Opponents of wind turbines in the Höhenkirchen forest have canceled a panel discussion planned for Tuesday, October 5th, during which they should have exchanged arguments with supporters in front of an audience. The group “Gegenwind” from the district of Munich and the initiative “Landschaftsschutz Ebersberger Land” accuse the energy agency Ebersberg-Munich as an organizer of taking sides with wind power. They specifically criticize the selection of the moderator, whom they consider to be biased. The working group (Arge) Höhenkirchner Forst was then forced to cancel the discussion event. The participants’ ideas and goals are too far apart to be implemented in a common format to the satisfaction of all, according to the rationale.
The result: the opponents in the dispute over wind power hide behind their barricades again. The topic has polarized in the south-eastern district of Munich and in the neighboring district of Ebersberg for a long time. Those who are in favor have their arguments, and those who reject wind power, especially in southern Bavaria, will find enough reasons online. A dialogue is often no longer possible. This was also shown by the tough argument in the run-up to the referendum on wind turbines in the Ebersberg Forest. The wind power opponents attribute the fact that the supporters were just in the majority in the end to a campaign in which they see the energy agency at work. This is to drive the energy transition on behalf of the districts of Ebersberg and Munich.
The hardened fronts should be softened in the discussion round planned for Tuesday. At the initiative of the mayors of Höhenkirchen-Siegertsbrunn, Egmating and Oberpframmern, things should get down to business in front of 200 guests in the multi-purpose hall in Höhenkirchen. Six participants were invited to the podium. On the one hand, the state chairman of the Federal Wind Energy Association would probably have been there in Raimund Kamm; the energy agency had asked the former mayor of Berg, who had fought a wind power project on Lake Starnberg that was comparable to the Höhenkirchen forest. On the opposite side, among others, Carin Dietl from the Ebersberg opponents of wind power and Thomas Schürmann from Ottobrunn, who leads the critics in the Munich district, should sit.
But in mid-September, the wind power opponents became queasy. They feared going under on the podium and ending up in the pillory, it is said. In a joint letter to Hans Gröbmayr, who, as the former head of the energy agency, coordinated wind power issues, they called for a retreat. Schürmann says that it was determined that in the end it should have been “yet another advertising event” for wind power. The stumbling block is the proposed moderator from Glonn, a psychologist and former professor at the University of the Federal Armed Forces in Neubiberg, who has already expressed the opinion in a letter to the editor that opponents of wind power often argued irrationally. With such a moderation he would not have “felt comfortable”, says Schürmann. He and Dietl also criticize the fact that with five-minute statements there would not have been enough space for everyone to present their own arguments. From Schürmann’s point of view, the podium would have come too early in general. It would be better to wait for a study commissioned by Höhenkirchen-Siegertsbrunn on possible alternative energy sources such as geothermal energy and photovoltaics.
Höhenkirchen mayor Mindy Konwitschny (SPD) thinks the hint is wrong. The panel discussion should be about wind power and not about alternatives. Anything else would go beyond the scope. In addition, given the climate crisis, there is no longer an “either-or”. Every approach to avoiding CO₂ is important. Höhenkirchen’s mayor also protects the moderator. She vouches for a balanced conversation. That is their claim.
Schürmann does not want to stand there as a climate denier. There are tough opponents of wind power who deny climate change. He knows them too, says Schürmann. He doesn’t count himself among them. But when it comes to building rotors in the Höhenkirchen Forest, Schürmann, a former controller and financial expert, is adamant. He criticizes the fact that wind turbines in Bavaria, where there is little wind, are only profitable thanks to subsidies. That works economically, but not economically. Schürmann accuses the energy agency of not wanting to talk about cost-effective and reliable energy. Mayor Konwitschny rejects his suggestion that instead of a panel discussion, the arguments of both sides for and against wind power should be printed in municipal newspapers. A parish journal is not suitable for such debates.
Together with the mayors Inge Heiler from Egmating and Lutz Andreas from Oberpframmern, Konwitschny declares in a statement that he wants to continue looking for the dialogue. She hopes to have an open discussion at a later date.