[Skybird]

On one of the most megalomaniac idiocies of contemporary German politics: the so-called "energy transition". My blood is boiling over when thinking on what the politcal freaks are doing there.

The energy transition has a weak point. This has been found out by a commission of experts set up by the government. How now, the energy transition and a weak point? That can't be, after all, Germany is a pioneer and Minister Altmaier says: "The whole world is emulating us", a single success story. And Professor Claudi Kemfert has even scientifically confirmed this. And now a non-existent "weak point" should disappear?

So far, electricity customers and taxpayers have invested roughly half a trillion euros (500,000,000,000 euros) in the energy transition. Every German, from babies to old people, has been forced to pay over 6,000 euros for the energy transition in recent years. And now experts appointed by the federal government are finding that the government's measures are "too small, short-term and not interlinked", which "stands in the way of a cost-effective climate policy". Too good German: The energy turnaround is one bog. But the money is gone, now others have it.

Anyone who has criticized the botched energy policy has been a climate denier and was diagnosed as mentally ill. Other critics were labeled as energy haters and were AFD-nah-zi. The specifications for the energy transition ultimately came from “experts”. Renowned members of nature conservation groups, BUND, Greenpeace, Potsdam's "climate researchers", eco experts, wind and solar lobbyists and church representatives sat on the commissions appointed by the Federal Government. The créme de la créme of the German environmental lobby - a prankster who thinks of intention.

The problem of Merkel's commissionitis was actually not the result, the problem was the selection of the commission members and their tasks. New German means something like: "**** in - **** out". Consequently, the nuclear energy exit came out with a simultaneous coal exit. But the government is happy, now that it’s going wrong, it’s fine. She has outsourced responsibility for her political botch to commissions at the expense of the citizens. This is a typical “Merkel number”: Now it just happened. Can happen.

The Federal Government's experts from the "independent commission of experts for monitoring the energy transition" now recommend that the tiresome EEG and CHP levy be completely removed and the electricity tax halved. To finance the energy turnaround, around 25 billion euros per year from the EEG and CHP surcharges and 6.7 billion euros from electricity tax were lost - readers finally know where their money is going.

The experts of the federal government would not be experts of the federal government if they would not recommend the government a hefty CO2 tax increase of 50 euros per tonne of CO2, which should apply wherever fossil fuels are used: from the power plant to the Petrol station to the heating system, actually to the breakfast roll.

But that's not enough to plug the eternal hole in the state's energy transition. For this reason, taxpayers' money should be used in a “transition period” to fill the financing gaps in order to continue to fill the pockets of eco-winners and to relieve electricity customers.

When I hear "Relieve electricity customers", all warning lamps come on. The federal experts say: "With a little driver with efficient heating" the bottom line is still 30 euros relief. That's something, Hosanna! However, for the de-tied citizens who are not "little drivers" but commuters and the tenants who cannot afford "efficient heating", this means nothing more than additional costs: right pocket, left pocket, even more energy rip-off. Because taxpayers or electricity customers are usually the same people.

The journalist Daniel Wetzel, whom I highly value, issued a devastating testimony to the Federal Government's Welt-Online: "The citizen pays for political irresponsibility". There is nothing to add. The energy turnaround, however, continues to advance as long as the number Michel can put up with it. What does the Corona economic crisis bother us - we simply rename crises as "challenges".

Manfred Haferburg

The author is nuclear physicist, was thrown into a Stasi prison in the GDR for singing protest songs, and after reunification worked as inspector of nuclear powerplants internationally. He fled from Germany after needing to witness the SED renaming itself into PDS and getting away with it.

And the following is the comment by Daniel Wetzel whom he referred to in the last paragraph, released in Die Welt, 3 days ago.

A current report underlines that the German coal phase-out was far too expensive. Instead, the market forces should have been allowed to take effect. Chancellor Merkel's tactics once again prove irresponsible.

Almost everything that has a place in climate protection was represented in the coal commission of the federal government: members of Naturschutzring, BUND and Greenpeace sat next to Potsdam's climate researchers, eco-experts, green electricity lobbyists and "representatives of the affected" from the open-cast regions. In the end, the letter of recommendation from the coal commission bore the signatures of almost the entire German environmental lobby. Such a concentrated eco-competence must have got the best possible out of climate protection?

An assumption that refers to a new scientific report in the realm of fairy tales. In its current commentary, the independent commission of experts on monitoring the energy transition does not leave the German coal phase-out in good stead. All the market interventions and compensation payments are superfluous, overpriced, counterproductive.

The phase-out of coal would become reality much earlier, and the costs for taxpayers would be much lower if you had simply let the European emissions trading scheme, i.e. the market, do the work. "Reworking" is the recommendation of the monitoring commission on the coal phase-out law in diplomatic restraint. The content of their analysis would also allow a more drastic formulation: Into the bin!

It is not surprising that the ecological left, which is so strongly represented in the coal commission, can only think in terms of state interventionism and does not trust market-based solutions. The error chain starts earlier in the system.

It is the clients of the coal commission in the ministries, the civil servants of environmental and energy politicians who gave the wrong job: to develop options for intervention instead of letting market forces work. Bad advice that is now becoming expensive for taxpayers and energy consumers.

Chancellor Angela Merkel's easy tactic of outsourcing the solution of difficult conflicts of interest to "society-wide consensus" to commissions has once again proven to be irresponsible.