In view of the war of aggression against Ukraine, people in this country want to become independent of Russian energy supplies as quickly as possible. The Greens have therefore submitted a motion that the district of Munich should operate the heating and combined heat and power plants of its own properties as quickly as possible without natural gas and switch to bio-liquid gas (LPG) made from waste materials such as fats and oils. District Administrator Christoph Göbel (CSU) and the members of the Committee for Building and Schools was the proposal too one-sided, they rather followed a supplementary application from the SPD parliamentary group, which wants to have the technology most suitable for each location checked.
Specifically, this involves the vehicle registration office in Grasbrunn, the vocational school in Munich-Riem, the ABC train in Haar and the refugee accommodation in Sauerlach and Putzbrunn, all of which are heated with natural gas. “The examination of alternatives to natural gas is correct,” argued the Social Democrats. “Bio-liquefied gas should be part of this analysis, but narrowing it down to a single technology does not go far enough.”
Large tanks would initially be required for LNG
A view that found its majority in the panel. “Green is a beautiful colour, but not everything that is green is also practical,” said Brunnthal Mayor and CSU district councilor Stefan Kern, who said he had experience in the construction of liquid gas systems and therefore pointed out that the tanks proposed in the application for storing the biological substances would have to be “huge” and above ground, which raises “the question of space”. In addition, the supplies would have to be transported by tanker truck, which in turn would pollute the environment. In general, Kern questioned the climate compatibility of some biogases, since the production of palm oil costs large areas of rainforest. It is still the best alternative to use biogas, but only if it is continuously obtained through pipes and does not have to be stored in tanks.
Green party leader Christoph Nadler, on the other hand, underlined the need to break away from Russian energy as quickly as possible so as not to be left out in the cold next winter. And liquefied gas is the solution that can be implemented most quickly, and the tanks required for storage can simply be “leased for a year or two”, because, according to Nadler, the proposal is only an interim solution anyway. As soon as the supply with other energy sources – such as biogas from pipelines or geothermal energy – is guaranteed, “you can switch to these,” says Taufkirchner. But first of all it depends on the “rapid security of supply”.
District Administrator Göbel emphasized that the energy supply for secondary schools is entirely under the decision-making authority of the special-purpose associations. That is why one can only recommend, but not oblige, them to join the district’s energy supply measures. FDP district councilor Manfred Riederle was skeptical about the entire debate. The detachment from Russian energies is “a national challenge” and “can finally be solved at our level,” said the Unterschleißheimer. For fear of the cold, one should “not act hastily”, especially since the financial means to be spent are “considerable”. Riederle therefore warned against “pushing on the uncertainty and overburdening the administration”. Especially the SPD proposal that the responsible departments in the district office should report regularly on the “monitoring of innovative and further developing technologies” is “a monster task”.
Ultimately, all committee members agreed that the possibility of converting from natural gas to alternative technologies at the affected properties should be examined without prioritizing LPG. “And we will examine rapid implementation in order to ensure security of supply,” assured the district administrator.