German CO2 Emissions Higher Now Than In 2009
By Paul Homewood
In this April 3, 2014 file photo giant machines dig for brown coal at the open-cast mining Garzweiler in front of a smoking power plant near the city of Grevenbroich in western Germany.
In its INDC at Paris, the EU stated that it was committed to a binding target of an at
least 40% domestic reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 compared to 1990, to be fulfilled jointly.
However the UK has gone much further by committing to a cut of 57%, thanks to the legally binding Fifth Carbon Budget, written by John Gummer’s Committee on Climate Change.
But what about Germany, where we hear so much about the Energiewende? Surely they must be at least matching our efforts?
Since 1990, their emissions of CO2 (note – not all GHGs) have fallen by 24%. However, when you look more closely, most of this fall took place in the 1990s, as a direct result of re-unification, when large chunks of obsolete, communist era, East German industry fell by the wayside.
BP Energy Review
Emissions last year were actually higher than in 2009, and have been on the rise again since 2014.
Nuclear power is still supplying 12% of Germany’s power. When this is finally phased out in a few years time, the country will be more reliant on fossil fuels than ever.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Someone ought to inform Business Insider’s caption writer its photo actually shows
“In this April 3, 2014 file photo giant machines dig for brown coal at the open-cast mining Garzweiler in front of a water-vapour emitting power plant near the city of Grevenbroich in western Germany.
The Energiewende has cost the German economy billions and has put a lot of people into fuel poverty. All for nothing. Lessons will not be learned.
You forgot the destruction of their beautiful Forests and it’s people turning to burning wood, which increases real polution even more.
With respect, Phillip, you are looking at Germany from the outside, with an impression formed by what you have heard/read. I would like to give you a different impression, one formed from looking from the inside out ( I lived and worked in Germany from 1994-2006).
The Energiewende was initiated from the deeply felt anti-nuclear stance. After the tsunami in Japan the populace called for banning nuclear even sooner than was planned, The government took a very pragmatic approach and basically said that that could be done, but only if sufficient alternative sources could be found. That meant increasing wind and solar, the continued burning of ‘brown’ coal, and an increase in gas supplies form their new connections to Bavaria from Russia via the Czech republic and the Baltic pipeline from St. Petersburg. Of course, it was a plus plus for the government, the greens were happy to phase out nuclear and increase wind/solar, and the Essen industrial area continued to extract and burn coal. The problem now is that without nuclear to give the base load to support wind/solar, they have no alternative than to stay with gas (sensible, really). As to the destruction of their forests, no, that will not happen. In general, UK reports about Germany are very shallow to say the least (especially those form the BBC), and entirely miss the nitty gritty of politics which determine peoples views.
Paul, you say the populace “called for the banning of nuclear” Were they ever asked or was it a result of the usual loud shouting from the green lobby and a couple of opinion polls?
I suggest that you try posting your thoughts over at NoTricksZone, I do not think Mr Gosselin would agree with at all.
Good question, David, but no, my impression was quite the opposite. The German anti-nuclear stance comes form the soul of the people, possibly connected to the guilt feeling after Hitler and WWII. This report is quite close to the sequence of events:
https://www.dw.com/en/germanys-nuclear-phase-out-explained/a-39171204
I would think closely of what happened in the Bundestag as mentioned in the report:
‘’Over 80 percent of parliamentarians in the Bundestag passed the nuclear phase-out plan. Only the Left party voted against the measure, saying they wanted a faster timeline.’’
Considering how conservative the CDU/CSU alliance is, that was quite something. The feeling among the populace was so strong, there was no other possible outcome. If you were around at the time, the daily reports of demonstrations against the deposition of French nuclear waste at Gorleben was extraordinary. One may be against demonstrations, but when the government will not respond to the public’s demands, then I am all for it.
I am am old enough to remember the anti-nuclear demonstrations in the UK during the 60s and 70s. I find it rather ironical that all of those involved now seem to be supporting ‘renewables’, including nuclear. Something like the saying ‘ the enemy of my enemy is my friend’ (sound better in German!).
“I am am old enough to remember the anti-nuclear demonstrations in the UK during the 60s and 70s”
That was nuclear weapons, not nuclear power as such. Huge difference
Germanys ‘over reaction’ to nuclear power stems more from the accident at Chernobyl than any ‘war guilt’- if only they had guilt for WW1 we likely not have got Hitler and WW2.
Duker, you may be right on both counts, a matter of opinion? You might consider this quote from Wiki:
”The initial objective of the movement was nuclear disarmament, though since the late 1960s opposition has included the use of nuclear power. Many anti-nuclear groups oppose both nuclear power and nuclear weapons. The formation of green parties in the 1970s and 1980s was often a direct result of anti-nuclear politic”
So although the bulk of the feeling was against nuclear war, nuclear in general had a bad name from this point on.
As to the feelings amongst the German population post I and II world wars, there was a huge difference. Whilst my comments about post-war feeling comes direct from German colleagues/friends, my impressions about feelings post-WWI come from history books, as well as Hemingway’s early writings – he had a remarkable way of getting ”inside” people and examining the motivations of people from the people one meets in everyday life to those in important positions. You can almost feel the hostility in the local people he met when reading about his experiences whilst fishing/skiing in southern Germany. Well worth a read.
Everyone wants to save the world but no one is willing to suffer the consequences of trying. Realty can be harsh.
i.e. Everyone wants others to save the world
Reblogged this on Climatism and commented:
ENERGIEWENDE fail…
Reality is what you say , not what you do!