Guest article by Heinrich Strößenreuther – “Apart from ideological reasons, there are no arguments against a speed limit”

Diving can be a nice hobby. Into the blue, enjoy depths, colors and fish without worrying. But it also becomes dangerous when it comes to surfacing. The so-called remaining reserve in a scuba tank and the emergence table are then the decisive factor: every breath, every minute counts. Hesitation can be deadly.

In a figurative sense, the Federal Constitutional Court also spoke of such a reserve necessary for survival in its landmark judgment on the climate. The remaining budget, i.e. the maximum amount of greenhouse gases that can still be emitted, results from the Paris climate agreement. Despite progress, political decisions are being made too slowly and too much “in the dark”. Every tonne of carbon dioxide counts, today more than tomorrow. Every tonne of CO2 that is not saved increases the risk of permanent damage.

The constitutional court argues that the liberties of later generations must be protected, which is actually a fundamentally liberal attitude. It is then all the more incomprehensible that the FDP-led Ministry of Transport neither adheres to nor takes up the concepts of freedom of the climate goals. Rather, the FDP parliamentary group is working on fine-tuning the precise reduction targets expressed in annual figures – one of the achievements of the last CDU-led federal government.

A “time is right” measure is the speed limit

But the truth is also that we as the CDU do not yet have a satisfactory answer as to how we ourselves want to protect future freedom in the face of climate change. Fast and effective measures are needed, especially in the transport sector.

Some of these measures are long overdue, so I call them the “time has come” measures. Some are measures from the “actually one should” drawer. Measures that we as KlimaUnion introduced in 2021 in a position paper in the internal party discussion. Others belong to the “not even remotely understood” measures that have not yet arrived even in the red-green climate movement. Here the Union would have the unique opportunity to become a pioneer – and thus once again a competent force in climate policy.

A “time is right” measure is the speed limit. A speed limit of 130 km/h on motorways can be implemented within a few months and reduces CO2 emissions from passenger cars by almost five percent in the blink of an eye. A two-thirds majority of voters are behind it, mostly older people and women. The majority of ADAC members are in favor of Tempo 130, big parties like the SPD and Bündnis 90/Die Grünen. Only three parties are reluctant to agree to a speed limit: the AfD, the FDP, but also parts of my party, the CDU and the CSU.

+ Pope Benedict XVI: Memoirs of the German Pope

+ Duels 2023: Who against whom and what will become of the turning point?

+ Narco-paradise Netherlands: A criminal report

Click here for the current magazine

Even the ADAC would no longer refuse

It would now be a sign of climate policy credibility if the Union were to decide on the speed limit of 130 in the Bundestag, together with the old coalition partner SPD and the Greens, who have long since become a trustworthy partner of the Union at state level. Together, the political project could be implemented in a state-supporting attitude. Even the ADAC would no longer refuse and refrain from the anti-campaign.

As a climate union, we asked our members, who come from the middle of the union, about the speed limit. Well over 70 percent are behind it – interestingly, with an argument that has hardly played a role in the public discussion so far: We know speed limits of 100 to 140 kilometers per hour from our neighboring European countries. While there is more of a “war” on the road in this country after crossing the border into Germany, we all enjoy the feeling of quiet, peaceful and flowing driving. The members of the KlimaUnion also want this feeling of chilled driving in Germany. As is probably the vast majority of the population.

Who hasn’t felt the fear of a speeding car approaching from behind at 200 km/h?

After all, who has never felt the fear when a speeder approaches their own car from behind at 200 km/h? Even small mistakes when steering, the famous “unexplained circumstances”, can then lead to a life-threatening collision. In fact, almost 90 percent of drivers would benefit from a speed limit, because they drive (including speedometer tolerance) under 140 kilometers per hour, according to the German Economic Institute. The small frenzied minority that absolutely wants to drive faster will certainly be able to live with it when the best liberal jargon soon says: “Free from fear for free citizens”.

Incidentally, as a CDU member, I also observe changes in the direction of the speed limit on other levels. 360 mayors are in favor of optional regulations for 30 km/h in the municipalities, 102 of them from the Union and 94 non-party mayors, many of whom previously belonged to the Union parties.

Apart from ideological reasons, there are no viable arguments for my party and the FDP to reject a speed limit. The time is ripe: those who do not decide to set a speed of 130 are complicit in the impending climate catastrophe. And that for cheap, party-internal career reasons.

The ordinary citizen sponsors not only the company cars of the upper class with his wage and value added tax

Let’s move on to the “actually you should” drawer. In other words, the measures that should have been adopted long ago and in which the CDU, as the opposition party, could drive the traffic light government in front of it. With their wage and value added tax, ordinary citizens not only sponsor the company cars of the upper class, but also 76 percent of the CO2 emissions of new cars. That can no longer be explained to the voters of a popular party like the CDU.

In order to become climate-neutral as quickly as possible, to challenge and promote the German automotive industry, only fully electrically operated company cars should be tax-deductible from now on. I almost doubt whether it will still be possible to build up sustainable competitive advantages – in fact, the only thing left to do is to reduce the competitive disadvantages compared to Tesla and Co. as quickly as possible.

That could really be sold to anyone, especially our voters in the liberal-conservative camp, who are interested in keeping industry strong in Germany. With such measures, we could advertise the “first climate-neutral industrialized country in the world”, tell of the third “climate-neutral economic miracle” or of the “industrial policy development of tomorrow’s climate prosperity”.

There is no way around electrifying the autobahns

Finally, let me take a look at the “not even remotely understood” measures: Today, rail transports around 18 percent of all freight traffic, not including planes, ships and pipelines. Even if rail freight traffic doubled within a decade or two, two-thirds would still be transported by road. So there is no way around electrifying the autobahns.

First tests with overhead lines are running, the technology for this has been tried and tested in the railways for years. This year, 55 battery-powered trains will go into operation in Schleswig-Holstein, which only need a few kilometers of overhead line and then serve the non-electrified routes with a 100% charge. Even a smart partial equipping of the motorway network with this technology could make a big difference.

One can only encourage ministers at the state level to exert their influence through the Bundesrat. Because just looking at the necessary railway expansion, as propagated by the FDP-led Ministry of Transport, will not be enough – and I say that as someone who has been for more than ten years for the Deutsche Bahn and competitors has held positions of responsibility.

FDP, SPD and Greens leave these issues alone, they go under in the bickering of the traffic light government

Without electrified highways, we will be in the deep red of the safety reserve. Then the air becomes scarce, surfacing life-threatening. That would be “climate policy in the dark”, as already criticized by the Federal Constitutional Court.

To return to my picture from diving: In a world that is permanently warming by 1.5 degrees, more than 70 percent of all corals are said to have disappeared. If we exceed the two-degree mark, almost 99 percent of the corals would be lost, with serious consequences for the marine food chain.

Tempo 130, the electrification of the highways and the reprivileging of company car subsidies would be stations of emergence. So that a trip into the blue becomes safe compliance with the climate goals. So that we make it possible for future generations to live on and observe their freedom rights. FDP, SPD and Greens leave these issues alone, they go under in the bickering of the traffic light government. This is the climate policy emergence chance for the CDU and CSU. We just have to use them boldly.