By P Gosselin
Conservative/socialist prospects
The German parliamentary election has been decided, now it’s all about the possible coalition plans.
It seems certain that the link between the economy and the climate will be removed.
It had been introduced especially for Robert Habeck (Greens) and, until recently, was a haven for friends and buddies of the Green politician. Will the numerous NGOs, some of which had family ties to Habeck’s ministry, be able to count on lavish donations from the Ministry of Economic Affairs in the future?
The Münchener Merkur names some possible constellations in terms of the next government.
Friedrich Merz plans to fill the key economic and domestic affairs ministries in particular with his confidants. Names such as Jens Spahn, Carsten Linnemann and Thorsten Frei have been mentioned in this context. The CSU is also making demands: CSU party chairman Markus Söder has already announced that Alexander Dobrindt should take over a key ministry. The interior, finance or defense ministries could be considered, although these posts could possibly also be claimed by a coalition partner. In addition, the CSU is also reaching for the Ministry of Agriculture, which Söder wants the current Bavarian Farmers’ Association President Günther Felßner to take over.”
Prof. Dr. Manuel Frondel from Ruhr University takes a rather critical view of the possible new government on the subject of energy in the Berliner Zeitung. He even accuses Friedrich Merz of being naive.
Experience shows that the construction of gas-fired power plants takes at least five years. “As quickly as possible” can therefore mean many years; there can be no question of ‘going online immediately’. In addition, there are currently no incentives for investors to build new gas-fired power plants, as these power plants, which are intended to bridge dark doldrums, will not be used much due to the expansion of renewable energies and will therefore not be able to recoup their investment costs through market revenues. For this reason, a power plant strategy was developed last year that envisaged subsidizing the construction of ten gigawatts (GW) of hydrogen-capable natural gas power plants with 20 billion euros from the state. This would finance the construction of around 20 power plants, not 50 as proposed by Friedrich Merz. Merz’s proposal would therefore be much more expensive.”
Frondel also sees the expansion of solar energy critically.
According to the medium-term forecast of the Energy Economics Institute (EWI) at the University of Cologne, rooftop photovoltaic systems alone, which account for around two thirds of the 100 GW solar power, will cost taxpayers around ten billion euros a year – and this for another twenty years, as the remuneration for solar power is guaranteed at the same level for twenty years under the Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG). These ten billion euros – per year, mind you! – are therefore not available for other urgently needed measures, such as the renovation of schools, the expansion of transport infrastructure or digitization, let alone for research and development, not least for energy generation and storage technologies.”
Voters getting what they voted for. Economic oblivion.
Most of German industry is shifting to China. German cars are now expensive junk.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9wWR8LIG8E
The Chinese will take the German technology and make better cars -eventually. There is now way that Germany can protect their intellectual property.
Most stuff we buy in the West comes from outside the West. Germany does not want to depend on cheap Russian gas but depends heavily on China even for their medicines and medical equipment. And even if Chinese cars get better who will be able to drive them in a third world Germany ? And why would China give away their cars in exchange for paper like the Euro or the Dollar ? Most container ships from China today already return to China empty.
If the container ships are going back empty, that means the goods in the arriving container ships is being paid for with paper.
Rail transport reflects the mess in Germany. A relative was recently telling me of his struggle to get to places on time using rail and the drama for fans who travelled to Germany to watch the Euro 24 football. Across the border in Switzerland you can set your watch on the punctual rail system. It is mind boggling that voters do not vote out their incompetent politicians and tollerate so much mismanagement and waste. The Greens are the worst by far and in coalition governments they are often the tail that wags the dog.
One of the issue that led to the pre-WWII rise of fascism in Italy was the issue of getting the trains to run on time. It was promised. It was accomplished. But the costs of WWII more than offset that success.
From what I have read, the fascists may have talked about making trains run on time, but their ability to actually do so was minimal at best.
The only reason why you didn’t hear about the problems as much, was that the citizens were no longer permitted to complain.
Mussolini dictated that one train, the one that took foreign tourists to the Alps, “Must Be On Time”. That was the “message” that visitors took home with them. The rest of the system? That the visitors didn’t get to see.
(Well I’ll be sheep-dipped, spelled “Mussolini” right, first try.)
They have the same problem as the UK. The problem is the direct contradiction between economic growth and the green net zero ambitions. You cannot have both and have to choose. Germany will find this more difficult than the UK to deal with politically because of proportional representation and the need for coalition governments. The UK system by contrast leads to a decisive majority for something, and this is likely to lead to an eventual policy reversal on net zero.
An important consequence of the UK system is that its propensity to produce landslides is known to all participants. Therefore even when there is no imminent election the incumbent, even with a huge majority like Starmer’s, is always looking over its shoulder. This means that even when Starmer has four more years in power, he can still feel obliged to u-turn. This may happen in the next couple of years on net-zero and the Climate Change Act. Its already happened on Foreign Aid, heating fuel subsidies, the abandonment of self id of gender and its under way on illegal immigration.
In the short term both in England and Germany what you see is a mix of inconsistent initiatives. So the UK is going to have two extra runways in the South East, with the avowed aim of producing economic growth, which means more flights. They are also trying to promote AI, which means more power needs. And at the same time, convert their generation to wind and solar, while increasing demand in addition from moving everyone to heat pumps and EVs.
In the end you cannot grow the economy while pursuing net zero, You cannot get a large increase of cheap supply while converting generation to wind and solar. You can’t even run existing demand on wind and solar. Both countries are going to run into the brick wall on this in the next few years.
What will happen? PR systems can lead to stalemate. The Dutch once went 299 days (n 2021) without a government. Belgium went 541 days in 2010. There will probably be a long period of negotiation in Germany, followed by a fudge. They are hampered by the firewall to exclude AfD. The fudge will not deal with the economic crisis caused by net zero or the social crisis caused by large scale immigration by groups who have no intention of integrating with the existing society. So AfD will continue to rise until in the end it can form a majority government on its own.
At that point, watch out!
As for the UK, it will continue to pursue incompatible policy goals with inconsistent measures. The classic example is to build wind farms off the north coast of Scotland, where there is neither demand nor transmission, and then to pay them not to produce, while ramping up production from gas in the south. While expecting this craziness to reduce prices!
The UK’s mid term political future is now almost wholly dependent on the weather and on Starmer’s intestinal fortitude. If he keeps on the present course then if in the next four years there is a really bitter winter with the usual blocking high, and if interconnect and gas cannot supply, there will be at least a regional and perhaps a national blackout. If that happens, Reform is returned at the 2029 election with a landslide.
At that point, watch out there too!
He may however have the fortitude to continue his swing to the right, repeal the Climate Change Act, fire Miliband. The prospect of being evicted in 2029 may way on his mind. He does not like losing, at all, and given the choice he just may go this way. In that case, and if he takes on the civil service unions at the same time, and turns back the boats, he may get re-elected in 2029 or before.
But the key driver unfortunately will still remain the weather in the next four winters.
Weigh, not way, on the mind.
Now, now, Michel, England is not the UK. When you say “England and Germany” you mean “Great Britain and Germany”.
I suppose so. I’m not sure how much control Miliband has over energy policy in Scotland or Northern Ireland, though. I suppose the Climate Change Act applies nationwide, to all of GB. Scotland of course, or at least the SNP, is ragingly woke, so they probably think 2030 for net zero in generation is far too late. But could they just refuse to accept it, if they changed their minds?
Woke = Far Left
“the classic example is to build wind farms of the north coast of Scotland”
The Sea Green offshore wind farm is one example. In 2024 it had its output curtailed 71% of the time at a cost of £65m. 3.3TWhs of the 4.7TWhs it generated were discarded. The owners, SSE, also operate the Viking wind farm in Shetland which had 57% of it’s output curtailed at a cost of £10m.
Sea Green now leads the table for constraints having been paid £262m to curtail compared to £104m to generate electricity.
According to Prof. Gordon Hughes of Edinburgh University subsidies for renewables and Net Zero policies are responsible for 40% of the growth in UK electricity bills since 2015.
Now we learn that Ed Milibrain is consulting on extending subsidies to wind from 15 to 20 years on top of the introduction of extra subsidies under the ‘Clean Energy Bonus Scheme’!
Watch out? Watch out for what? Making Britain Great again?
Brilliant post on UK by Michel. As I write British windmills are producing three gigawatts with outside air temp c. zero C.
Coeur,
Michel is pussyfooting, writing like an aspiring politician.
Michel, why not speak your mind?
Like this.
Edward Samuel Miliband, a minister, needs investigation for criminal charges such as attempted wilful premeditated murder. There is widespread existing evidence that his policies will lead to electricity shortages whose plausible outcome includes increased deaths of the people he was elected to serve. It is improbable that he is unaware that he is likely to kill people, but this should be confirmed by direct questioning by a public prosecutor.
Minister Miliband should be stood down for interrogation. It might be possible to find a UK prosecutor able to perform duties for which he/she is paid. Those duties include action to avoid predictable deaths.
Geoff S
Not an aspiring anything I am afraid!
Yes, I think Miliband’s policies will lead to national disaster, if implemented. The thing I was trying to focus on is how likely that is, or whether there is any chance of a u-turn before the next election. And how the same problem may play out differently in the UK and Germany.
I think there is a straightforward head-on collision between the economy and net zero – this was the gist of Pielke’s ‘Iron Law’. The question is which way Starmer will jump. I think there is a reasonable chance that self preservation will lead him to repeal the Climate Change Act and dismiss Miliband. But its a big ask. Gets more likely the closer Britain gets to the next election and the coming energy disaster.
Is there any chance of prosecution of Ed and a few others? Don’t know. There is a law on Misconduct in Public Office, but the defence would probably be Paris and the COPs. Unlikely to get anywhere.
Starmer will jump where ever his masters tell him to jump. Same goes for the German politicians. The EU is one big corrupt system. It’s not left or right just corrupt.
Pielke’s Iron Law is mis-defined. It is the growing gulf between doing with is ideological and getting re-elected.
I do understand the concept as it was presented, but I think the reality is that politicians want to stay in office.
The present British Government has a problem. Its the same one the previous Government had, and its the same one Germany has.
It is pursuing energy policies in the name of green which will result, are resulting, in no growth and recession and rising prices. At the same time its re-election depends on it keeping its promises to produce growth and better living standards.
There is no way to avoid this. If it carries on with current energy policies the result is going to be a landslide for Reform in 2029. Because it will have produced a combination of recession and rising prices to no purpose that it can explain to the electorate. Its either a U-turn or get kicked out. There is no way to fudge this.
I don’t know what it will do. But Starmer is showing quite some willingness to move with the electorate, and he is deeply committed to re-election. He is a win at all costs guy. So there is a fair chance he will go with the flow and drop net zero. Look at the fate of Corbyn for a clue, and also at foreign aid. They were in, they were iconic, he was right behind them… until he wasn’t. And what made the difference? Not being useful any more.
And notice that when he turns, its effective. The person or the policy is gone as if they never existed. Could happen.
It may be zero today, but the deadly 20° unprecedented heat waves blood red on the weather maps are just around the corner, CdL!
Is Fredrich Merz still on “I Love Lucy?”
Things have to get worse before they get better, it seems. Well, Germany and the West in general have gotten MUCH worse.