Climate protection is the most unsuccessful concept of the present (Peter Heller) Germany

https://www.achgut.com/artikel/klimaschutz_ist_das_erfolgloseste_konzept_der_gegenwart Please see link above for original text in German, embedded hotlinks and comments.

Climate protection is the most unsuccessful concept of the present Peter Heller March 23, 2019 (simple computer translation – Google Translate) Climate protection has been high on the political agenda for three decades. Five comprehensive progress reports and many other smaller studies have been developed by the IPCC, which is closely linked to the UN bureaucracy, during this period. At countless conferences and congresses global climate diplomacy was raging. With the Framework Convention on Climate Change, Agenda 21, the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement, international treaties have been signed, in which almost all countries in the world committed themselves to substantial reductions in their greenhouse gas emissions.

At the same time, a powerful network of politicians, science and environmental activists, media and lobbyists from certain sectors of the economy emerged that gained opinion leadership in the discourse. Successfully pounding the population emission reductions as indispensable to avoid a global catastrophe. Skeptics see themselves marginalized, even denigrated as "deniers" and more recently suspected of right-wing extremism.

Which makes it possible to outlaw their arguments regardless of the content.

Correspondingly little attention is given to contrary views in the public, correspondingly low is their echo in a largely sluggish and uninterested society, the majority of which approves of climate protection, mainly because almost all multipliers persuade her.

In this country, for example, voters are no longer resisting a parliament in which an oversized coalition of the Union, the SPD, the Greens, the Left, and the FDP sunk the acquired wealth into planned energy, transport, and agricultural activities. People no longer argue about whether to ban Germans from flying or driving, but only how to succeed most effectively. It is no longer necessary to ask whether de-industrialization is wise, but only whether it can be speeded up with a carbon tax, with a regime of steadily tightened limit values or better with a forced increase in prices and emission rights. It is no longer discussed whether the citizens have to renounce and accept restrictions on freedom, but only the extent and order of the regulations serving for it. And Germany is not an isolated case in this regard.

1

Life itself contradicts a "climate-neutral" existence Nevertheless, over the past thirty years, annual carbon dioxide emissions have risen from 21 to more than 33 billion tonnes. If at least it would be possible to freeze global emissions at the current level, the 1.5-degree target by 2030 and the two-degree target by 2050 would be obsolete, according to the Berlin-based Mercator Institute's carbon dioxide watch. But even that is illusory, with a growing world population and an ongoing dynamism of innovation that offers more and more opportunities to improve living conditions and build wealth.

Climate protection has been high on the political agenda for three decades. But it takes place only in the imagination of actually clever people who waste their time unproductively in superfluous bodies with the production of useless papers. Although there is no lack of will, nor of the necessary majorities, climate protection is probably the most unsuccessful concept of the present. That will not change. Because he fails for principle reasons.

Even life itself contradicts the basic idea of a "climate-neutral" existence. His fundamental aspiration lies in the expansion, without which it could not survive on the one hand and on the other hand gives him the power to massively influence the planet.

From the cover of the soil to the composition of the atmosphere, the biosphere is inexorably changing the conditions under which the incoming solar radiation is absorbed and re-emitted. And with that, the conditions that define the climate.

The metabolism of human industrial society is only part of this happening. And as little as it is possible for the plants to do without carbon dioxide, we are unable to outlaw fossil fuels. Thirty years ago, these 88 percent of our primary energy delivered. Today, their share amounts to almost unchanged 85 percent - of a nearly doubled total consumption. Climate protection has been high on the political agenda for three decades. For three decades, coal, oil and natural gas have continued to flourish unaffected. That has good reasons.

There are no alternatives The energy necessary for the operation of our machines and apparatus must be taken from the offer of our environment. Its variety is limited as it feeds only four primary sources: solar radiation, earth rotation, gravity and nuclear power. The gravitational field of the earth in connection with the natural radioactive decay produces, for example, a steady heat flow from the Earth's interior. However, using it requires

2

geological conditions that are comparatively rare. The interaction of earth rotation and gravity leads to regular tidal currents, which are also useful only in certain places.

However, the needs-based supply of our technological environment demands a scalable access to energy, in particular with regard to increasing demand, with extensive flexibility in terms of space and time. Alone stored potentials offer one. Only under standard conditions stable, solid, liquid or gaseous chemical energy carriers can be stored and transported without loss and with little effort. These alone allow a technically simple and thus effective extraction of heat, as well as electrical energy and propulsion in all the required performance areas of the lighter on the diesel engine to coal power plants or blast furnaces. And only the fossil hydrocarbons, in which the energy flows of the sun and the earth's core are permanently stored by means of gravity, are available in sufficient quantities anywhere in the world. There are no alternatives.

Anyone who thinks that collecting, bundling and storing natural, volatile energy fluxes of low surface density offers such a solution only documents its mathematical weakness.

In Germany alone, fuel consumption in the transport sector is around 720 terawatt hours per year, which even exceeds the gross power generation here. Of course, the chain wind energy battery backup charging station car battery electric motor propulsion despite the charge and discharge losses about a factor of two higher efficiency over the conventional variant. This leaves 360 terawatt hours, which would have to be produced for a complete electrification of the traffic, which in this case is based purely on wind power. What can be done with wind turbines of 5 megawatts rated power optimistically scheduled 2,000 full load hours. If you set up from these Boliden with rotor diameters from 130 meters 36,000 pieces.

To make clear the insanity of this idea, the number of almost 29,000 wind turbines with an average rated output of 2 megawatts is referred to, which is already turning in this country. The option of using wind energy for the electrolytic production of hydrogen, which is then converted into electricity in fuel cells, is enjoying growing political popularity. Since the additional conversion steps in this concept further reduce the efficiency, it already requires more than 70,000 windmills. It is now possible to continue such estimates for all sectors, from agriculture to manufacturing to households. You can calculate it with biomass, with photovoltaic or solar thermal. The same result always occurs. It is technically not possible to substitute hydrocarbons in these ways to a significant extent, not to mention the cost.

3

Germany can continue to play the striver for climate protection Climate protection has been high on the political agenda for three decades. And all the measures taken to implement it have done nothing but increase energy costs. That will not change, no matter which instruments you try. Because consumers can not simply switch to relevant levels, they have no alternative. The biggest threat to the dominant positions of coal, oil and natural gas is probably methane hydrate, which is already being produced in small quantities by Russia, Japan and China. But otherwise there is nothing. If anything had happened, more than 300 years after the industrial revolution began with Abraham Darby's transition from wood to coal in iron smelting, it would have been on the market for some time now and maintained its competitive position. Of course, alternatives can make a contribution, in specific applications and in certain regions with suitable geographical conditions. But this one will never be global.

Of course, nuclear energy can create new value chains for electricity, heat and synthetic fuels in the energy system. Of course, the combustion of hydrocarbons is not necessarily associated with carbon dioxide emissions, but they can be deposited, save or even recycle. Of course, carbon dioxide can also be removed from the atmosphere. But all these options will not be available quickly enough in order to reach the climate goals yet.

Of course, Germany can continue to play the role of climber with its 2% share of global carbon dioxide emissions. But even if the Germans now all give in to abruptly reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to zero, their contribution would be barely noticeable and neutralized in less than two years by the growth in the rest of the world again.

Anyone who thinks that the USA, China, India, Japan and Russia are oriented towards Germany, is naive or suffers from megalomania.

The world will tear down its climate goals. However, as these are based solely on interpretations of computer models, two things remain unanswered: how much potential warming really turns out to be, and whether disaster is actually at stake. For the past thirty years, we have not come closer to answering these questions. We have only learned how foolish the idea of climate protection is, because it never had the possibility of success. So after three decades, it's time to finally take it off the agenda.

4