The latest coalition committee has unveiled its package of measures, which includes social balance for heating, faster planning processes for motorway projects, and changes to the climate protection law. While these are significant findings, one point stands out in terms of emissions from individual sectors. The report suggests that cross-sectoral and multi-year accounts will be used to monitor compliance with climate protection goals. While this may seem like a holistic approach, it essentially means that other sectors may need to make more savings if the transport sector fails to meet its targets.
The idea of cross-sectoral climate goals is correct in theory, as some sectors are easier to decarbonize than others. However, separate sector goals can lead to counterproductive competition for shared resources such as arable land, which could be used for CO₂ sinks, photovoltaic free-field systems, biomethane, or biofuels for home heating. The path chosen should depend on which sector has the greatest pressure to act and can buy the resources away from the other departments.
While it may seem like a good idea to abandon sector targets, they were originally introduced for a valid reason. Some sectors have always lagged behind, especially traffic, due to political unwillingness. The Climate Council was formed to rein in individual departments and ensure that all contribute to the common goal. If departments cannot be trusted to do their part, some may need to impose stricter austerity measures, while others get off lightly.
In conclusion, while the focus on a common goal is admirable, it may not be feasible with the current political staff. The transport sector needs to take its responsibilities seriously, or other sectors will have to bear the burden of stricter austerity measures.
