Sachsen-Anhalt
Landtag, Plenarprotokoll 7/124, pp. 140-142.
Right
honorable Herr President. Sovereign House.
Once again
Sachsen-Anhalt makes headlines with records, first with the construction of the
tallest wind energy installation in Germany with a height of more than 200
meters, planned in repowering, and now shall follow the mega solar parks with
more than 100 hectares in many locations in Sachsen-Anhalt.
Studying the
problem of land [fläche] use
according to the information of the Federal Environment Office, one must
conclude that Sachsen-Anhalt in regards its land is consistently on a collision
course with the climate protection plan and Federal land goals. There are some
abbreviated statements which I may cite. Let us begin with the recognition that
land is a limited and scarce resource for which the various types of use
compete.
“The increase of housing and transportation land in
Germany and Sachsen-Anhalt is fulfilled to a great extent at the cost of land
in agricultural use.
The expansion of housing and transportation acreage proceeds with an increasing exhaustion of land [Bodenversiegelung]. Thereby will primarily agricultural land be over-developed and fertile land from long-term production of foodstuffs...be withdrawn.”
In that regard, the MULE [Ministry for Environment, Agriculture and Energy] – I cite:“From 1993 to 2010, the housing and transportation land in Sachsen-Anhalt increased about 60,700 ha, which corresponds to an average requisition of land of 9.2 ha per day. Although this trend in the last years has slowed and for 2009 to 2011 has even come to a standstill, we need to counteract, especially by means of effective land recycling, further land consumption. Particularly valuable and productive lands are to be maintained in regards their…usage.”
Thus, the MULE.
The Federal
Environment Office states that the Federal government wanted to henceforth in
the year 2020 to use only 30 ha of open space [freiflächen] per day for new housing and transportation land. In
the year 2019, however, it was nevertheless 60 ha. Yet the land consumption is slowly
reducing. This does not yet suffice; for according to the Federal government’s
climate protection plan, by the year 2050 the land consumption should be reduced
to a net zero and the transition to a land cycle economy [Flächenkreislaufwirtschaft] be thereby fulfilled.
A University
of Darmstadt study now indicates a possible solution for the problem of land
exhaustion. Instead of building new dwellings, we can for example use space at
supermarket and parking garages. The garages would offer space for a total of
2.3 million to 2.7 million dwellings. Thus not only would less land be exhausted,
but it would also be a savings in energy. Dwellings at garages could then, for
example, use the building’s heating. So far, the University of Darmstadt.
Whether this is wanted or possible is undecided for now. It is only a proposal.
Now the
Federal Environment Office has also a completely different idea for which our
garages could be used for problem solving; since there are already quite
different ideas. In the year 1990, Nitsch and Luther ascertained a building
allocation of 15,000 km2 in Germany. This yielded a covered surface
area of 2,850 km2, of which further a southern roof surface of 650
km2 could be suitable for heating water collectors or solar cells which
were to be committed to electricity generation. The numbers games should call
attention to possible alternatives.
We thus see,
even the roof surface is hotly contested by the housing market and energy – as also
the field acreage.
We see how
successful that was. The surfaces were not used in Sachsen-Anhalt, there was
little interest in determining these figures. For that, however, farm land will
be donated which supposedly would not longer bring a return. There is a
university helicopter which can do exactly this. It could fly over and measure
everything. Then it could be quite precisely said which surfaces we in
Sachsen-Anhalt could use to bring solar cells to the roof. We already had
discussions. Since then, nothing happens.
The Federal
Environment Office states that the land requisition by means of open space
photo voltaic installations in Germany at the end of the year 2017 extrapolates
to 27,000 ha. Clearly more than half will be taken from conversion surfaces, which
is entirely right. Yet a fourth is former farm land and that I find not right.
14% is alloted to transportation land.
Now, I would
have gladly heard the numbers for Sachsen-Anhalt today. Unfortunately, the Frau
Minister is not here. I think that the agency will not be in a position to directly
deliver the figures. Perhaps we can receive this in the follow-up.
Now let us
come to some calculations of the State of Baden-Württemberg; since this has
already established a guide for open space solar installations. It is clear to
me here and there that this is in the pipeline in Sachsen-Anhalt from the
various parties which are also in the Baden-Württemberg government.
The lifetime
of a 10 MW open space solar installation amounts to 25 to 30 years. The previous
EEG [Renewable Energy Law] reimbursement
will be paid for twenty years. For the balance, there is till now little
experience. If the installation after its calculated lifetime can continue to
produce electricity, then this is extremely fortunate; since with a 10 MW
installation a net revenue of approx. €300,000 per year could result. The 2% of
the investment sum is still deducted and the operating costs total €10,000 for
surveillance, for cleaning and for chasing the sheep.
It thereby already
amounts to a considerable pile of money, a fine matter for investors in and
around Sachsen-Anhalt who have the appropriate means to let dream yields become
true. A project is quickly developed, in which the Federal network authority
has taken part in the write-off. Discussions will be appointed and the project
will be quickly presented in the city or local council with the advice: The day-care
could use a new coat of paint, perhaps we may also have new playground
equipment. Then it will be approved quite quickly in the city council –
oftentimes.
Responsibility
for the energy transition will then be spoken of, for saving the world climate
in the village, so that the last local councilor really is convinced: With
this installation on 100 ha, we really have done something important for the
world climate and to save our country and the Earth.
Out on the
farm land, it runs similarly; since as a result of a completely failed farm
policy, the recent foodstuff prices, which will passed on to the producer, have
further dropped. Operations are given up daily because the costs can no longer
be economized and because the banks can or will give no operating credit, or because
the operation is no longer green enough to fulfill the European guidelines for
granting credit to an agricultural undertaking.
The farmer in
Germany thus stands before the end, and then the well-heeled investor comes
around the corner and right to it with the tempting promises. It is
nevertheless not a rescue; for they come to exploit the farmer’s state of
emergency.
Many citizens
in rural areas have seen through this and therefore no longer participate. Ever
more citizens’ initiatives are organized. Even the local councils re-think it,
one way or another. I think, for example, of the former CDU member from the
Anhalt-Bitterfeld Landkreis who left
the CDU, who has a quite clear opinion on the open space solar installations
and who, in committee, as I understood it, previously always voted against.
Thus, some thereby do right.
Yet here in
the Landtag, the murmuring is heard ever louder, one must go into the State
development plan, it needs to be made better, priority areas need be created, a
better balance should be struck to thereby be able to more easily make these
investments. Yes, you naturally can do this. For me, it is wrong, I would not
do this.
Yet it thus
needs be considered that the decision for the erecting of such installations
still lies with the localities. If it is thought at the State level that the
State development plan needs to be changed in some way, and we could then
prevent or alter at the local level precisely this project, then that is simply
just false. That does not go. Since, for this are, a) the regional planning communities
appropriate and b) the local community council, the city council, which pass
the resolution or not. It is thus eyewash to assert that only the development
plan needs be changed and then everything is OK. That is dishonest.
Dorothea Frederking (Greens): What is he saying then? These are just insinuations!
The formula “more
wind and solar energy in the State, less self-determination in the local
governments and a marginal say for the citizens” leads ever more often not to
the desired result. Instead of fulfilling the yield dreams, it comes to a
rejection of these projects.
It is now finally
time to thwart [unterbinden] the
selling-out of agricultural use land to foreign investors of every kind and to
put the solar installations where they sensibly belong; namely, on the roof.
Therefore, vote for our motion [Drucksache
7/7562]. Help us thereby to defend our farmers, to defend our land and to
bring our energy transition, which we all in some way want, to the roof. Help
us to thereby bring forward our State.
[trans: tem]
