Please support THE CITIZEN'S VOICE with a donation HERE!
|
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
| Home About Contact | ||
|
||
Please support THE CITIZEN'S VOICE with a donation HERE! |
||
Green Disinformation and Misrepresentations – Sebastian Striegel’s Speech in the Saxony-Anhalt State Parliament – Facts, Omissions, and Rhetorical Smoke ScreensOn March 4, 2026, the draft of an implementation law for the Heat Planning Act and the decarbonization of heating networks was on the agenda in the Saxony-Anhalt State Parliament. Sebastian Striegel (Greens) used his speech to welcome the law, while at the same time voicing sharp criticism of the federal policies of the CDU, CSU, and SPD. He accused them of “dismantling” the Building Energy Act (GEG) and sabotaging the heating transition. Striegel’s contribution was marked by polemical rhetoric – yet many of his central claims, particularly regarding the economic viability of fossil heating systems and Germany’s global influence, prove upon closer inspection to be strongly policy-dependent and in some cases misleadingly framed. The Context: Delay and Federal ConflictStriegel begins with an observation: “The Heat Planning Act for Saxony-Anhalt comes far too late – we are the last federal state, but it is coming.” In fact, Saxony-Anhalt only adopted its own implementation law in 2026, while states such as Baden-Württemberg had already moved ahead in 2020 and are expected to present comprehensive heat plans by 2026. Here Striegel’s criticism is justified, but he fails to examine the local context: the financing is provided with 12 million euros in federal funds, and the focus lies on the obligation for cities such as Magdeburg and Halle to present plans by 2026. Instead, he uses the delay as a transition into federal politics.Striegel attacks CDU, CSU, and SPD: “While we are passing this here, CDU, CSU, and SPD are dismantling the GEG at the federal level and with it the heating transition.” The GEG, originally passed in 2020 under the Grand Coalition (CDU/CSU and SPD), was amended in 2023/2024 under the traffic-light coalition (SPD, Greens, FDP) and reformed again in 2026 under the new CDU/SPD coalition – the 65-percent renewable energy requirement for new heating systems has largely been removed. He ignores that the original GEG was already created under CDU/SPD and that the traffic-light amendment introduced social transition rules. His claim that the GEG was “passed by the CDU and SPD in 2021” is inaccurate – it was 2020. Data Without Context: Economic Viability of Fossil Heating – Policy-Driven Rather Than “Market-Economically Inevitable”A central point in Striegel’s speech is: “Gas and oil heating systems, that is fossil heating systems, are uneconomical in the medium term. Emissions trading, gas network charges, and maintenance costs for the network will inevitably lead to this. These are all market-economic realities, not ideology.”This wording is misleading. The decisive cost drivers – above all the CO₂ price and rising network charges for gas – are not natural market forces but the direct result of political decisions: » The national emissions trading system (nEHS / BEHG) was politically determined and gradually increased: 2021: €25/t → 2025: €55/t → 2026: price corridor €55–65/t (often expected at the upper end). From 2027 the transition to the EU ETS 2 with free market pricing begins – forecasts range from €100 to over €300/t. » For a typical single-family house (approx. 20,000 kWh of gas per year ≈ 4 t CO₂), the CO₂ price alone will generate additional costs of about €260–380 per year in 2026 (including VAT). For heating oil it is €350–450. » Gas network charges are also rising due to policy decisions: fewer gas customers → fixed network costs are distributed among fewer consumers; additionally accelerated depreciation of the networks since 2025 and statutory phase-out requirements. Forecasts in extreme cases see a ten- to sixteen-fold increase in network charges per kWh by 2045. Without these politically determined additional costs, gas and oil heating systems would in many cases – particularly in poorly insulated older buildings – remain cheaper than heat pumps. Heat pumps only become competitive through massive government subsidies (up to 70%, often €16,000–20,000 in grants) and the artificially increased CO₂ price. Striegel’s description of these as “market-economic realities, not ideology” obscures the fact that they are policy instruments that deliberately steer behavior and create costs. Statements About Heat Pumps Without ContextSimilarly vague: “In Saxony-Anhalt, heat pumps dominate new construction and will also continue to gain ground in the existing building stock.” In new construction this is true – in 2025 heat pumps accounted for 83 percent, making Saxony-Anhalt the national leader. In the existing building stock, however, heat pumps remain marginal at under 5 percent; gas and oil still dominate. Striegel’s optimism lacks reference to barriers such as high installation costs (€25,000–45,000 for a single-family home) or the need for subsidies.Uncertainty About Emerging CostsIn a question from Daniel Roi (AfD), who asked about concrete conversion costs in municipalities such as Burg, Striegel evaded the issue: “For the state we do not yet have a differentiation between costs that would arise anyway and additional new costs.” Roi hit the nail on the head: Striegel was unable to provide reliable figures.Global Perspective: Germany’s Marginal Influence – and Declining ShareJörg Bernstein (FDP) posed the provocative question: “We would basically save in six years the amount of CO₂ that China releases into the atmosphere in a single day. Do you consider that efficient?” Striegel countered: “Roughly 1% of the world’s population lives in Germany. But we are responsible for 2% of global emissions and even 4% of historical emissions.”The numbers are correct, but the context is decisive: » Germany’s current share (2024/2025): approx. 1.2–1.3% of global CO₂-equivalent emissions (649 million t Germany vs. 53–54 billion t worldwide). Striegel’s “2%” likely refers to fossil CO₂ emissions alone without other greenhouse gases – even here the share is steadily declining. » Since 1990: Germany’s emissions −48% (2024) – a significant portion due to the collapse of industry in East Germany. 2024: −3.4% compared to the previous year; 2025: approx. −1.5% (slower decline). » Global: emissions continue to rise (especially China ≈ 29–30%, India ≈ 8%). Germany’s percentage share continues to decrease. Even an immediate zero-emission scenario in Germany would not halt the global trend as long as Asia continues to grow. Striegel’s argument ignores that the absolute influence is marginal and that global climate change is primarily driven by growth outside Europe. Rhetoric and Quotations: Minkmar and the Federal Constitutional CourtStriegel quotes Nils Minkmar and the Federal Constitutional Court’s 2021 ruling – both substantively correct, but emotionally charged. Guido Heuer (CDU) responded personally: “You are a divisive force in this parliament.” The debate thereby became highly polarized.Incomplete and Partly MisleadingStriegel’s speech is a plea for climate protection. Yet as Roi and Bernstein demonstrated in their follow-up questions, concrete data are often missing – on costs, efficiency, and sources. Particularly problematic: he presents policy-driven costs (CO₂ price, network charges) as “market-economic realities” and exaggerates Germany’s global leverage, while in reality the country’s percentage and absolute influence is marginal and continuing to decline.At a time when Saxony-Anhalt is supposed to implement the heating transition, greater transparency and honesty would be helpful. Author: AI-Translation - АИИ | |
|
| Other articles: |
 | The Field Service RepresentativeThe thoughts and views of a field service employee.... zum Artikel |
 | Experience Thought Criminals Live – Don’t Miss This Opportunity!The time has come, dear fellow citizens, we are truly living in interesting times! A turning point, just as our politicians not only loudly promised but are actually making a reali... zum Artikel |
 | Protest without showing your face and without a message - Leftists don't want to be heardLast Friday, there was a demonstration in Braunsbedra against the AfD's "Bürgerdialog" (Citizen Dialogue), among other locations.... zum Artikel |
|
Support the operation of this website with voluntary contributions: via PayPal: https://www.paypal.me/evovi/12 or via bank transfer IBAN: IE55SUMU99036510275719 BIC: SUMUIE22XXX Account holder: Michael Thurm Shorts / Reels / Kurz-Clips Imprint / Disclaimer |