The traffic turnaround is one of the greatest challenges for German climate policy: Hardly any other area emits so many emissions. Actually, Volker Wissing should urgently present solutions. Instead, he is blocking the EU, enraging diplomats and sticking to a sham solution with e-fuels.
The transport minister has a problem. The Scientific Service of the Bundestag accuses Volker Wissing of acting illegally in view of the excessive greenhouse gas emissions from traffic. Because the federal government is legally obliged to reduce greenhouse gases to decrease in all sectors. The transport sector, the problem child of climate policy, has clearly missed its targets and now has to catch up. But instead of delivering workable and effective proposals, the FDP politician offers a sham solution.
In fact, the matter was settled. The vote on phasing out combustion engines at EU level, which should have taken place in Brussels last Tuesday, was a matter of form. But then the FDP changed its mind. Without an additive for combustion engines with synthetic fuels, she does not agree, they say. EU-level diplomats are appalled and even draw comparisons with Viktor Orban.
With this blockade, the FDP ignores arguments from science and business. Because e-fuels are too inefficient, too expensive, too scarce. Scientists also do not assume that much will change in the future. Hoping for a future where e-fuels are cheap and available in large quantities is naïve.
Even the auto industry lrejects the use of e-fuels for newly registered cars after 2035. They are already chasing after Chinese automakers who can build faster, more efficient, and cheaper electric cars. At the same time, working on the expansion of combustion engines that can “only” run on synthetic fuels, as Wissing would like, would simply not be economical.
E-fuels will play an important role
The production of e-fuels must actually be expanded. Finally, in a climate-neutral world, synthetic fuels will play an important role for shipping and long-haul flights. Even for combustion engines that are purchased shortly before 2035, e-fuels could possibly still be used temporarily.
But just because the production capacities for e-fuel are ramped up does not mean that sticking with the combustion engine is realistic. Because even if it were possible to produce enough synthetic fuels to power shipping and long-haul flights and still have some left over, a new filling station network and new infrastructure would have to be built. And that alongside the expansion of the charging infrastructure. Where will the money and the skilled workers come from?
Postpone to the next legislative period
Actually, Wissing should have presented a plan in July last year on how he wants to save the three million tons of CO2 that were too much emitted by traffic in 2021 by 2030. In addition, the transport minister must also work out measures to save 271 million more tons of CO2 by 2030. With the e-fuels proposal, he is simply postponing the problem to the next legislative period.
Drafting a new law at EU level just to introduce a sham solution to Wissing and its transport emissions problem would waste valuable time. Car manufacturers, suppliers, private consumers – they all need clarity and the ability to plan. If the EU is serious about climate neutrality by 2050, the decision to phase out the combustion engine must not be postponed again.
If Wissing really wanted to do something about climate change, there would be enough measures that would make a big difference with little effort – and have been checked by independent experts. A speed limit, for example. Instead of complaining about a lack of “technology openness”, he should concentrate on real solutions.