麻豆无码版

There is a wide gap between environmental rhetoric and climate action in Germany, as displayed by the 鈥渋nadequate compromise鈥� found by the coal exit commission, which 鈥渄oes not amount to a coherent response to the climate emergency,鈥� writes Adam Tooze, director of the European Institute at Columbia University, in an article for Social Europe. The recommendations are 鈥渁 devastating display of parochialism and a denial, for the sake of political convenience, of the clear implications of climate science. [鈥�] Incrementalism and narrow political pragmatism are easily confused with 鈥榬ealism鈥�.鈥� Tooze compares the situation with the management of the eurozone crisis: 鈥淭here are situations where what seems pragmatic falls woefully short of what is necessary. This was the case during the eurozone crisis. It is even more so in the face of the climate emergency, where the costs rise exponentially with every year of delay.鈥� Tooze calls the 鈥減olitical realism鈥� exhibited by the coal commission 鈥渋n fact completely unrealistic. One can only hope that on climate 鈥� if not to date the eurozone 鈥� shifts within European and German politics are enough to break through Berlin鈥檚 highly developed capacity for denial.鈥�

骋别谤尘补苍测鈥檚 coal exit 肠辞尘尘颈蝉蝉颈辞苍听has agreed to phase out coal-fired power plants by 2038, but Merkel鈥檚 government coalition聽must still decide聽on binding legislation that will turn the exit into reality. Scientists, economists and NGOs have criticised the coal commission鈥檚 recommendations for their lack of ambition and said they are not in line with the Paris Climate Agreement goals.