If you know Germany you know that it's pretty common, almost 'common sense', to claim that Germany is doing better than other countries re: climate & environment.
Journalist here calls it an "undisputed climate leader"
I use data for 2019, and not relative reduction data because if:
- your emissions were very high
- you have reduced them more than others (in relative terms)
- but they're still higher than others in absolute terms
to me you're not a *leader*, you're just converging
Total emissions (including aviation): higher in Germany than in all other countries considered here except Poland.
Look at the difference with France!
Now sector by sector.
ENERGY INDUSTRIES: again, second behind Poland. And look at the difference with France.
IRON AND STEEL
Germany has by far the highest emissions of all countries considered. More than twice their values.
TRANSPORT
Here the differences between countries are less pronounced (everyone sucks at transport & climate) but Germany still wins. As in: highest per capita emissions of the bunch.
OTHER (ENERGY) SECTORS (commercial/institutional, residential, agricultural/forestry/fishing. Highest emissions for Germany.
'OTHER OTHER' (ENERGY) SECTORS
Germany is middle of the pack
INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES AND PRODUCT USE
Germany has the highest emissions per capita.
AGRICULTURE
Germany is middle of the pack - France does much worse.
WASTE MANAGEMENT
That's where Germany does much better than other countries - half or less than half their emissions.
So to sum up:
- Germany has higher total emissions per capita than other major European countries
- in 4 sectors, it's got the highest emissions
- it's got the lowest emissions in just 1 sector (waste management)
So Germany be proud of your waste management (and other things you've done right) but don't let it go to your head.
The case for Germany being a "climate leader" *on the whole* is weak at best.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Since Israel attacked Iran, German media outlets & journalists of all political persuasions have started questioning international law and or heralding a new age where the law of the strongest applies in international relationships.
The reason why "transport poverty" is suddenly getting attention is ETS 2, which is expected to increase motor fuel prices a lot from 2027, and the associated "Social Climate Fund" which aims at supporting groups that are vulnerable to such price increases.
The Commission outlines a number of eligible measures which Member States can include in their SCF plans to tackle transport poverty
We first review existing cross-sectional evidence on the deteminants of air travel - summarised in this table (which the reviewers didn't like so didn't make it into the final paper :) )
Why it's interesting to use panel data?
1. How travel behaviour changes over the life course is interesting in and of itself
2. It provides better evidence of causality than cross-sectional data
3. Shows which groups & trends are driving rapid growth in air travel
Having grown up in Berlusconi's Italy, I can feel it in my bones that when they win the first time, it's tough, but when they win *again*, after all they've demonstrated, *that's* the really hard one to take
When it happens the first time, you can think "This is an aberration, this was a tantrum, people don't really stand behind this, this is not who we are". The second time around really brings home that yes, this is what many of "us" are & stand for.
But in a way, it cures you from populism. No there is no innocent, well-intentioned mass of people who have been misled. We live in liberal democracies with a lot of people who fundamentally reject key principles of liberal democracy.