The criticism was loud during the G-7 summit in Elmau. The German chancellery wanted to water down an agreement from the world climate conference and continue to promote natural gas projects in foreign countries. There is a risk of a step backwards for climate protection, complained climate and environmental protection organizations.
But it wasn’t as bad as feared. On the contrary. Of course, Chancellor Olaf Scholz has to regain confidence because he wants to continue to rely on natural gas for many years to come in the transformation to a world without new greenhouse gases. Since Russia is likely to fail as a supplier soon, others are now to step in. That was not planned until now.
There is a danger that other countries will now think: Oh, if the rich countries claim an exception for themselves, then we can do that too. Then international climate protection would experience a setback. This must be prevented at all costs, because the world climate report is clear: the emissions from the existing fossil fuel infrastructure will eat up the remaining greenhouse gas budget if we want to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. If mankind doesn’t stop burning oil, gas and coal soon, warming will quickly rise to two degrees and more. With catastrophic consequences.
The G-7 must remain at the forefront of the climate movement
After all, the G7 state that new gas projects may only have temporary effects and that they should later also be suitable for the transport of hydrogen, for example. It sounds through how much the states are struggling to solve the acute energy crisis and the climate crisis. It’s a tightrope walk because time is of the essence everywhere.
The G-7 must remain at the forefront of the climate movement. In Elmau, they almost just got attached to the summit and prevented the fall. They have the technologies for a renewable future and also the finances to implement it. In Elmau there were hopeful signs. In the final paper, the states commit themselves to “completely or predominantly” decarbonizing the electricity sector by 2035. In addition, the road transport sector is to become largely climate-neutral by 2030. That would finally be the end of the combustion engine.
Efforts to get emerging economies on board are extremely important for the global climate. The planned “Partnerships for a Just Energy Transition” with Indonesia, India, Vietnam and Senegal can represent decisive progress. In the end, what matters is what these countries actually get themselves into. If India, with its 1.3 billion inhabitants, could be persuaded to say goodbye to coal more quickly and expand renewable energies more, that would be great progress. That should trigger a pull effect for many other regions.
In the end, the G-7 countries even united behind Olaf Scholz’s idea for a climate club. The Germans now have until the end of the year to work out the details. Playing for time was the best solution for the German hosts, too many points such as a uniform price for CO2 could not be solved. The alternative would have been failure. If Germany still manages to form a climate club and that attracts more countries from the G-20 states, for example, Elmau can one day be remembered as the starting point of a new dynamic in international climate protection.