German CO2 Reduction Targets “Completely Illusionary,” Comments German National Daily

Game over for green energies and CO2 reductions?

Journalist Daniel Wetzel of German national daily Die Welt here presents a devastating commentary on Paris Accord and Germany’s so far “illusionary” CO2 reductions targets. The German failure is a signal that could have significant global consequences.

Wetzel not only calls the targets illusionary, he also believes the existing Energiewende (transition to green energies) is “at an end”.

2030 target completely illusionary

According to Wetzel, “The Energiewende and climate change are not among the priorities of the government” and that Germany reaching its self-imposed targets is achievable only if “everyone were forced to switch off every boiler, oven, motor. Completely illusionary.”

Lots of talk, no action

While German political leaders like to continue pretending they are taking real action to combat climate change, the reality is that the German government has been rolling back subsidies for green energies such as wind and sun over the past years. And many localities have made the permitting of wind parks far more stringent.

The days of unfettered support for green energies are over.

Treibhausgasemissionen in Deutschland von 1990 bis 2017 in Millionen Tonnen CO2-Equivalent

Germany’s CO2 equivalent greenhouse gas emissions in millions of tonnes (Source: UBA Federal Office of Environment)

The result: Germany has not reduced its CO2 equivalent emissions for close to a decade (see chart above). Wetzel writes that everyone agrees that it is unrealistic to think that Germany will somehow make the sudden downward trend turn.

German Energiewende “at the end”

The Die Welt journalist adds: “Practically all renowned environmental analysts and government experts have already determined that the German Energiewende structurally has reached the end and that a system change is needed.”

Humans burning fuel one million years

In his commentary Wetzel also reminds that humans have been using fire for some one million years, and that it cannot be expected that they will just stop doing so during the course of one single generation.

Wetzel compares the Energiewende to the Apollo space program, which put man on the moon after 12 years and 120 billion dollars of investment. He notes that compared to the great transformation which Energiewende would entail, this was peanuts.

He warns that implementing the Energiewende could cost the country a back-breaking three trillion euros (without mentioning the impact on climate would be negligible) and doubts the public would ever accept such a large-scale, draconian transformation of society.

German credibility takes a blow

Wetzel also comments the Germany’s failure to make the 2020 targets has tarnished the country’s image as a leader in climate protection, and adds: “The coalition agreement and the German Federal Budget for 2018 robbed all remaining credibility.”

In short Germany’s is not serious about reducing CO2.

Environmental groups and the Potsdam Institute, for example, are fuming, yet keep insisting it’s still not too late and achieving the target is still possible. But Wetzel injects sobriety and realism: “In the meantime we know that Germany will not only fail resoundingly to meet its self-imposed 2020 targets, but also those of the EU itself.”

With Germany as Europe’s largest economy, and regarded as a role model for all things green, the country’s failure would send a devastating message to the rest of the continent and the world: The Green Revolution was mostly a dream and was in fact never attainable. If tech-savvy Germany can’t do it, who can?

“No reality basis”

Yet, German officials continue to insist they can meet the 2030 target! But Die Welt’s Wetzel notes that doing so would mean Germany cutting it’s CO2 equivalent emissions by some 40%, or 350 million tonnes, within the next 12 years. That would mean radical and painful transformations. Recall that Germany has not managed to emissions at over the past decade (see chart above). Wetzel asks: “How credible is this target?

Die Welt’s Wetzel summarizes:

The feasibility rhetoric of policymakers as a rule has no reality basis.”

Finally, he reminds that Germany going it alone will never work, and that climate protection has to be “organized internationally – or not at all”.

72 responses to “German CO2 Reduction Targets “Completely Illusionary,” Comments German National Daily”

  1. Henning Nielsen

    Thank you for this important news. As for “organized internationally – or not at all”, it should be clear by now that it will be not at all, thankfully.

    1. SebastianH

      Why the hate?

      1. AndyG55

        “Why the hate?”

        You tell us where you get it from ?

        1. Yonason (from a friend's comp)


          Kind of the opposite of hate, the exact opposite of what the true believers falsely claim.

          1. AndyG55

            I have spent more of my youth on REAL environmental matters than basically ANY of the AGW apostles.

            Cases like seb just DO NOT CARE about the environment. !

            They HATE the very trace gas that feeds plant life and sustains all life on Earth. They want plant life to starve.

            The HATE avian wildlife, and DON’T CARE about it being chopped to shreds or roasted by solar farms.

            They devastate the landscape with white crucifixes, destroying trees, views, wildlife habitats, with none of the fines that would be occurred if someone else did the same thing, while making large areas unfit for human habitation.

            They want prices for electricity pushed up, so that less funded people are forced to burn all sort of high-polluting garbage material.

            They hold back funding for RELIABLE energy supplies in third world countries, so poor people have to continue cooking their food over dung and other horrendous substances.

            But THEY JUST DON’T CARE !!!

            Thank goodness for China and its funding of RELIABLE energy in Asia and Africa.

            The World Bank and other AGW stall-warts ought to be ASHAMED of themselves.

          2. SebastianH

            You two have a very twisted perception of reality …

          3. An Inquirer

            SebastianH claims that his opponents have a “very twisted view of reality.” The veracity of Sebastian’s claim may depend upon what reality is under consideration. If the Sebastian is disputing that his hatred is intentional and conscious, I would side with him. But if he claims that his advocated policies do not have the same impact as someone who hates, then his claim is invalid.

          4. AndyG55

            Seb, really doesn’t have very much idea of real REALITY, anyway.

            He lives in his own little anti-science fantasy land.

          5. Yonason (from a friend's comp)

            @AndyG55 10. May 2018 at 5:56 AM

            Yes. Everything they pretend to know is wrong. And none of it is good for humans, wildlife or our environment.

          6. SebastianH

            Yes. Everything they pretend to know is wrong.

            It’s not. What “we” don’t know is how anyone can even get to where you two guys are with your “knowledge” of how things really work. What does it take to become like this?

        2. yonason (from my cell phone)

          It I do confess, there are things I do hate, like needless loss of human life resulting from their rabidly harmful agendas – as described here.

      2. Kurt in Switzerland


        You asked, “Why the hate” in your response to Henning, who merely concluded that “not at all” was the de facto status of so-called international “Climate Protection” progress / success / agreement.

        Where do you see “hate” in Henning’s observation?

        1. SebastianH

          Where do you see “hate” in Henning’s observation?

          OP wrote: “[…] it should be clear by now that it will be not at all, thankfully.” The last word is the key.

          1. AndyG55

            So, you see “thankfully” as a hate word.

            And then accuse US of having twisted reality !!

            WOW !!!!

          2. SebastianH

            Comprehension skills AndyG55, you need to acquire some …

          3. AndyG55

            I don’t have your fetid imagination to read something like “hate” into the word THANKFULLY.

          4. SebastianH

            Words don’t exist in isolation, AndyG55. I understand that you don’t get this as evident by most of your replies.

          5. AndyG55

            THANKFULLY, I don’t have the sort of TWISTED mind you have.

            Your mind lives in isolation from REALITY, seb

            A fantasy la-la-land of your own self-hatred imaginings.

  2. Gus

    I Google-translated the original German article, indeed, to find its author’s despair at the inevitable failure of Energiewende.
    However, what the author fails to convey is the simple truth that all this effort is completely unnecessary, because the impact of man-made CO2 on the world’s (or local) weather is practically unobservable, whereas the benefits of higher atmospheric CO2 concentration, whether due to human activities or to natural processes, are profound, observed and monetized readily in the form improved crop yields around the world.
    In other words, the whole shebang is a monumental international racket: misappropriation of public monies under false pretenses. The ones pocketing the money should be taken to task.

    1. SebastianH

      Are you really believing this? What convinced you?

      1. AndyG55

        “impact of man-made CO2 on the world’s (or local) weather is practically unobservable”


        “whereas the benefits of higher atmospheric CO2 concentration”


        “in the form improved crop yields around the world”


        FACTS, seb, which you have ZERO arguments against.

        EMPTY as always

    2. Georg Thomas

      Well said, Gus 9.

      The Energiewende is irresponsible flummadidle and a scandal of German hypocrisy in which the population at large ever subservient to authority partakes no less than politics and the state.

      It makes me shudder to think how a well-educated (German!!!) people could ignore the obvious fundamental shortcomings of the Energiewende for so long, and keep supporting the politicians responsible for railroading it.

      To me, this shows that it is still possible to get the German people to support monumental totalitarian fantasies.

    3. toorightmate

      The CO2 horsesh*t has to stop.
      Got that Seb?

  3. Bitter&twisted

    The “Trump effect” is starting in Germany.

    1. SebastianH

      You mean everything becoming super stupid? Waiting for people to use Gatorade to “water” their plant … you know, because electrolytes.

      1. AndyG55

        “You mean everything becoming super stupid?”

        And there’s seb, leading the way !

      2. Matt Stettler

        You mean Brondo…

        1. SebastianH

          Indeed, Brawndo …

  4. mwhite
    1. yonason (from my cell phone)

      Fascists In Charge

      Pass a law that mandates the impossible, and then penalize people for violating it.

  5. Georg Thomas

    I liked the below paragraph from the German article, as the author puts his finger on a remarkable feature of the Energiewende that the German population is surprisingly insensitive to:

    “Obwohl sich die utopischen Annahmen zur Zielerreichung Jahr für Jahr in Luft auflösten, gab es keine Nachsteuerung, kein Controlling. Über eine ganze Dekade hinweg erfolgte keine Revision der Aufgabenstellung, keine Überprüfung der Prämissen …”

    My rough translation:

    “Even though the assumptions underlying the feasibility of the Energiewende evaporated year after year, no corrections were made, and there was no controlling. During the course of a decade no efforts were made to revise the definition of the project and reexamine the project’s premisses …”

    Frightening this is: reason suspended, a religious mania, a paroxysm reminiscent in its bumbling way of Hitler’s erratic conduct of war.

    What I find most worrisome is the absence (until recently) of open controversy and political opposition concerning the Energiewende. It is almost as if (many) Germans are glad to have found a higher cause that entitles them to sideline pesky democracy.

  6. Penelope

    Funny how there’s no restrictions or even propaganda against China’s stupendous expansion of coal-fired plants. Is it on purpose that Europe and the US are being pushed down, and China up? Peculiar.

    I’ve no theories except perhaps some rough standard-of-living equivalency between China, US & Europe is wanted– to facilitate horrid global governance?

    1. AndyG55

      “to facilitate horrid global governance?”

      YOU NAILED IT, Penelope !!

      They have even said as such !!

      1. Penelope

        AndyG55, Thank you for your very relevant quotes. Finally got around to checking them out. I’ve kept them to bludgeon those who WILL not see that AGW is a tool of TPTB.

        1. AndyG55

          There are lists of similar quote from groups like the Club of Rome. (I don’t have them saved though)

          The whole AGW thing is a socialist totalitarian construct. !

    2. Kurt in Switzerland

      Indeed, Penelope –

      Instead of calling China out on matters such as real pollution (e.g., mfg or pwr plant efflux), the leftist narrative goes something like this:

      “China is so far ahead of the West in renewables, with x GW wind & solar generating capacity added in just the last year alone… we are losing the battle to lead in the energy transition! So time to double down and invest more in [non-hydro renewables]!”

      1. SebastianH

        China is certainly no role model pollution-wise, but they are leading the renewable game in absolute numbers. They are stopping plastic trash imports. They are supporting electric vehicles like no other country. One could say they are without real competition right now.

        1. AndyG55

          And they are funding coal powered electricity around the world, THANKFULLY

          FAR outweighing their push to renewables in an attempt to lower real pollution from old technologies.

          Even the Chinese need RELIABLE electricity, and THANKFULLY they know how to make it..

          …and its NOT with so-called renewables.

          Most of China’s so called renewables, is of course from hydro.

          “They are supporting electric vehicles like no other country.”

          Delivery trikes !! And guess where most of the electricity comes from 😉

        2. Kenneth Richard

          They are supporting electric vehicles like no other country.

          Powered by coal.

          30% of the world’s CO2 emissions come from China alone, where over 50% of the world’s coal is burned. But yet they’re leading the renewable game in absolute numbers…so that’s OK.

          1. SebastianH

            Why would that be ok? I never said that and you need to stop making up what you imagine other people are saying/thinking.

          2. AndyG55

            China ..biggest CO2 emissions in the world.

            And helping many countries to increase theirs.

            No wonder seb is so upset and CONFUSED. ! 🙂

    3. SebastianH

      I’ve no theories except perhaps some rough standard-of-living equivalency between China, US & Europe is wanted– to facilitate horrid global governance?

      Are you saying that China doesn’t deserve a higher standard of living because you fear a global government if that happens?

      1. AndyG55

        NO, that is NOT what he is saying.

        Why do you ALWAYS intentionally misinterpret what is said.??

        Comprehension or “make-it-up” issues hey seb. !!!

        China would bring themselves to a higher standard of living, and with them many other third world countries, if the idiotic drive to renewables would get out the way and help reliable energy supplies to be built.

        Renewables have wasted so much funding that they have, possibly by intent, slowed down world progress, especially in the third world.

        The anti-CO2 agenda has caused stagnation of both science and of world development.

        The anti-CO2 craziness has to be brought to an end so that the world can start to move forward again. It has been held back for too long by this anti-science tom-foolery. !!

        1. SebastianH

          NO, that is NOT what he is saying. Why do you ALWAYS intentionally misinterpret what is said.??

          1) pretty sure Penelope is a female name
          2) the irony of you bringing that up seems to completely elude you

          Renewables haven’t wasted funding and the world’s progress hasn’t slowed down because of renewables. You have to get your hate for renewables under control, seriously.

          1. AndyG55

            Poor seb, more attention-seeking distraction for the pointlessness of his posts.

            And do you really think that the money WASTED on unreliables could not have been spent of FAR BETTER things for the progress of humanity, instead of pushing up prices for poor people.

            You have to get you HATRED of CO2 under control and realise that it is an ESSENTIAL part of the life cycle and more is needed in the atmosphere to feed our expanding world population.

            THANKFULLY China does not share your views and is promoting and building coal fired stations in many countries that have been HELD BACK by the DELIBERATE choices of the anti-CO2 cult..

      2. Penelope

        Sebastion, No, honey. I am only speculating upon the motives of TPTB.

        1. SebastianH

          I am speculating on your motives …

          1. AndyG55

            We all know your motives, seb.

            Attention seeking.

            That is you ONLY purpose here.

  7. Kurt in Switzerland

    The funniest part is that the analogy of The Emperor’s New Clothes is used for the Paris Agreement by BOTH sides of the argument:

    1) those unconvinced that there is even a “problem” to solve
    2) those convinced that we need to act to save the climate, but cry out that the agreement isn’t more than a drop in the proverbial bucket.

  8. Kurt in Switzerland

    The phrase, “If tech-savvy Germany can’t do it, who can?” reminded me of when the German Central Bank failed to meet the Eurozone criteria for annual deficit as a percentage of GDP about a decade and a half ago. I think it was under Schröder. After Germany failed the [fairly sensible and reasonable] measures, intended to prevent the sort of meltdown experienced by Greece over a decade later, it seemed that the rest of Europe’s national bank leaders and politicians threw in the proverbial towel.

    If I recall correctly, the argument went something like, “It would be irresponsible for us to rein in [deficit] spending at a time of high unemployment!”

  9. Steve

    I no longer read any of Sebastian’s posts.
    He cannot see the forest for the trees.

    1. AndyG55

      I’m not sure he ever reads them, either. !!

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy