Rainer Kraft, October 20, 2022, Energy Security

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/63, pp. 7097-7099.

Right honorable President. Valued colleagues.

It is, ja, meanwhile a platitude that, due to a false energy policy, Germany has fallen into existential difficulties and that here reprimand of the Russian aggressive war simply helps nothing. Since already in the spring of 2019, thus three years prior to the Russian invasion, the German energy policy was quite appropriately designated by the Wall Street Journal as the world’s “dumbest energy policy”.

Throughout the country, the country arms itself against the dangers of unprecedented electricity outages or even many hours of electricity shutdowns; and that, even though Germany according to the statements of responsible ministers has at no time today an electricity problem. At the same time, since 2020, power plant capacities of 8 gigawatts for nuclear energy and around 10 gigawatts for coal-generated electricity have been withdrawn. That at least the latter was not so good an idea, the government has sufficiently demonstrated with the introduction of the replacement power plant readiness law. In parallel, Germany now enacts two laws. With one of the laws is demanded the ban on the operation of any coal power plant, and the second permits again the operation of precisely these coal power plants. What energy policy nonsense! The same will be expected of us in regards nuclear power. One law will need come about which permits one operation, even though by law the operation is nevertheless actually forbidden.

It appears similarly in regards to natural gas. To generate methane from so-called unconventional generation methods, colloquially designated as “fracking”, is forbidden in Germany. At the same time, the import of fracking gas generated in foreign countries has been massively increased. For that, an extra law was created, the so-called LNG acceleration law. This then again allows things which, from the right, would otherwise naturally be forbidden.

These examples show us quite clearly: The German energy policy is hopelessly stuck and will only be kept alive by means of makeshift cobbling. The costs for these fading patients, called an energy policy, are thereby so great that they are no longer able to be shouldered by a constantly increasing number of private and business purchasers. And the consequences are the emigration of value-creating industry and the impoverishment of the people.

What this and the preceding government obviously have not understood: Energy is the basis of our prosperity, it is for our economy and people as important as oxygen is for us; and for that, sufficient quantities have to be available and may not by means of costs unnecessarily burden the customer.

The energy policy of the past twenty years has however done the opposite of this. New forms of energy production were established with billions in tax money,

Timon Gremmels (SPD): And atomic was not subsidized, or what? Atomic power was always free of charge?

although no evidence existed for the technical feasibility of these ventures.

Before the replacement of tested methods of energy production, questions of the reliability and questions of the regionality of generation from a technical viewpoint ought to have been asked, this concept of the so-called renewables needed to be tested on a small scale so as to investigate the feasibility and real costs. In such an effort, it then would have been quite quickly noted that the price lay far above that of an ice cream cone and that the reliability of the supply of energy is faulty.

Timon Gremmels (SPD): The most economic form of energy production is photovoltaic, mein Gott!

Yet that was not done. Unprofessional, – here, certainly one cries out clearly – over-paid people without presentable credentials, with Luddite zeal wrecked all the technique and fundamentals of the energy basis of this country.

Last week we in the Bundestag had a visit of a Ukrainian colleague from the Verkovna Rada, the Ukrainian parliament. The chairman of the gas committee, Andrei Zhupanyn, depicted for us in moving words how the Ukraine’s present energy infrastructure is being destroyed by targeted Russian attacks. The goal of Russia is obvious. The Ukraine, by means of the destruction of the potentialities for generating, distributing or even selling energy, shall be forced to its knees.  

For that, here n Germany, is required neither rockets nor bombs nor Iranian kamikaze drones; since the foundations of the energy supply are being demolished by the government itself.

Since 2011, for example, 14 modern nuclear power plant blocks have been idled,

            Bernhard Herrmann (Greens): Shame on you!

            Timon Gremmels (SPD): Shame on you!

with a rated power output of 20 gigawatts – power plants which presently not only for the Ukraine would be finger-lickin’ good – and you have disconnected them.    

            Timon Gremmels (SPD): That is just unbelievable!

So as to make that clear, an example:

            Ingrid Nestle (Greens): Is your motion actually about the inquest commission?

If we still had 17 nuclear power plants, then the energy produced by these could be projected at approximately 180 terawatt-hours.

            Bernhard Herrmann (Greens): Come to the theme!

The entire production of electricity from coal and gas in the past year, 2021, was 240 terawatt-hours. And that means that two-thirds of the fossil energy production could have been replaced in the past year by nuclear energy. So much for your alleged climate saving measures. The same also applies for this year 2022, in which the government now begs after gas and coal. If we had nuclear energy, we need not send packing the town of Lützerath.

The energy carriers extolled by the government, wind and solar, have in 2021 delivered only about 150 terawatt-hours. And that means: After 20 years of permanent subsidization, these chance energies do not do it, even only for substituting for the performance of nuclear power plants, and here nothing is to be said of a replacement of coal and gas. These are the hard facts in your energy transition fairy tales.

I ask myself, where should all this lead to? Quite simply: The goal is that Germany again has an energy supply which corresponds to the guidelines of the Agenda 2030: Affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern. That will be the duty of this commission.

Because here the entire time come objections to the so-called renewables: No one questions the capability of wind industry installations and photovoltaic to be able to produce electricity. It would also be an outstanding and good thing if the amount of generation would be adapted to the corresponding consumption.

That unfortunately is as good as never the case. We therefore must continually grasp at expensive replacement measures so as to bridge the entire deficit.

             Bernhard Herrmann (Greens): Perhaps both can be done! Then it is better suited.

In the future then, energy which is generated shall be converted into a storable form, so as then to be activated in times of continual under-production. It is then necessarily the goal to generate vast additional amounts of energy so as to compensate for the thereby occurring losses. This is presently a megalomaniacal idea. Since not only should the present energy supply be replaced one for one, but, beyond that, giant amounts of energy should be generated with the only purpose of compensating for the gigantic transformation losses – into the hydrogen, out of the hydrogen, into the battery, out of the battery – thus, generating energy with the only purpose of again squandering it.

            Bernhard Herrmann (Greens): Nonsense!

            Norbert Kleinwächter (AfD): It is so!

            Enrico Komning (AfD): It is logical to me!

The evaluation concerns now only the electricity sector. Yet will be increased by many magnitudes when you shall, as planned, take hold of the entire primary energy sector. 

We confirm: The energy sector in Germany is in considerable need of reform. The government meanwhile tinkers with the symptoms in monthly reports.

            Timon Gremmels (SPD): The symptoms are a Russian war of aggression!

On that account, it is time that the legislative branch gets back to the roots so as to re-direct onto the right track, onto the right path, the energy policy, the basis of this country’s welfare.

            Timon Gremmels (SPD): That was nothing, to be sure!

            Enrico Komning (AfD): Everyone should have understood that!

 

[trans: tem]

 

           

 

 

 

 

 

Peter Boehringer, October 21, 2022, Shadow Budget and Energy

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/64, pp. 7272-7273.

The government today still says nothing in the last reading of its draft law of how the planned economy, guaranteed to be highly bureaucratic and never to be legally implemented gas price caps should be installed. Who receives money? Which prices prices will be where capped? How will the operative be implemented? All of this in the first months will be regulated by decree. The draft law put forward is simply not ready for a decision.

A test question for you all, whether you have even read the laughably brief business plan contained in a law for the 200 billion euro fund: How much money does it foresee for the announced December payments? Now, I say to you: Here is exactly zero euros. The same for the gas price brake, the electricity price brake and additional support measures: Not a euro. Frau Esdar, one cannot block what is in fact not in the business plan. That simply does not work. There is nothing here to block. We have nothing, in any case not for 2022. And yet the Bundestag shall today agree that 200 billion euros in new debts shall be stowed in reserves in a purposeless, moreover completely undefined shadow budget. It would be absurd to bestow upon the government such a blank check.

The only correct way for such a law would be a 2022 supplementary budget for the really quite small sum which, as the planned December energy payment, will in fact be payed out to people and businesses. The Finance Minister – not present – nevertheless wants to put more than 20 times that in the 2022 budget, which then brings his twelve month balance of new indebtedness to a round 500 billion euros. And the Federal Audit Authority, as exactly for years the AfD, has stated: The accounting trick of the accumulation of reserves is very likely unconstitutional. – We say: It is unconstitutional.

The 200 billion euros is not required for 2022.Your appropriation today in the WSF [economic stabilization fund] serves only to get around the debt brake which at present is by luck still set aside. What at all is that? On this point also, the Union is dishonest; since the Grand Coalition still lead by the Union in 2021 found an additional trick whereby credits only in the year making the credit will accounted for in the debt brake, which in the Corona time was practically set aside and today still is. Luckily these tricks are now finally in Karlsruhe. Return to the law. That goes for all.

Our motion [Drucksache 20/4094] to be voted on today gives to you the opportunity for a careful budgeting of the required monies. Simply vote for it! Then the people and businesses who suffer under the present false policy can be assisted. For a merely symptomatic alleviation with tax money of the world’s dumbest energy policy, the shadow sums are much too high. Required is the causal aversion [ursächliche Abwenden] from the existentially dangerous energy emergency. We say this for months; even before the Ukraine war we have said this. In regards energy themes, finally listen to the rational voice of the AfD.

Hearty thanks.

            Otto Fricke (FDP): I find speeches with lace finish always good!

 

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

Tino Chrupalla, October 20, 2022, Germany and Europe

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/63, pp. 7046-7048.

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. Dear countrymen.

Let me first remember the two dead tradesmen in Ludwigshafen who two days ago were murdered by a Somali. – Frau Haßelmann, that hurts. – I wish the families and those left behind much strength, I wish the wounded a rapid healing. This is meanwhile normality in Germany.

Let us come to the European Council which today and tomorrow meets in Brussels to deal with Russia’s war in the Ukraine as well as its effects on the energy prices and the economy in Europe; so says the title. On one side, the explosive power of an energy crisis seems to have sunk in. On the other side, here again cause and effect are confused. One answer to the crisis is to be in any case the so-called gas price cap; we hear and read it thus. Yet here many questions remain open: Can Germany’s energy and supply security be guaranteed? Are we in common purchasing adequate quantities? How will be the distribution ratio – according to need? How much more does procurement in common cost the taxpayer in comparison to national procurement? To this the Chancellor today provides no answers. To secure the energy supply in common with the European states can be a way if Germany needs no longer to invest, if Germany was in good contact with all European partners, and not in part at war. The continent of Europe has at its disposal sufficient energy reserves so as to take care of itself. It would thus be not at all necessary to purchase additional, expensive and dirty fracking gas. Yet for that is required an infrastructure which is also secured by the community.

In this connection, I ask you, Herr Chancellor: Where are the investigation results for the sabotage attacks of Nord Stream 1 and 2? I already asked you a week ago. You have said in the last week that these will soon be put forward. Now Sweden refuses to name the details of the investigation. I ask you: Does that correspond to a trustworthy process in the European community? Do friends deal with us thusly?

We had and have with the Nord Stream pipelines the opportunity as Germany to secure, sovereign and at good value, our energy supply. Even so, parts of Europe could besides be served. We have always aspired to that the German government needs to keep open options, options to keep itself capable of action so that the prosperity of the economy, of industry and thereby that of the people are secured. All of this you put in play with your self-kindled economic war which is principally directed against us, against our people. Your measures and programs come late and are always again a bad compromise which primarily causes only costs in the long-term for the citizens. For the 200 billion euros in special funds are also new debts which in the end the taxpayers must pay as well. That is the usual game of “left pocket, right pocket”, and it is in addition partly unconstitutional, as the Federal Audit Authority has already declared.  

I have often said: You ineptly bustle about and tinker with the symptoms instead of finally devoting yourself to the causes. And this at present lies in your sanctions policy. You therein really appear to meanwhile develop preferences. Look for once through the values glasses, Frau Baerbock: Which is the next country from which you want to distance yourself?  Here, you quite eagerly take the lead. It is really quite peculiar that exactly out of the party which once stood for openness and tolerance now comes the greatest of schoolmasters. These meanwhile would want to let weapons speak for the enforcement of their so-called values.  

Diplomacy in any case does not belong to your strengths. You show that exactly in the ranks of the Ampel coalition. Among the citizens you earn ever less respect and credibility; that is seen not only in the polling results.

The Economy Minister day by day attests to the consequences of his own policy when he speaks of the high prices for energy, a coming recession and the downfall of the German economy. Here it needs to be said: The policy of Robert Habeck works: He of course is actively anxious that we become a developing country or the problem child of Europe. You should, Herr Habeck, really for once reconsider whether you still fulfill your office for the welfare of the German people, or should better withdraw again into the world of imaginary creatures.

            Sakia Esken (SPD): Frenetic applause!

From Economy Minister to Finance Minister. Herr Lindner, you speak in Dresden to young journeymen where you – you may recall – make jokes about your colleagues Lauterbach and Habeck. A few weeks before you said to the young journeymen there – I cite: We need to do everything that brings down energy prices and discontinue everything that lets energy prices rise.  In such a situation all available capacities need to be kept in the network. Certainly through Easter.

In Dresden, you tell the people what they want to hear, and here in Berlin you make your policy the exact opposite. That is the mendacious policy of the FDP. That is the mendacious policy against the trades and the Mittelstand. And the voters  in Niedersachsen have already recognized that. Here, I can only say to you, dear Herr Lindner: Lies have short legs. You should therefore concern yourself for warm underwear; since soon it is ground frost.

…

With all impossible means, you want to save the Western system of values and economics, and are thereby the commanders of your own downfall. Yet certainly we in Europe need nevertheless make a policy lead by interests for our citizens. The continent of Europe has a strong place in a multipolar world order. We therefore require peace, stability and before all things economic sovereignty. You and your one-sided U.S.-American alignment are the gravediggers of the German economy. We see this every day. For the sake of the people, please finally come to reason! Finally try to put aside your ideological interests!

At the moment, you gamble [verpokern] all capital in favor of a one-sided transatlantic alliance or a new dependency. In any case, your policy is of no use to Germany. You thereby split not only Europe but also the world community. Yet, plainly, business partners believed to be secure turn away and seek new contacts, as for example Saudi Arabia and its plan to enter the BRICS states.  

I therefore demand of you, for credibility in face of our European partners and also of this summit:

First. Concern yourselves as quickly as possible so that the three idled and the three remaining active nuclear power plants secure the energy supply through April 2023. For that, new fuel rods are required.  Besides, this exactly would be the hour of the parliament. We demand an open vote not influenced by the delegations – particularly; since here it is about responsibility. Each member should declare this in his constituency; also, any of those who deny the reality. This is democracy, and this we demand.

Second. Clarify the sabotage attacks on the Nord Stream pipelines. Concern yourselves that the critical infrastructure will be and is protected so that gas will again be delivered through the pipelines to Germany and Europe.

Third. End your values-led sanctions policy and stop the weapons deliveries to the Ukraine. Help to end the war in Europe by means of negotiations.

            Alexander Lambsdorff (FDP): Recite all that in Russian!

And stop playing the vice cops of the entire world, Herr Lambsdorff. Finally act as sovereign for the welfare of our country and for the welfare of our German citizens.

Konstantin von Notz (Greens): My goodness! That is so boring! That is so meaningless, what you say!

Many thanks.

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

 

Jörn König, October 14, 2022, Heating: Tax Relief vs Direct Subsidy

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/61, pp. 6913-6914. 

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable colleagues. Dear citizens.

The CDU recently had its national party day with us in Hannover. The principal theme was not about the heating change as in the motion put forward, not Russia’s war, not the energy shortage, not the wave of bankruptcy of many businesses; no, the principal theme was the women’s quota. It succeeded, you passed the introduction of the women’s quota. Congratulations; for thus does the Alternative für Deutschland, free of quotas and discrimination, once again have one more unique position.

            Michael Donth (CDU/CSU): Tätä, tätä, tätä!

You demand in your motion new tax relief for the construction and reconstruction of buildings as well as in regards the establishment of photovoltaic installations. Amazingly, what you do not demand is a women’s quota at construction sites. Generally in recent years, construction and reconstruction have become significantly more expensive. The principal reason for that is the ever more rigid construction guidelines, primarily in the energy area. In addition come further problems like the homemade inflation, the homemade energy crisis by way of power plant disconnections and supply chain problems.

In your motion, you wish to fight the symptoms, the origins of which you yourselves in great part have furnished by tolerance of the ECB debts policy and the atomic withdrawal. With this fight against the symptoms, you reach back to tax advantages; that in our view is false.

Tax advantages in comparison to a direct means of promotion are unfavorable; since the advantages are only remunerative at a far above average income. It is indeed nice that in the first three years a twice as high tax reduction of 40 percent instead of 20 percent shall apply. Yet who really has an income tax burden of 80,000 euros in three years?

The payment of the tax promotion also results clearly later than would be the case with direct subsidies, and only long after the costs fall due. The relief will further only be realized with the tax decision and plainly only partially for most citizens. These tax regulatory arrangements are complicated even for professional people – just what shall Otto Normal Consumer say?

What we need are simple solutions, and that calls for direct promotion of the hardworking citizen who with hard work has built or bought his own home and now must outfit it in terms of energy. To reverse the promotion program was the precisely wrong signal. The new government needs to be thoroughly criticized for that. One of the first measures of Herr Habeck was to stop the promotion program.

The demands in the CDU/CSU delegation’s motion are, for all that, also unsozial; since private persons with a small or moderate income, due to their smaller tax burden, have no opportunities to participate in these tax advantages. Once again: We need the direct promotion of the hardworking citizen who builds his own home or rebuilds in terms of energy. That is the better means to reconstruct as many as possible houses in terms of energy and to equip with photovoltaic.

            Bernhard Herrmann (Greens): Ach, take a look!

One thing was completely forgotten in the motion. It will become increasingly difficult to obtain appropriate, competent skilled labor from the trades [Handwerk] for the energy reconstruction. Already, the planned heating pump offensive is therein failing. We will put forward a motion concerned that expert trades work finally once again pays in this country.

Demand number 5 is sensible: That home ownership societies can also erect and operate photovoltaic installations without much bureaucracy – it is at this time a horror; I say this from personal experience – this demand we expressly support.

We are happy with the consultation on this motion in committee yet need realistically say that it is a very long way to an agreement by our delegation. Yet even a very long way begins with a first step.

            Bernhard Daldrup (SPD): Was that Mao Tse-Tung?

In that sense, there is still a little hope.

I am grateful for your attention.

 

[trans: tem]