Like Robert Habeck, you can take shorter showers. Or, like Robert Habeck, conjure up a “nightmare scenario” if Russian gas doesn’t return – if everything is done to prevent the energy apocalypse. But Habeck would have to hurt one party in particular.

Robert Habeck performed a gas servant in Qatar. The country is not a flawless democracy. It certainly cannot be called “value-based” energy policy. A green taboo, born out of German distress.

Robert Habeck gets America gas, even though it’s evil: fracking gas, which, when Donald Trump was still US President, had to be used for all sorts of conspiracy theories that had one thing in common: the Americans didn’t care about the warning at all Russians, but for your own wallet. They just wanted to sell their own gas to Germany at high prices. It sounded like neo-imperialism.

Now save articles for later in “Pocket”.

How times change. Today, Robert Habeck builds LNG terminals, which isn’t exactly a green idea either. Not so long ago, liquid gas was considered expensive, harmful to the climate and outdated. Today, Robert Habeck makes it look like the last resort.

Robert Habeck says that every kilowatt hour counts, so saving makes sense, including in the living room, in the bathroom, and in the kitchen. Shower on, wet in 30 seconds, shower off. lathering Shower off in a minute and a half.

Two minutes, that works. Germans currently spend eight to ten minutes under the warm running water. There’s still a lot to do. And if you like swimming in rivers and lakes, it will seem strange when outdoor pools are regulated down from 28 to 25 degrees. What, it used to be 28 degrees?

Surf tip: You can find all the news about the corona pandemic in the FOCUS Online news ticker

Nevertheless – there are people who perceive all these savings proposals as transgressive. As an encroachment on their liberties. You should take it seriously, even if you personally think differently. Habeck thinks it’s right to prescribe unreasonable demands on some Germans.

some? Not all? In fact: Habeck plans and tinkers with emergency generators, he demands sacrifices for it. But he exempts one group from his unreasonable demands: the supporters of the Greens.

Habeck doesn’t like to expect the Greens to let the last three German nuclear power plants run longer. It’s about three months, maybe six. Of a nuclear renaissance, no one talks about weight. Only political exotics dream of a nuclear turnaround. And the energy industry has long since adjusted to the phasing out of this energy, no matter how climate-friendly it may be.

Surf tip: You can find all the news about the corona pandemic in the FOCUS Online news ticker

Habeck calls it “high-risk technology” and it sounds like we should be lucky to have survived our nuclear years at all. The high-risk technology thing is of course questionable. If the things were life-threatening, they should have been shut down immediately for disaster control reasons.

If nuclear power plants were a threat to the German population, which the federal government has sworn to avert, we would have to impose relentless sanctions on the nuclear-obsessed French.

The FDP calls it “absurd” not to “extend” the use of nuclear power plants for a few months. At the moment, of course, the Liberals have the problem of explaining why they voted against it in the Bundestag. Then you would have to change the Atomic Energy Act, says parliamentary group leader Dürr. Honesty is hidden behind it: It doesn’t work with the Greens. But it would be possible.

Far more people have died in Germany from the consequences of using coal than from the allegedly high-risk technology. But for Robert Habeck, coal as a “bridging technology” is suddenly okay again in times of need.

What a different form of earth energy that could certainly be used more cleanly, but according to the verdict of the Green Federal Minister of Economics should not apply. Fracking, the technique that can be used to get gas from Germany’s depths. So much that it would last for 30 years.

An expert opinion for the old federal government came to the conclusion that this would not be dangerous. The technique of forcing a water-chemical-sand mixture into the ground under high pressure in order to free gas trapped in old rock has long been tried and tested elsewhere.

The United States has gone from being an energy importer to an energy supplier through fracking, if you think about it in all its importance. Geostrategically, too, it was a masterpiece.

Green fracking opponents like Robert Habeck counter that it would take too long. But isn’t Habeck working on shorter approval procedures because climate protection now seems more important to him than nature conservation? By the way, not all Greens think that’s great. The green district leader from Habeck’s constituency, Rainer Borcherding, has just resigned. The man finds Habeck’s wind-first policy “intolerable”.

Anyone who wants fracking can also make fracking possible. The “unconventional” fracking from harder rock should actually take longer. Fracking “unconventionally”, as was the order of the day in Germany for decades, happened very quickly – and would help replace Russian gas for at least a year, if not two.

It’s actually quite simple: A federal government that wants to expect something from its people cannot afford a communicative hole. The following applies: the greater the imposition, the higher the credibility must be. A green economics minister who makes technologies taboo when rescuing the country from energy shortages because they don’t suit his own party risks his credibility.

Much has been written about Robert Habeck’s rhetorical skills. He is considered to be a much better communicator than the Chancellor. But one day you will reach your limit with rhetoric alone: ​​If you don’t do what you say.

And Habeck has promised to do everything. And not just everything that pleases the Greens. Or from the point of view of the Green Economics Minister, it might just seem reasonable to them. The “turning point” that Olaf Scholz did not announce in the military is still ahead of Robert Habeck in energy policy.