Great German Success

February 28th, 2013 by Guest Contributor

Another great post by Karl-Friedrich Lenz, reposted from the Lenz Blog (image added):

Germany solar panels & flag via Shutterstock

The final numbers for Germany’s performance under the Kyoto Protocol have been released recently, and they are fantastic.

Germany has beat its ambitious goal of 21% reduction compared to 1990 by a comfortable margin, getting to 25.5 percent. Take that, Australia!

To be exact, the goal under the Kyoto Protocol was to have the average of the years between 2008 and 2012 lower than 974 million tons CO2 equivalent. Germany has almost reached the goal with 975 million in 2008 and beaten it every year since then, for a cumulative performance of 192 million tons over the Kyoto targets.

Of course, this success is nice to have, but it is only one first small step on the way. Germany and all other countries need to get to zero emissions as fast as possible, and then to negative emissions (by using energy to suck it up).

And while these are fantastic numbers, the real contribution from Germany to solving the global warming crisis was getting the prices of solar energy down massively to the point that all countries now can use that technology to get rid of fossil fuel fast. The ebbing tide lifts all the boats. That has not come cheap, costing about 0.14% of German GDP. But it was the right thing to do, since Germany has a special moral obligation to do as much as possible to counter climate change.

About the Author

Guest Contributor is many, many people. We publish a number of guest posts from experts in a large variety of fields. This is our contributor account for those special people. :D

Özgün Özışıkyılmaz

How much of this reduction has to do with German companies delegating their production to China, thus emitting Chinese CO2 to produce goods consumed outside of China?
- Ronald Brakels
  
  I don’t know, but it’s couldn’t be much as we know a lot of the emission reductions come from things like reducing the amount of heating oil Germany uses, which is not something China is really involved in.
Ronald Brakels

The German Environment Minister, Herr Altmaier, counted feed-in tariffs as a cost when they are actually a transfer, so building up Germany’s solar capacity has not cost as much as he says. As an example of the difference between a cost and a transfer, if Grandma gives 100 euros to her son that transfer doesn’t decrease the wealth or spending power of the familiy as a whole. Grandma might be poorer, but the family as a whole isn’t, just as transfers from feed-in tarifs don’t make Germany as a whole poorer (or not much poorer – there will be some small deadweight losses.) If the son then spends that 100 euros to buy a TV then that is a cost, the 100 euros is gone and the family’s overall spending power is reduced. Of course, they do get a TV out of it.
- http://zacharyshahan.com/ Zachary Shahan
  
  Yes, great point that we need to start making more.
- Kate
  
  If we go off the grid with solar power that cost would not effect the German Government to pay out the high cost of feed-in tariffs, its better to say ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your self.
  You will never save the planet if you think that governments are going to continue to pay for solar power.