heating – switch from fossil fuels to electricity will decide whether China can maintain its current pace of renewable energy expansion,” Trivium China experts say. nib
China
Energy transition
Renewable energies
Translation missing.
COP29: NGOs call on Hoekstra to prevent influence of fossil fuel lobby
Several civil society organizations are calling on EU Climate Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra not to bring fossil fuel lobbyists as part of the EU delegation to the UN climate negotiations in Baku. In a joint letter, they criticize Hoekstra’s team for bringing senior executives from Eni and BP as well as the chief lobbyist from Exxonmobil in Brussels as part of the EU delegation to Dubaiat COP28 last year.
Some member states have also brought representatives of the fossil fuel industry on their ticket to the COP in Dubai. For example, the French delegation brought six lobbyists from Total Energies, including CEO Patrick Pouyanné.
When asked by Table.Briefings during the COP in Dubai, the EU Commission explained that the EU delegation consisted of commissioners, negotiators and employees and that lobbyists were not part of the delegation. That fossil fuel lobbyists are listed on the COP28 registration list with EU accreditation, is because they were invited to speak at side events and required an access pass to the venue. However, they “would not have had access to the delegation rooms of the EU Commission,” according to a Commission spokesperson.
The letter was signed by over 100 NGOs. They demand that oil and gas companies are not granted privileged access to the climate negotiations. “It makes no more sense to ask Exxonmobil and BP how to move away from fossil fuels than it does to ask Philip Morris how to stop smoking.” luk
COP28
COP29
Fossile Brennstoffe
Nitrous oxide: Report warns of failure to meet Paris targets
If nitrous oxide emissions are not curbed, the 1.5-degree limit of the Paris Climate Agreement cannot be achieved. This is the result of the first comprehensive global assessment of the pollutant, which was published on Thursday. The Global Nitrous Oxide Assessment was compiled by the Climate and Clean Air Coalition, an association of over 180 governments, NGOs and international organizations.
Nitrous oxide (N2O) is the third most common greenhouse gas and is many times more harmful to the climate than CO2. Nitrous oxide also damages the ozone layer. N2O emissions are mainly caused by the use of artificial fertilizers and manure in agriculture. According to the report, they have increased by 40 percent worldwide since 1980 and are expected to rise by 30 percent above 2020 levels by 2050 if no countermeasures are taken.
However, saving nitrous oxide is challenging. According to agricultural scientist Bernhard Osterburg from the Thünen Institute, more skillful fertilization or digital innovations can reduce emissions. Germany has already made progress in this area. Osterburg also takes a critical view of over-fertilization to safeguard yields. The EU Commission therefore wants to reduce the use of fertilizers by 20 percent and nutrient losses by 50 percent by 2030 as part of its farm-to-fork strategy.
Global measures to reduce N2O emissions could avoid the equivalent of up to 235 billion tons of CO2 emissions by 2100, the report continues. The savings would therefore exceed the carbon budget calculated by the MCC Institute for the 1.5-degree limit. Conversely, this would mean that without savings, the 1.5-degree limit would fail due to nitrous oxide emissions alone.rtr/lb
Treibhausgase
Greenhouse gases: where emissions fell in the EU in 2023
According to preliminary figures, greenhouse gas emissions in the EU fell sharply last year. According to a report by the European Environment Agency (EEA), net greenhouse gas emissions in the EU fell by eight percent in 2023 compared to the previous year. This is the largest annual decrease in decades – with the exception of the Covid year 2020.
The energy and industry sectors, which are subject to the European Emissions Trading System (ETS), contributed significantly to the good result. According to the EEA, half of the reduction in emissions can be attributed to the development of the energy sector. The following contributed to this:
the significant decline in coal consumption in the EU,
the expansion of renewable energies,
and the reduction in electricity consumption.
In the industrial sector, too, efficiency and process improvements led to a decline of six percent in 2023.
National reduction targets rather ineffective
Other sectors, on the other hand, have some catching up to do when it comes to reducing emissions.
Agriculture has hardly made any progress since 2005, as efficiency gains have been offset by higher production. The decline from 2022 to 2023 is only two percent.
Emissions in the transportation sector are even higher today than they were in 1990, with an estimated decrease of just one percent between 2022 and 2023.
Agriculture and transportation are subject to national reduction targets under the ESR load-sharing regulation. Among the major ESR-regulated sectors, only the construction sector recorded a significant reduction of six percent, although this was achieved more due to moderate weather conditions with less demand for heating and cooling than through the installation of heat pumps.
The EU has set itself the goal of being largely climate-neutral by 2050. By 2030, emissions are to be reduced by 55 percent compared to 1990 levels. However, based on existing and planned climate protection measures, the EU is only projected to achieve a 43 to 49 percent reduction in emissions. av/with dpa
Climate & Environment
Climate change
Energie
ETS
Klima & Umwelt
Soils: Climate change activates dormant toxins
According to a recent study, toxic metalsnaturally bound in the soil could be mobilized by climate change and increasingly enter the food chain. According to the study by the University of Tübingen and the Helmholtz Center for Environmental Research (UFZ), this is particularly likely in slightly acidic soils – which make up a third of all soils. The research team examined agricultural land for the presenceof carcinogenic cadmium. Cadmium occurs naturally in soils around the world, but in a bound and therefore normally non-hazardous form.
The researchers then allowed soils to undergo a regular growth period in Germany – under assumed climate conditions in the year 2100, with a predicted temperature rise of two to four degrees. They found that cadmium was increasingly mobilized. Its mobility increased by around 40 percent in slightly acidic soils compared to today’s conditions. According to the data, this led to higher cadmium concentrations, for example in the pore water of the soil. Certain microorganisms were also affected by this.
Ecosystems could be massively disturbed by increased amounts of mobile cadmium in the future, said study leader Marie Muehe from the Plant Biogeochemistry Department at the University of Tübingen and the UFZ. As a result, cadmium could end up in crops and in turn be harmful to human health. These developments must continue to be monitored. dpa
Klimawandel
Electricity storage: ‘Batteries on wheels’ to save billions
Electric vehicles can make an important contribution to the stable supply of renewable energy to the electricity grids, according to a study by Fraunhofer ISI and ISE for the Transport & Environment (T&E) association. The key to this is vehicle-to-grid technology (V2G), i.e. bidirectional charging, in which car batteries not only absorb electricity but also release it back into the grid.
Demand for stationary battery storage would fall massively
The possibility of temporarily storing wind and solar energy is important for the expansion of renewable energies to buffer phases of oversupply and undersupply. However, the expensive construction of a large-scale storage infrastructure is only just beginning. According to the study, bidirectional charging is a cost-effective alternative that can be implemented quickly.
The researchers assume that this could reduce the installation of stationary battery storage systems in the EU by up to 92 percent by 2040. The average savings potential in Germany alone would amount to €8.4 billion per year. Across the EU, it would be €22 billion.
“Bidirectional charging will provide us with free batteries on wheels”, says Kim Kohlmeyer from T&E. This will reduce the pressure to build energy storage systems for surplus wind and solar power. However, better framework conditions are needed, says Kohlmeyer.
V2G ensures a longer battery life
T&E sees the fact that the automotive industry is currently pursuing different technical approaches to V2G as a problem. For interoperability, it is necessary that every vehicle can be charged and discharged at every charging point in the future. Political guidelines are necessary here.
According to the study, the fears of electric car owners that V2G will have a negative impact on the battery are unfounded. As the technology keeps the battery in an optimum state of charge, the service life could even be extended. ch
Energiewende
Heads
Gubad Ibadoghlu – a fossil critic in custody
Gubad Ibadoghlu has not been allowed to leave Azerbaijan for over a year. He was initially detained and mistreated, and is now under house arrest.
Almost exactly one year ago, Gubad Ibadoghlu was supposed to take up a new position at TU Dresden. But it never happened. In July 2023, the native of Azerbaijan was arrested together with his wife on the street in Baku. His wife was released the same day and subsequently reported mistreatment and even torture. Ibadoghlu has still not been released and is accused of terrorism. He is said to belong to the Gülen movement. There is no real evidence of this.
After 274 days in detention and further reports of torture, he was transferred to house arrest on April 22 of this year, where Ibadoghlu remains to this day. He is unable to leave the country but suffers from serious health problems. Due to type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure and a dilated aorta, the European Court of Human Rights ordered adequate medical treatment, which his family says he has been denied. “His condition is constantly deteriorating, but the regime in Azerbaijan is ignoring this”, says Zahla Bayramova, the daughter of the imprisoned regime critic. Without medical treatment, he is at risk of a stroke or life-threatening heart disease.
Ibadoghlu researched corruption and authoritarianism
The 53-year-old first came to the attention of the Azerbaijani government through his work at the Economic Research Center, a Baku-based think tank that promotes transparent governance and good governance. He later conducted research in Warsaw, Chapel Hill, Princeton and most recently at the London School of Economics. The next step in his career would have been a professorship at TU Dresden, which never materialized.
His research exposed corruption and mismanagement in the Azerbaijani state apparatus, particularly concerning fossil fuels. He constantly criticized the poor human rights situation and the management of oil revenues in his native country. The economist was also concerned about the gas deal between the European Union and Azerbaijan. He called for the EU to use the deal to achieve improvements in the human rights situation and democracy in Azerbaijan.
COP29: First reason for imprisonment, now a chance for freedom
The regime in Baku did not like this research and the attention paid to Ibadoghlu. According to Amnesty International, the “unfounded prosecution of Gubad Ibadoghlu” is part of the ongoing crackdown by the Azerbaijani authorities on human rights activists, government critics and independent media. This “familiar pattern” can also be observed in the run-up to the UN Climate Change Conference in Baku (COP29) in order to silence critical voices.
But the COP is now in the very place where Ibadoghlu is being held captive. This could also put pressure on the Azerbaijani regime. Diplomats and activists from all over the world will be flocking to Baku from next Monday. German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock is also aware of Ibadoghlu’s fate and is likely to raise the issue of his release in her talks with her Azerbaijani counterparts during her stay in Baku in the second week of the COP.
Ibadoghlu was nominated for Sakharov Prize
Members of the EU Parliament will also travel to Baku and insist on the release of the fossil critic. They recently nominated Ibadoghlu for the Sakharov Prize and have already spoken out against repression against Ibadoghlu in resolutions passed by a large majority. As a nominee for the Sakharov Prize, he has also been invited to the award ceremony in Strasbourg in December, which is why Parliament President Roberta Metsola called on the Azerbaijani government to lift his house arrest.
Ibadoghlu has long been a symbol of resistance to corruption and oppression in Azerbaijan. Things that the regime would rather not discuss too widely in public during the COP. The chances of his release are therefore not bad at the moment. However, if the efforts remain unsuccessful until the end of the COP and Baku disappears from the public eye again, it will be all the more difficult for Ibadoghlu. Lukas Knigge
There is to be an “autumn of decisions”, and this week will probably be the high point for the time being: When a new President and Parliament are elected in the USA today, the global climate community will be shaking with them. Today we have summarized the catastrophic consequences that a Republican victory could have for climate action and UN negotiations.
Things are also getting exciting on a smaller scale in Germany: The traffic light coalition is creaking at every turn. Should there be a new government under CDU Chancellor Friedrich Merz, what would its climate and energy policy look like? Today we write about what the CDU has in mind on this topic – in other words, which traffic light rules it would abolish, change or keep.
Then there are the global decisions: Next week, the UN Climate Change Conference will be back in session and our Climate.Table Team will be present once more. Three of us will be on-site in Baku to create an issue of Climate.Table for you every day, in collaboration with our colleagues in Berlin and worldwide – comprehensive, exclusive, relevant and in-depth, just as you would expect from us.
We are looking forward to a hectic two weeks and, as always, hope you enjoy reading this issue.
Your Bernhard Pötter
Feature
US election: How much damage Trump could do to the climate
May 31, 2017, in the Rose Garden of the White House: POTUS Donald Trump announces the withdrawal of the USA from the Paris Agreement.
The prospect of Donald Trump becoming US president again is causing great concern in the US and global climate scene. Unlike if Kamala Harris were to win the election, the consequences would likely be severe. At a time of escalating climate crisis and high geopolitical tensions, another US withdrawal from the international process would hit climate diplomacy hard. Although many observers are optimistic that the energy transition in the USAwould continue under Trump, a Trump victory could jeopardize the future of the entire COP process internationally and pose major additional problems for COP29.
Stopping the government’s climate policy
One of Donald Trump’s few consistent stances is his opinion on climate change: He believes it is a hoax and does not take it seriously. For him, energy policy means the global “energy dominance” of the USA and the massive expansion of oil and gas, including for export. From his first term in office and the radical “Project 2025” of the Heartland Institute think tank, it can be concluded that he would slow down or reverse many of the US administration’s climate decisions. Experts cannot be quoted by name with their views before the US election, but in detail, Trump probably would:
withdraw the USA (again) from the Paris Agreement and now also from the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC);
withdraw many of the Biden administration’s regulations or slow down their implementation, such as the USA’s net zero target, the regulation of power plants and the moratorium on the construction of new LNG terminals;
drastically restrict funding for climate measures in the country and internationally;
dry up funding and staffing for agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and government-funded climate research;
make the government’s climate policy undefendable in court. Conservative judges appointed by Trump could attack the jurisdiction of the federal authorities for climate regulations.
make important state climate regulations such as the CO2 regulation of cars in California more difficult or prevent them entirely.
Energy transition in the states unstoppable?
On the other hand, observers and experts in the US point out that a large part of US climate policy would continue without and against the federal government. In particular, the investment program surrounding the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) is fundamentally protected from direct access by the federal government as a law and through its construction of tax breaks. The package of around $370 billion in tax credits also provides jobs and investment, particularly in “red” US states with Republican governments. Republican members of the House of Representatives have therefore also called for the IRA not to be touched. What’s more:
The opposition from the environmental movement, progressive US states, cities, universities and parts of the business community, which rallied under the slogan “We are still in” and “America’s Pledge” during Trump’s first term in office, could be reactivated quickly. During Trump’s first term in office, the alliance promoted climate policy at US state level and acted as an unofficial US representative at the COPs.
In many states and companies, the development of renewables and the green transformation have progressed significantly further than during Trump’s first term in office. Even then, Trump’s promise to “bring back coal” proved to be false. The implementation of renewables and batteries in the electricity sector can hardly be stopped.
Bipartisan solutions on climate issues could also find majorities in a Republican-dominated Congress: promoting carbon capture from the air (DAC), CCS and CCU, expanding geothermal energy, and promoting new nuclear power.
Trump’s second term could therefore mean that the federal government freezes or reduces large parts of its climate policy, rails loudly against environmental and climate action, and primarily promotes fossil fuels. An anti-science mood in the US federal government could have a particularly negative impact on climate research, as scientists fear in surveys. However, little would change in terms of state policy, the expansion of renewables and massive investment in greentech.
Damage to global climate policy
However, many observers fear that a second term in office for Donald Trump would probably cause serious damage to international climate policy. The UN is concerned about the development, as the effects would probably be much more serious than during Trump’s first round in the White House from 2017 to 2021:
At that time, the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement dragged on for more than three years due to UN regulations. The USA practically only left the agreement from November 2020 to February 2021, when President Biden re-entered. Now Trump could lead the USA out of the agreement in just one year after a corresponding declaration.
Trump also wants to withdraw from the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). This can also be completed within a year. This would effectively mean that the USA would withdraw from the UN negotiations and would only be an observer. Its strong role in transparency, CO2 reduction and market-based elements, for example, would be missing.
Withdrawing from the UNFCCC would also mean the loss of its largest donor. The Climate Secretariat, which is already chronically underfunded, would face even greater difficulties in organizing climate diplomacy and the COPs.
Geopolitically, a US withdrawal would then make China the dominant factor in the climate negotiations. Although the country would then have to abandon its often wait-and-see attitude as an official “developing country” of the G77, it would be able to assert its interests much more strongly – for example, it would be better able to fend off demands for more transparency.
Trump’s election victory could already have a significant impact on COP29: This is because the negotiations revolve primarily around the new NCQG financial target. The USA’s share of global climate financing of around eleven billion US dollars has already been criticized by many as being far too low because it does not correspond to the historical responsibility or the economic possibilities of the world’s largest economy. A “fair contribution” would therefore be closer to 40 billion dollars. A Trump administration would probably stop or reduce large parts of the funding that has so far been provided by the US government. The US Congress, in turn, has been blocking such payments and commitments for a long time.
Mood killer for the COP29?
However, COP29 in Baku is all about finding more public and private money for urgently needed measures for CO2 reduction, adaptation and technology transfer and for international bodies. If the USA were to withdraw from the entire process in the future, not only would there be a lack of money, but the mood would also be jeopardized: The accusation that the industrialized countries are shirking climate change financing would probably become even louder. And the EU, already the largest climate financier, would probably not be able to fill this gap – especially as public budgets in Europe are also suffering from major burdens.
When the COP29 officially begins on Nov. 11 with two days of “High-Level Segment” of heads of state and government, Trump’s election victory could spoil the mood in Baku. It is doubtful whether a viable compromise on the already very difficult issue of financing could be reached in the course of the conference.
Climate policy
COP29
Energiewende
Forschung
Klimaforschung
Trump 2024
Universitäten
Translation missing.
Climate policy: What the CDU/CSU wants to do differently from the traffic light coalition – and what not
A possible part of the Union’s future energy supply is the Isar 2 nuclear power plant, which was shut down in April 2023.
Where exactly the CDU and CSU stand on climate policy was unclear for a long time. The “Mittelstandsunion”, for example, usually advocated different concepts than the “Klima-Union”, while climate expert and party vice-chairman Andreas Jung set a significantly different tone than Jens Spahn, who is responsible for the parliamentary group’s energy policy. However, the parliamentary group has now agreed on a joint discussion paper in a lengthy process, which will be presented to the public at an energy policy conference this Tuesday. And this paper aims to roll back the energy and climate policy of the traffic light coalition more than some past statements have suggested.
The paper contains a clear commitment to nuclear power. While party leader Friedrich Merz declared at the BDEW Congress in June that the issue of nuclear energy in Germany had been “decided”, the CDU/CSU parliamentary group is now calling for an examination of whether “it is still possible to resume operation of the most recently shut-down nuclear power plants at a reasonable technical and financial cost”. However, it is unlikely that the outcome will be positive: As the Federal Ministry for the Environment announced in response to an inquiry from Table.Media, the so-called primary circuit contamination has already taken place in all five of the most recently shut-down pressurized water reactors; this process makes “as a rule, a restart practically impossible”, the ministry writes on its website.
CDU wants to make energy transition more affordable
In contrast, the paper remains rather vague when it comes to the construction of new nuclear power plants: it advocates “research and development of fourth and fifth generation nuclear power plants and SMRs” (Small Modular Reactors) and is “involved in European partnerships and international initiatives”. On the other hand, the Union states a very specific – but not necessarily realistic – goal for nuclear fusion: “The world’s first fusion reactor connected to the grid should be located in Germany.”
A central demand of the paper is also to make the energy transition more affordable. “This is why all additional costs must now be put to the test for a cost turnaround”, write the authors. However, there are only a few specific points on reducing costs – such as the suggestion that long-distance power lines should generally be laid above ground again in the future and the expansion of offshore wind power should be reduced.
At the same time, however, the paper contains many demands that are likely to make the energy transition more expensive. For example, the traffic light coalition is criticized for “relying almost exclusively on solar and wind energy”, which produce by far the cheapest green electricity. Instead, the CDU/CSU is calling for a greater role for biogas, which requires many times more subsidies per kilowatt hour. In addition, the hydrogen core network should become denser than currently planned by the Federal Network Agency due to the expected demand, and the guaranteed return for network operators should be increased. The CDU/CSU rejects the division of the German electricity grid into different price zones, which many experts believe would reduce dispatch costs and thus make the energy transition cheaper.
‘Withdraw the traffic light coalition heating law’
There appears to have been a particularly long dispute over how to deal with the Building Energy Act (GEG). This topic was still left out of a draft from mid-October. The finished paper now contains the announcement that the CDU/CSU will “withdraw the traffic light coalition heating law”. There is officially no such thing as a “heating law”; what is apparently meant is the most recent amendment to the GEG, which the traffic light coalition had also argued about for a long time. There would then no longer be an obligation that new heating systems may only be installed from 2026 or 2028 if they use 65% renewable energy. However, party leader Merz had called in the summer for “many more heat pumps” to be installed than at present. In order to achieve this even without legal requirements, the CDU/CSU is relying on “reliable subsidies” in addition to the rising CO2 price.
Unlike FDP leader Christian Lindner, who has just announced in his paper that he wants to stop all financial support for climate-friendly technologies, the CDU/CSU wants to support the switch to climate-friendly technologies with funding programs – just as the governing coalition has done to date. Companies should also be able to continue to benefit from this, but “unbureaucratically and in line with the market”.
Similarities to traffic light coalition policy
In other respects too, the CDU/CSU’s demands differ less from the policy of the traffic light party than the rhetoric of the paper suggests. For example, like the BMWK and unlike the FDP, it is not aiming for an immediate abolition, but rather a restructuring of the EEG feed-in tariff. The current government is also aiming to reduce electricity tax and grid fees, although this has so far failed due to additional funding requirements. And on many points, the CDU/CSU is working towards positions that the government has long since abandoned – such as a “forced dismantling” of the gas grid or the exclusive use of green hydrogen.
And unlike Minister Lindner, the CDU/CSU is not questioningthe goal of achieving climate neutrality in Germany by 2045. They want to “correct the wrong path” of the traffic light coalition, but “not the climate target”, said CDU/CSU Vice-President Andreas Jung to Table.Briefings. “Climate action remains urgent, but it absolutely must be combined with a strong economy and social acceptance.”
To increase this social acceptance, the Mittelstandsunion (MIT) and the Climate Union recently called for the introduction of a climate fee in similar papers. However, there still seems to be a need for discussion on this within the party: The parliamentary group’s paper does mention a “climate bonus”; however, this only refers to reducing the burden on consumers and companies by lowering electricity prices. However, a climate bonus, i.e. the direct payment of part of the CO2 revenue, does not appear in the paper. According to information obtained by Table.Briefings, a separate paper is planned for this in the coming weeks.
Atomkraft
CDU/CSU
Climate policy
Energiewende
Translation missing.
News
COP16: Why the outcome is a burden on COP29
The UN Conference on Biodiversity, COP16, which was canceled at the weekend, also casts its shadow over COP29. On the one hand, the conference in Cali, Colombia, emphasized the close link between climate and species extinction. On the other hand, the delegations were unable to agree on the details of financing until the plenary was no longer quorate and the meeting had to be ended – not a good omenfor the climate conference in Baku.
Several points were clarified by consensus at the species protection conference. For example, in the future:
The proceeds from the use of genetic material from nature are shared in a “Cali Fund”;
Indigenous communities in a permanent body are to advise COPs on species conservation issues.
However, the countries were unable to agree on a review of their progress in protecting biodiversity.
Closer integration with climate action
In the preliminary final document on climate and biodiversity, COP16 called for closer integration with the climate negotiations. Among other things, it emphasizes the threat to biodiversity posed by the climate crisis, the risks of a difference between 1.5 and 2 degrees of warming, and warns against mistakes in adaptation measures (“maladaptation”). The resolution also provides for
a joint meeting of climate and species experts from both conventions in 2025,
a report on the connections between these two topics,
increased cooperation with Indigenous communities and
the development of guidelines on adaptation and social and ecological guidelines.
COP16 provided a foretaste of the tough debates in Baku, particularly on the issue of finance. These differing demands, which will take center stage at COP29 with the new planned global financial target NCQG, prevented a successful conclusion to the conference in Cali. For example, the idea of setting up a new UN biodiversity fund failed due to resistance from industrialized countries, including the EU, and debtor countries such as China, because the fund was also intended to address the debt of developing countries. bpo
COP29
NCQG
Health: Psychologists call for national climate resilience plan
The healthcare system needs to be further developed in order to better cope not only with the physical but also the psychological effects of climate change. A “national resilience plan” is needed to work out how people can deal with the stress caused by climate change as “productively” as possible. This is what the report “Psychological Perspectives on Climate Change: Strategies and Concepts” by the Association of German Psychologists calls for. It is also important that the development of a comprehensive climate awareness with “realistic risk perception” is promoted.
Psychologists and psychotherapists are therefore, on the one hand, “change agents” who should both accompany and actively promote social changes caused by climate change. On the other hand, they are also increasingly confronted with psychological challenges such as climate anxiety caused by climate change. A study by The Lancet, for example, found that 45% of young people are negatively influenced by thoughts and emotions about climate change in their everyday lives. kul
Klimaschutz
Climate lawsuits: Why DUH is once again taking the German government to court
With the measures set out in its National Energy and Climate Plan (NEKP), Germany will “massively miss”its binding EU climate targets by 2030, according to Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH). The organization therefore filed another climate lawsuit against the German government with the Berlin-Brandenburg Higher Administrative Court (OVG) last Friday.
The NECP is inadequate and violates applicable EU law, it said in justification. It lacked “comprehensible forecasts and sufficiently defined measures, making it impossible to assess the actual impact”. It also lacked a realistic assessment of the necessary investments and their financing.
DUH is particularly critical of emissions that are significantly too high in the sectors covered by the EU Effort Sharing Regulation (ESR). These are transport, buildings and land use. Back in August, the organization filed another complaint with the Berlin-Brandenburg Higher Administrative Court, asking the court to order the German government to submit a plan with “additional actions” that would be sufficient to reduce emissions in these sectors in line with EU requirements. ae
Klimaklagen
Renewable energies: How China wants to boost consumption
China aims to boost the consumption of renewable energies and has issued a new directive to this end. According to the consulting agency Trivium China, the new targets are “incredibly ambitious.” This is planned:
In 2025, electricity consumption from renewable energies is set to increase by 30 percent compared to 2023. This new target is ten percent higher than the previous target for 2025.
Electricity consumption from renewable energies is expected to reach 1.1 billion tons of hard coal units (almost nine million GW/h) by 2025.
In recent years, China has massively expanded its renewable energy generation capacity. Plans to increase demand include:
the faster expansion of power grids,
accelerating the production of green hydrogen and the electrification of the industry,
Energy-hungry industries will be relocated closer to renewable energy sources, i.e., solar, wind and hydroelectric power plants. It can be assumed that this will lead to a further shift of industries inland and closer to the deserts, where large solar and wind farms are being built.
Renewable energies are also to be used for heating and cooling buildings.
“The rate at which key economic sectors – namely industry, transportation and heating – switch from fossil fuels to electricity will decide whether China can maintain its current pace of renewable energy expansion,” Trivium China experts say. nib
China
Energy transition
Renewable energies
Translation missing.
COP29: NGOs call on Hoekstra to prevent influence of fossil fuel lobby
Several civil society organizations are calling on EU Climate Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra not to bring fossil fuel lobbyists as part of the EU delegation to the UN climate negotiations in Baku. In a joint letter, they criticize Hoekstra’s team for bringing senior executives from Eni and BP as well as the chief lobbyist from Exxonmobil in Brussels as part of the EU delegation to Dubaiat COP28 last year.
Some member states have also brought representatives of the fossil fuel industry on their ticket to the COP in Dubai. For example, the French delegation brought six lobbyists from Total Energies, including CEO Patrick Pouyanné.
When asked by Table.Briefings during the COP in Dubai, the EU Commission explained that the EU delegation consisted of commissioners, negotiators and employees and that lobbyists were not part of the delegation. That fossil fuel lobbyists are listed on the COP28 registration list with EU accreditation, is because they were invited to speak at side events and required an access pass to the venue. However, they “would not have had access to the delegation rooms of the EU Commission,” according to a Commission spokesperson.
The letter was signed by over 100 NGOs. They demand that oil and gas companies are not granted privileged access to the climate negotiations. “It makes no more sense to ask Exxonmobil and BP how to move away from fossil fuels than it does to ask Philip Morris how to stop smoking.” luk
COP28
COP29
Fossile Brennstoffe
Nitrous oxide: Report warns of failure to meet Paris targets
If nitrous oxide emissions are not curbed, the 1.5-degree limit of the Paris Climate Agreement cannot be achieved. This is the result of the first comprehensive global assessment of the pollutant, which was published on Thursday. The Global Nitrous Oxide Assessment was compiled by the Climate and Clean Air Coalition, an association of over 180 governments, NGOs and international organizations.
Nitrous oxide (N2O) is the third most common greenhouse gas and is many times more harmful to the climate than CO2. Nitrous oxide also damages the ozone layer. N2O emissions are mainly caused by the use of artificial fertilizers and manure in agriculture. According to the report, they have increased by 40 percent worldwide since 1980 and are expected to rise by 30 percent above 2020 levels by 2050 if no countermeasures are taken.
However, saving nitrous oxide is challenging. According to agricultural scientist Bernhard Osterburg from the Thünen Institute, more skillful fertilization or digital innovations can reduce emissions. Germany has already made progress in this area. Osterburg also takes a critical view of over-fertilization to safeguard yields. The EU Commission therefore wants to reduce the use of fertilizers by 20 percent and nutrient losses by 50 percent by 2030 as part of its farm-to-fork strategy.
Global measures to reduce N2O emissions could avoid the equivalent of up to 235 billion tons of CO2 emissions by 2100, the report continues. The savings would therefore exceed the carbon budget calculated by the MCC Institute for the 1.5-degree limit. Conversely, this would mean that without savings, the 1.5-degree limit would fail due to nitrous oxide emissions alone.rtr/lb
Treibhausgase
Greenhouse gases: where emissions fell in the EU in 2023
According to preliminary figures, greenhouse gas emissions in the EU fell sharply last year. According to a report by the European Environment Agency (EEA), net greenhouse gas emissions in the EU fell by eight percent in 2023 compared to the previous year. This is the largest annual decrease in decades – with the exception of the Covid year 2020.
The energy and industry sectors, which are subject to the European Emissions Trading System (ETS), contributed significantly to the good result. According to the EEA, half of the reduction in emissions can be attributed to the development of the energy sector. The following contributed to this:
the significant decline in coal consumption in the EU,
the expansion of renewable energies,
and the reduction in electricity consumption.
In the industrial sector, too, efficiency and process improvements led to a decline of six percent in 2023.
National reduction targets rather ineffective
Other sectors, on the other hand, have some catching up to do when it comes to reducing emissions.
Agriculture has hardly made any progress since 2005, as efficiency gains have been offset by higher production. The decline from 2022 to 2023 is only two percent.
Emissions in the transportation sector are even higher today than they were in 1990, with an estimated decrease of just one percent between 2022 and 2023.
Agriculture and transportation are subject to national reduction targets under the ESR load-sharing regulation. Among the major ESR-regulated sectors, only the construction sector recorded a significant reduction of six percent, although this was achieved more due to moderate weather conditions with less demand for heating and cooling than through the installation of heat pumps.
The EU has set itself the goal of being largely climate-neutral by 2050. By 2030, emissions are to be reduced by 55 percent compared to 1990 levels. However, based on existing and planned climate protection measures, the EU is only projected to achieve a 43 to 49 percent reduction in emissions. av/with dpa
Climate & Environment
Climate change
Energie
ETS
Klima & Umwelt
Soils: Climate change activates dormant toxins
According to a recent study, toxic metalsnaturally bound in the soil could be mobilized by climate change and increasingly enter the food chain. According to the study by the University of Tübingen and the Helmholtz Center for Environmental Research (UFZ), this is particularly likely in slightly acidic soils – which make up a third of all soils. The research team examined agricultural land for the presenceof carcinogenic cadmium. Cadmium occurs naturally in soils around the world, but in a bound and therefore normally non-hazardous form.
The researchers then allowed soils to undergo a regular growth period in Germany – under assumed climate conditions in the year 2100, with a predicted temperature rise of two to four degrees. They found that cadmium was increasingly mobilized. Its mobility increased by around 40 percent in slightly acidic soils compared to today’s conditions. According to the data, this led to higher cadmium concentrations, for example in the pore water of the soil. Certain microorganisms were also affected by this.
Ecosystems could be massively disturbed by increased amounts of mobile cadmium in the future, said study leader Marie Muehe from the Plant Biogeochemistry Department at the University of Tübingen and the UFZ. As a result, cadmium could end up in crops and in turn be harmful to human health. These developments must continue to be monitored. dpa
Klimawandel
Electricity storage: ‘Batteries on wheels’ to save billions
Electric vehicles can make an important contribution to the stable supply of renewable energy to the electricity grids, according to a study by Fraunhofer ISI and ISE for the Transport & Environment (T&E) association. The key to this is vehicle-to-grid technology (V2G), i.e. bidirectional charging, in which car batteries not only absorb electricity but also release it back into the grid.
Demand for stationary battery storage would fall massively
The possibility of temporarily storing wind and solar energy is important for the expansion of renewable energies to buffer phases of oversupply and undersupply. However, the expensive construction of a large-scale storage infrastructure is only just beginning. According to the study, bidirectional charging is a cost-effective alternative that can be implemented quickly.
The researchers assume that this could reduce the installation of stationary battery storage systems in the EU by up to 92 percent by 2040. The average savings potential in Germany alone would amount to €8.4 billion per year. Across the EU, it would be €22 billion.
“Bidirectional charging will provide us with free batteries on wheels”, says Kim Kohlmeyer from T&E. This will reduce the pressure to build energy storage systems for surplus wind and solar power. However, better framework conditions are needed, says Kohlmeyer.
V2G ensures a longer battery life
T&E sees the fact that the automotive industry is currently pursuing different technical approaches to V2G as a problem. For interoperability, it is necessary that every vehicle can be charged and discharged at every charging point in the future. Political guidelines are necessary here.
According to the study, the fears of electric car owners that V2G will have a negative impact on the battery are unfounded. As the technology keeps the battery in an optimum state of charge, the service life could even be extended. ch
Energiewende
Heads
Gubad Ibadoghlu – a fossil critic in custody
Gubad Ibadoghlu has not been allowed to leave Azerbaijan for over a year. He was initially detained and mistreated, and is now under house arrest.
Almost exactly one year ago, Gubad Ibadoghlu was supposed to take up a new position at TU Dresden. But it never happened. In July 2023, the native of Azerbaijan was arrested together with his wife on the street in Baku. His wife was released the same day and subsequently reported mistreatment and even torture. Ibadoghlu has still not been released and is accused of terrorism. He is said to belong to the Gülen movement. There is no real evidence of this.
After 274 days in detention and further reports of torture, he was transferred to house arrest on April 22 of this year, where Ibadoghlu remains to this day. He is unable to leave the country but suffers from serious health problems. Due to type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure and a dilated aorta, the European Court of Human Rights ordered adequate medical treatment, which his family says he has been denied. “His condition is constantly deteriorating, but the regime in Azerbaijan is ignoring this”, says Zahla Bayramova, the daughter of the imprisoned regime critic. Without medical treatment, he is at risk of a stroke or life-threatening heart disease.
Ibadoghlu researched corruption and authoritarianism
The 53-year-old first came to the attention of the Azerbaijani government through his work at the Economic Research Center, a Baku-based think tank that promotes transparent governance and good governance. He later conducted research in Warsaw, Chapel Hill, Princeton and most recently at the London School of Economics. The next step in his career would have been a professorship at TU Dresden, which never materialized.
His research exposed corruption and mismanagement in the Azerbaijani state apparatus, particularly concerning fossil fuels. He constantly criticized the poor human rights situation and the management of oil revenues in his native country. The economist was also concerned about the gas deal between the European Union and Azerbaijan. He called for the EU to use the deal to achieve improvements in the human rights situation and democracy in Azerbaijan.
COP29: First reason for imprisonment, now a chance for freedom
The regime in Baku did not like this research and the attention paid to Ibadoghlu. According to Amnesty International, the “unfounded prosecution of Gubad Ibadoghlu” is part of the ongoing crackdown by the Azerbaijani authorities on human rights activists, government critics and independent media. This “familiar pattern” can also be observed in the run-up to the UN Climate Change Conference in Baku (COP29) in order to silence critical voices.
But the COP is now in the very place where Ibadoghlu is being held captive. This could also put pressure on the Azerbaijani regime. Diplomats and activists from all over the world will be flocking to Baku from next Monday. German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock is also aware of Ibadoghlu’s fate and is likely to raise the issue of his release in her talks with her Azerbaijani counterparts during her stay in Baku in the second week of the COP.
Ibadoghlu was nominated for Sakharov Prize
Members of the EU Parliament will also travel to Baku and insist on the release of the fossil critic. They recently nominated Ibadoghlu for the Sakharov Prize and have already spoken out against repression against Ibadoghlu in resolutions passed by a large majority. As a nominee for the Sakharov Prize, he has also been invited to the award ceremony in Strasbourg in December, which is why Parliament President Roberta Metsola called on the Azerbaijani government to lift his house arrest.
Ibadoghlu has long been a symbol of resistance to corruption and oppression in Azerbaijan. Things that the regime would rather not discuss too widely in public during the COP. The chances of his release are therefore not bad at the moment. However, if the efforts remain unsuccessful until the end of the COP and Baku disappears from the public eye again, it will be all the more difficult for Ibadoghlu. Lukas Knigge
