efficiency nagging? “The industry only has to do what is worthwhile with the money glasses”

With solutions that are sometimes more, sometimes less complex, German companies are preparing for energy efficiency. Just as much electricity can be saved with economical light sources as is produced with longer nuclear power plant runtimes – Tatjana Ruhl and Christian Noll from the German company initiative for energy efficiency (Deneff) last week in the first part of her conversation with ntv’s “Climate Laboratory”. In the second part, the energy experts explain why Germany is urgently Energy Efficiency Act needed and why data centers should urgently be required to make their waste heat available for other heating needs. If you don’t follow along, it’s your own fault: “Companies are going into the next few years and decades with high energy consumption and will be pushed out of the market.”

ntv.de: You said that you practically have to build your own airport if you want to increase energy efficiency – that’s how complex the undertaking is. How has the pace been in recent years? How many measures have been implemented?

Christian Noll: That depends very much on the political framework, for example when it comes to the question of skilled workers. As a crafts company, why should I invest in the training of a skilled worker if I can’t be sure that I’ll still need them in five or ten years? Especially when there is an immigrant background and I not only have to teach skills but also language.

In the energy efficiency report The International Energy Agency (IEA) says: “German progress is slowing down.”

Christian Noll: Unfortunately, that’s how it is. We’re not as fast as we used to be or could be. Last year, the funding conditions were changed in the middle of the year: I planned a refurbishment, discussed the project with my energy consultant and suddenly it was no longer funded. This also goes down well in the trades and in companies that produce products to save energy. Then I ask myself: Do I do that in Germany or somewhere else? In addition, the energy crisis has led to liquidity bottlenecks for companies, which is why investments have also been postponed.

Do you have the impression that the framework conditions are going in the right direction?

Christian Noll: The next few weeks will be very exciting because we will be discussing relevant laws and guidelines, including a German energy efficiency law for the first time. There has been a Renewable Energy Sources Act for more than 20 years, but the goals have always been non-binding. That’s why nobody got behind it politically. We are now facing a paradigm shift.

The Energy Efficiency Act opens up the possibility of improving funding conditions. In December you still have from the “wrong possible decision at the wrong possible time” spoken. What do you mean by that?

Christian Noll: It was about the worsening of the subsidy rates. In the building sector we have funding on the one hand and binding standards on the other. This mainly applies to new builds. These new building standards will be further developed over time: you always look at what is economical and can be declared the new standard. Anything that is not yet economically viable will be funded. This funding standard has been abolished without following up with requirements at the legal level. That was a mistake that led to a run on funding. But with that, all funds were gone in no time.

This is reminiscent of infrastructure projects: At the end of the year, a construction site is quickly set up on the street so that the subsidies can be taken with you. However, the actual work only begins months later.

Christian Noll: But it happens on the streets with such regularity that you can adapt to it (laughs). This was not the case in the building sector. The funds planned for this in the budget were limited. The biggest mistake, however, was that the subsidy rates for energy saving measures such as building insulation were also reduced, although we actually need them now to support people.

And what should such an energy efficiency law look like? Economics Minister Robert Habeck promisedthat it is coming, but it seems to be stuck again at the traffic light.

Christian Noll: The most important thing about this law is actually that it stipulates in a binding manner how much energy should be saved. This would oblige the federal and state governments to set up programs and to consider: How do I do that? Do I increase the funding framework and equip it in such a way that the goals are reasonably achievable? Or do I introduce legally binding standards?

So what do homeowners have to be prepared for?

Christian Noll: First and foremost, it’s about determining the direction and saying what we actually want to achieve and do. It’s similar to companies. Plants with high energy consumption will probably have to Energy management systems and energy audits introduce. A second area is data centers, which are springing up like mushrooms in Germany. The electricity that goes in goes out again in the form of heat, just like in a kiosk, because it should be cool inside, of course. This waste heat could be used to heat other buildings, but also a plant farm, an eel farm or a fruit drying facility. Obligations to use such waste heat are currently being discussed.

And how are these plans received?

Christian Noll: Of course everyone who is supposed to be committed to something screams clamor and murder at first. Some of the data center operators as a new economy are threatening to no longer settle in Germany. We are more familiar with the old economy saying that when climate protection comes, we will only produce in China. At the end of the day, such plans have to be formulated sensibly and realistically, because there are also data center operators who say: We would even give away our waste heat. Then we would have free heat. But of course we as an association will not decide that this heat has to be used in a building or in a heating network instead. These details are a political process. But there is no way around it, because these requirements have long existed in the building sector or in household products.

Also in other countries?

Tatjana Ruhl: The preference for industrial regulatory law is particularly pronounced in very few industrialized countries, to put it mildly. Some countries in Europe, but also some states in the USA, work with a smart system that is called supplier obligation: The energy suppliers, i.e. the suppliers or network operators, are told: Make sure that energy consumption in your area goes down. You can pass on the costs that you incur through network charges or through higher energy prices. The advantage is that the energy suppliers know exactly how much the customers are consuming. Then I have a caretaker who can approach these people and initiate things. It’s smart because I have to explain to far fewer participants what they should do. In Germany there are about 900 network operators, but several hundred thousand companies. But this idea has been resisted for a long time. Instead, we work with quite a wild growth that doesn’t really lead to the goal.

But it doesn’t sound very social if the conversion can ultimately be passed on to electricity customers.

Tatjana Ruhl: Then you have to find a socially acceptable solution. The conversion of the energy system will also result in considerable costs over the next few years, which will also be passed on through the grid fees. However, efficiency measures also save energy, which in turn has a dampening effect on energy prices.

How much energy do we have to save to achieve our climate goals?

Tatjana Ruhl: In order for climate neutrality to work somehow, the entire German industry must reduce its energy consumption by 20 percent by 2045 – despite economic growth, despite additional consumption and despite technologies such as Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), in which CO2 is captured and stored. That’s hard.

Is this goal realistic? How far can you get with classic measures?

Tatjana Ruhl: It works, this one studies were not created in a vacuum. The industry wouldn’t have to do anything that doesn’t pay off, but really only things that are worthwhile even with pure money glasses. That’s a great message.

And how would it be checked that everyone makes their contribution and that individual companies do not rely on others?

Tatjana Ruhl: That’s what they’re for Energy management systems and energy audits thought. Every company should have a list of useful efficiency measures lying around. If it turns out that this or that measure saves the most energy or generates the most money, it should be implemented. The authorities could check this with random samples.

And in the end, only with these efficiency measures can we actually do the same thing, as you say, only with less energy consumption?

Tatjana Ruhl: Definitely, that’s stored in the models. What happens to companies that don’t do this? They go into the next few years and decades with high energy consumption and at some point they are no longer competitive. If instead I consistently reduce my consumption and save 10, 20 or maybe even 30 percent, I can produce more cheaply and thus push other companies out of the market.

Clara Pfeffer and Christian Herrmann spoke to Tatjana Ruhl and Christian Noll. The conversation has been shortened and smoothed for better understanding. The first part of the interview about wasteful late-night shops, the extraordinary potential of LED lights, very large refrigerators and washing machines can be found here.