Advertisement

The Role of German Regime Actors and Trade Unions in the Energy Transition: Agency and Power

  • Stefan Bößner
Chapter

Abstract

The German energy transition is an interesting beast. While the share of renewable energies in the power sector has reached impressive dimensions, the country’s emissions remain stubbornly high. One reason for this counter intuitive development is the significant role coal has played and continues to play in Germany’s energy mix and in the German economy. This chapter shines a light on this continuous love affair with coal and investigates how coal has historically shaped the German economy, its energy system and even the cultural identity of coal regions. Furthermore, the chapter analyses the role of German coal stakeholders such as utilities and labour unions and investigates the agency and power those stakeholders are still able to wield in order to prop up the fossil fuel-based energy system. By doing so, the chapter offers some explanations on why tackling coal as an energy source has been so difficult in Germany.

Keywords

Coal Energy transition Regime actors Unions Renewables Utilities Just transition 

References

  1. AG Energiebilanzen. 2018. Bruttostromerzeugung in Deutschland Ab 1990 Nach Energietraegern. AG Energiebilanzen. https://ag-energiebilanzen.de/index.php?article_id=29&fileName=20171221_brd_stromerzeugung1990-2017.pdf.
  2. Agora Energiewende. 2017. Kohleausstieg, Stromimporte Und -Exporte Sowie Versorgungssicherheit. Kurz-Analyse. Agora Energiewende. https://www.agora-energiewende.de/fileadmin2/Projekte/2015/Kohlekonsens/Agora_Kurzanalyse-Kohleausstieg-und-Versorgungssicherheit_10112017.pdf.
  3. Ahrens, C.D. 2017. Transition to Very High Share of Renewables in Germany. CSEE Journal of Power and Energy Systems 3(1): 17–25.  https://doi.org/10.17775/CSEEJPES.2017.0004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alves Dias, P. et al. 2018. EU Coal Regions: Opportunities and Challenges Ahead. EUR—Scientific and Technical Research Reports. Publications Office of the European Union. JRC112593.  https://doi.org/10.2760/668092 (print).
  5. Arendt, H. 1995. Macht Und Gewalt. München: Piper Verlag GmbH.Google Scholar
  6. Aretz, A., Heinbach, K., Hirschl, B. and Schröder, A. 2013. Wertschöpfungs-und Beschäftigungseffekte durch den Ausbau Erneuerbarer Energien. Institut für ökologische Wirtschaftsforschung (IÖW). https://www.ioew.de/fileadmin/user_upload/BILDER_und_Downloaddateien/Publikationen/2013/20130902_Greenpeace-Studie-Wertschoepfung.pdf.
  7. Avelino, F. and Rotmans, J. 2009. Power in Transition: An Interdisciplinary Framework to Study Power in Relation to Structural Change. European Journal of Social Theory 12(4): 543–69.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1368431009349830.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baran, J., Lewandowski, P., Szpor, A. and Witajewski, J. 2018. Coal Transition in Poland. Options for a Fair and Feasible Transition for the Polish Coal Sector. IBS. https://www.iddri.org/sites/default/files/PDF/Publications/Catalogue%20Iddri/Rapport/20180609_ReportCOAL_Poland-.pdf.
  9. Baun, M.J. 1995. The Maastricht Treaty as High Politics: Germany, France, and European Integration. Political Science Quarterly 110(4): 605–624.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2151886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bell, S.E. and York, R. 2010. Community Economic Identity: The Coal Industry and Ideology Construction in West Virginia. Rural Sociology 75(1): 111–143.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1549-0831.2009.00004.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bößner, S. 2016. Turning Energy Around: Coal and the German Energiewende. Stockholm Environment Institute. https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/Climate/SEI-DB-2016-Energiewende-and-coal.pdf.
  12. Bröcker, M. and Hoenig, A. 2018. Interview mit RWE-Chef Rolf Martin Schmitz: ‘Ein Kohleausstieg bis 2030 ist nicht zu schaffen’. RP Online. https://rp-online.de/wirtschaft/unternehmen/rwe-chef-rolf-martin-schmitz-kohleausstieg-bis-2030-unmoeglich_aid-23553795.
  13. Bryce, E. 2017. Germany’s Transition from Coal to Renewable Energy Offers Lessons for the Rest of the World. Ensia (blog). https://ensia.com/features/german-transition-coal-renewable-energy/.
  14. Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie. 2018. Eine Zielarchitektur für die Energiewende: Von politischen Zielen bis zu Einzelmaßnahmen. https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/DE/Artikel/Energie/zielarchitektur.html.
  15. Burkitt, I. 2016. Relational Agency: Relational Sociology, Agency and Interaction. European Journal of Social Theory 19(3): 322–339.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1368431015591426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Busch, C. and Gimon, E. 2014. Natural Gas versus Coal: Is Natural Gas Better for the Climate? The Electricity Journal 27(7): 97–111.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tej.2014.07.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Caldecott, B., Sartor, O. and Spencer, T. 2017. Coal Transitions. High-Level Summary for Decision Makers. IDDRI. https://coaltransitions.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/coal_synthesisreport_v04.pdf.
  18. Campbell, S. and Coenen, L. 2017. Transitioning Beyond Coal: Lessons from the Structural Renewal of Europe’s Old Industrial Regions. Australian National University. https://coaltransitions.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/australian-coal-transition-industrialization-final.pdf.
  19. Chiesura, A. and de Groot, R. 2003. Critical Natural Capital: A Socio-Cultural Perspective. Ecological Economics, Identifying Critical Natural Capital 44(2): 219–231.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00275-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. DBG. 2018. DGB-Mitgliederzahlen 2010–2017. Deutscher Gewerkschaftsbund. http://www.dgb.de/uber-uns/dgb-heute/mitgliederzahlen/2010.
  21. DEBRIV. 2018. Braunkohle in Deutschland. Daten Und Fakten 2017. Bundesverband Braunkohle. https://www.braunkohle.de/4-0-Zahlen-und-Fakten.html.
  22. Deutsche Bundesregierung. 2016. Klimaschutzplan 2050—Klimaschutzpolitische Grundsätze und Ziele der Bundesregierung. Berlin: Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz, Bau und Reaktorsicherheit.Google Scholar
  23. Diekmann, J., Breitschopf, B. and Lehr, U. 2016. Social Impacts of Renewable Energy in Germany: Size, History and Alleviation. GWS. https://www.gws-os.com/discussionpapers/gws-paper16-7.pdf.
  24. DIW Berlin. 2015. DIW Berlin: Klimabeitrag Kann CO2-Emissionen Im Stromsektor Effektiv Und Kostenguenstig Senken—Alternative Votschlaege Ieffektiv Und Teuer. DIW Berlin. http://www.claudiakemfert.de/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Kurzfassung_Studie.pdf.
  25. DPA. 2015. Kohle-Streit: Tausende demonstrieren für und gegen Braunkohle. ZEIT Online, April 25, 2015. https://www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/2015-04/sigmar-gabriel-braunkohle-demos.
  26. DPA. 2016a. Klimaschutzplan 2050: Gabriel stoppt Klimaplan und brüskiert Hendricks. Handelsblatt, August 11, Online Edition. https://www.handelsblatt.com/politik/deutschland/klimaschutzplan-2050-gabriel-stoppt-klimaplan-und-brueskiert-hendricks/14814170.html.
  27. DPA. 2016b. Regierungskonzept: Kohlekompromiss Ebnet Einigung Auf Klimaplan. Spiegel Online, November 11, sec. Wissenschaft. http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/natur/klimaschutzplan-2050-regierung-einigt-sich-nach-streit-a-1120863.html.
  28. DPA. 2018. Kosten Der Energiewende: BDI-Chef Warnt Vor Produktionsverlagerung Ins Ausland. Spiegel Online, January 8, sec. Wirtschaft. http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/unternehmen/energiewende-bdi-chef-warnt-vor-abwanderung-ins-ausland-a-1186678.html.
  29. EIA. 2018. How Much Carbon Dioxide Is Produced When Different Fuels Are Burned? US Energy Information Administration. https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=73&t=11.
  30. EurObserv’ER. 2017. The State of Renewable Energies in Europe, Edition 2017. Paris: Observ’ER. https://www.eurobserv-er.org/17th-annual-overview-barometer/.
  31. Eurostat. 2018. Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Source Sector, 12 September 2018. http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?lang=en&dataset=env_air_gge.
  32. Evans, S. 2019. How Far Would Germany’s 2038 Coal Phaseout Breach Paris Climate Goals? Carbon Brief, January 29. https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-far-would-germanys-2038-coal-phaseout-breach-paris-climate-goals.
  33. Fothergill, S. 2017. Coal Transition in the United Kingdom. Sheffield Hallam University. https://www.iddri.org/sites/default/files/PDF/Publications/Catalogue%20Iddri/Rapport/201706-iddri-climatestrategies-coal_uk.pdf.
  34. Frantal, B. 2016. Living on Coal: Mined-out Identity, Community Displacement and Forming of Anti-Coal Resistance in the Most Region, Czech Republic. Resources Policy 49: 385–393.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2016.07.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Fraunhofer ISE. 2016. Annual Electricity Spot Market Prices in Germany, 11 May 2016. https://www.energy-charts.de/price_avg.htm?year=2011&price=nominal&period=annual.
  36. Fraunhofer ISE. 2019. Net Installed Electricity Generation Capacity in Germany, 31 January 2019. https://www.energy-charts.de/power_inst.htm.
  37. Frese, A. 2018. Wenn wir die Klimafrage überdrehen, wird es gefährlich. Der Tagesspiegel Online, October 4. https://www.tagesspiegel.de/wirtschaft/gewerkschaftsboss-michael-vassiliadis-wenn-wir-die-klimafrage-ueberdrehen-wird-es-gefaehrlich/23145988.html.
  38. Fried, N. 2010. Liebe geht durch den Magen. Sueddeutsche Zeitung, 2010, Online Edition, sec. wirtschaft. https://www.sueddeutsche.de/wirtschaft/ig-metall-chef-huber-liebe-geht-durch-den-magen-1.16537.
  39. Fröhlich, A. 2015. Sozialer Blackout. Der Tagesspiegel Online, April 24. https://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/kohle-in-der-lausitz-sozialer-blackout/11687284.html.
  40. Geels, F. 2002. Technological Transitions as Evolutionary Reconfiguration Processes—A Multilevel Perspective and a Case Study. Research Policy 31(8–9): 1257–1274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Geels, F.W. 2011. The Multi-Level Perspective on Sustainability Transitions: Responses to Seven Criticisms. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions. In Press, Accepted Manuscript. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6KKF-52890RW-2/2/b84768abfe3e2d05f2830d753db4ac84.
  42. Geels, F.W. 2014. Regime Resistance against Low-Carbon Transitions: Introducing Politics and Power into the Multi-Level Perspective. Theory, Culture & Society 31(5): 21–40.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276414531627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Geels, F. and Schot, J. 2007. Typology of Sociotechnical Transition Pathways. Research Policy 36: 399–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Geels, F.W., Kern, F., Fuchs, G., Hinderer, N., Kungl, G., Mylan, J., Neukirch, M. and Wassermann, S. 2016. The Enactment of Socio-Technical Transition Pathways: A Reformulated Typology and a Comparative Multi-Level Analysis of the German and UK Low-Carbon Electricity Transitions (1990–2014). Research Policy 45(4): 896–913.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.01.015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Gerlach, F. and Ziegler, A. 2015. Konturen Einer Proaktiven Industriepolitik—Das Beispiel Deutschland. WSI Mitteilungen 68(7): 526–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Germeshausen, R. and Löschel, A. 2015. Energiestückkosten als Indikator für Wettbewerbsfähigkeit. Wirtschaftsdienst—Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftspolitik 95(1): 46–50.Google Scholar
  47. Giddens, A. 1984. The Constitution of Society. Berkeley: University of California Press. https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520057289/the-constitution-of-society.Google Scholar
  48. Greef, S. 2014. Gewerkschaften im Spiegel von Zahlen, Daten und Fakten. In: Schroeder, W. (Ed.) Handbuch Gewerkschaften in Deutschland. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, pp. 657–755.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-19496-7_25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Grubb, M., McDowall, W. and Drummond, P. 2017. On Order and Complexity in Innovations Systems: Conceptual Frameworks for Policy Mixes in Sustainability Transitions. Energy Research & Social Science: Policy Mixes for Energy Transitions 33(November): 21–34.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.09.016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Hecking, H., Kruse, J., Paschmann, M., Polisadov, A. and Wildgrube, T. 2016. Ökonomische Effekte Eines Deutschen Kohleausstiegs Auf Den Strommarkt in Deutschland Und Der EU. Cologne: EWI. https://www.ewi.research-scenarios.de/cms/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/ewi_ers_oekonomische_effekte_deutscher_kohleausstieg.pdf.Google Scholar
  51. Heinrich Böll Stiftung. 2018. Energieatlas 2018. Daten Und Fakten Ueber Die Erneuerbaren in Europa. Heinrich Böll Stiftung. https://www.boell.de/sites/default/files/energieatlas2018.pdf.
  52. Hildmann, M., Ulbig, A. and Andersson, G. 2015. Revisiting the Merit-Order Effect of Renewable Energy Sources. In: 2015 IEEE Power & Energy Society General Meeting, July, 1–1.  https://doi.org/10.1109/PESGM.2015.7286477.
  53. Hobsbawm, E. 1987. The Age of Empire. 1875–1914. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.Google Scholar
  54. Hobsbawm, E. 2012. The Age of Capital. 1848–1875. London: Abacus.Google Scholar
  55. Hockenos, P. 2017. Germany Is a Coal-Burning, Gas-Guzzling Climate Change Hypocrite. Foreign Policy (blog), November. https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/11/13/germany-is-a-coal-burning-gas-guzzling-climate-change-hypocrite/.
  56. IG BCE. 2015a. Gegen den sozialen Blackout ganzer Regionen, 14 April 2015. https://www.igbce.de/aufruf-demo-berlin-energie-25-4-2015/103140.
  57. IG BCE. 2015b. Vassiliadis: Die Politik riskiert den sozialen Blackout ganzer Regionen, 25 March 2015. https://www.igbce.de/themen/energie/xix-16-fehlentscheidung-energiepolitik/101884.
  58. IG BCE. 2018. Die Energiewende braucht einen Neustart, 16 August 2018. https://www.igbce.de/themen/energie/fakten-und-stimmen-zur-energiewende-1/171428.
  59. IG Metall. 2015. So steht die IG Metall zur Energiewende, 1 July 2015. https://www.igmetall.de/so-steht-die-ig-metall-zur-energiewende-16635.htm.
  60. Ioakimidis, C., Koukouzas, N., Chatzimichali, A., Casimiro, S. and Itskos, G. 2011. Assessment for Carbon Capture and Storage Opportunities: Greek Case Study. In: Pistikopoulos, E.N., Georgiadis, M.C. and Kokossis, A.C. (Eds.) Computer Aided Chemical Engineering. 21st European Symposium on Computer Aided Process Engineering 29: 1939–1943.  https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-54298-4.50166-5.Google Scholar
  61. IPCC. 2018. Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5°C Above Pre-Industrial Levels and Related Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways, in the Context of Strengthening the Global response to the Threat of Climate Change, Sustainable Development, and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty. Summary for Policy Makers, IPCC, Incheon, Republic of Korea.Google Scholar
  62. Jones, D., Huscher, J., Mylyvirta, L., Gierens, R., Fliskowa, J., Gutmann, K., Urbaniak, D. and Azau, S. 2016. Europe’s Dark Could. How Coal-Burning Countries Are Making Their Neighbours Sick. CAN Europe and WWF Europe. http://www.wwf.de/fileadmin/fm-wwf/Publikationen-PDF/Europes_dark_cloud_report_2016.pdf.
  63. Judt, T. 2005. Postwar. New York: The Penguin Press.Google Scholar
  64. Kemfert, C., Opitz, P., Traber, T. and Handrich, L. 2015. Deep Decarbonization in Germany: A Macro-Analysis of Economic and Political Challenges of the ‘Energiewende’ (Energy Transition). DIW Berlin: Politikberatung kompakt. DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research. https://econpapers.repec.org/bookchap/diwdiwpok/pbk93.htm.
  65. Kern, V. and Meier, F. 2018. Das sind die Mitglieder der Kohlekommission. klimareporter 2018. http://www.klimareporter.de/deutschland/das-sind-die-mitglieder-der-kohlekommission.
  66. Kost, C., Shammugam, S., Jülch, V., Nguyen, H.T. and Schlegl, T. 2018. Stromgestehungskosten Erneuerbare Energien. Maerz 2018. Fraunhofer ISE. https://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/content/dam/ise/de/documents/publications/studies/DE2018_ISE_Studie_Stromgestehungskosten_Erneuerbare_Energien.pdf.
  67. Krewitt, W. and Nitsch, J. 2003. The German Renewable Energy Sources Act—An Investment into the Future Pays off Already Today. Renewable Energy 28(4): 533–542.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-1481(02)00064-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Kungl, G. 2015. Stewards or Sticklers for Change? Incumbent Energy Providers and the Politics of the German Energy Transition. Energy Research & Social Science 8(July): 13–23.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2015.04.009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Kunz, F., Gerbaulet, C. and von Hirschhausen, C. 2013. Mittelfristige Strombedarfsdeckung durch Kraftwerke und Netze nicht gefährdet. DIW Wochenbericht 48: 14.Google Scholar
  70. Kuzemko, C., Lockwood, M., Mitchell, C. and Hoggett, R. 2016. Governing for Sustainable Energy System Change: Politics, Contexts and Contingency. Energy Research & Social Science 12(February): 96–105.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2015.12.022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Lauber, V. and Jacobsson, S. 2016. The Politics and Economics of Constructing, Contesting and Restricting Socio-Political Space for Renewables—The German Renewable Energy Act. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 18(March): 147–163.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2015.06.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Marcacci, S. 2018. Uneconomic Coal Could Be Squeezed Out of European Union Power Markets by 2030. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/energyinnovation/2018/06/11/uneconomic-coal-could-be-squeezed-out-of-european-union-power-markets-by-2030/.
  73. Meadowcroft, J. 2009. What about the Politics? Sustainable Development, Transition Management, and Long Term Energy Transitions. Policy Sciences 42(4): 323–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Newbery, D.M. 2017. Designing an Electricity Wholesale Market to Accommodate Significant Renewables Penetration: Lessons from Britain. Energy Policy Research Group Cambridge. https://www.eprg.group.cam.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/1719-Text.pdf.
  75. OECD.Stat. 2018. Trade Union Density. OECD. https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=TUD#.
  76. Oei, P-Y., Gerbaulet, C., Kemfert, C., Kunz, F., Reitz, F., Von Hirschhausen, C. and Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW Berlin). 2015. Effektive CO2-Minderung im Stromsektor: Klima-, Preis-und Beschäftigungseffekte des Klimabeitrags und alternativer Instrumente. Berlin: Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung. http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0084-diwkompakt_2015-0985.Google Scholar
  77. Öko-Institut. 2017a. Die Deutsche Braunkohlewirtschaft. Historische Entwicklungen, Ressourcen, Technik, Wirtschaftliche Strukturen Und Umweltauswirkungen. Berlin: Agora Energiwende.Google Scholar
  78. Öko-Institut. 2017b. Die Deutsche Braunkohlewirtschaft. Historische Entwicklungen, Ressourcen, Technik, Wirtschaftliche Strukturen Und Umweltauswirkungen. Berlin: Agora Energiwende. https://www.agora-energiewende.de/fileadmin2/Projekte/2017/Deutsche_Braunkohlenwirtschaft/Agora_Die-deutsche-Braunkohlenwirtschaft_WEB.pdf.
  79. Pujades, E., Willems, T., Bodeux, S., Orban, P. and Dassargues, A. 2016. Underground Pumped Storage Hydroelectricity Using Abandoned Works (Deep Mines or Open Pits) and the Impact on Groundwater Flow. Hydrogeology Journal 24(6): 1531–1546.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-016-1413-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Raven, R., Kern, F., Smith, A., Jacobsson, S. and Verhees, B. 2016. The Politics of Innovation Spaces for Low-Carbon Energy: Introduction to the Special Issue. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 18(March): 101–110.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2015.06.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Reuters. 2018. RWE und Gewerkschaft laufen Sturm gegen Pläne für Kohle-Aus. Der Tagesspiegel, September 16. https://www.tagesspiegel.de/wirtschaft/kohleausstieg-rwe-und-gewerkschaft-laufen-sturm-gegen-plaene-fuer-kohle-aus/23073646.html.
  82. Rogge, K.S. and Reichardt, K. 2016. Policy Mixes for Sustainability Transitions: An Extended Concept and Framework for Analysis. Research Policy 45(8): 1620–1635.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.04.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Rosenow, J., Kern, F. and Rogge, K. 2017. The Need for Comprehensive and Well Targeted Instrument Mixes to Stimulate Energy Transitions: The Case of Energy Efficiency Policy. Energy Research & Social Science: Policy mixes for energy transitions 33(November): 95–104.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.09.013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. RWE. 2015. Matthias Hartung: Braunkohle und Beschäftigte tragen zu Klimaschutz und Versorgungssicherheit bei. http://www.rwe.com/web/cms/de/2320/rwepower-ag/pressemitteilungen/pressemitteilungen/?pmid=4013567.
  85. Schot, J. and Geels, F.W. 2008. Strategic Niche Management and Sustainable Innovation Journeys: Theory, Findings, Research Agenda, and Policy. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 20(5): 537–554.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09537320802292651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Schroeder, W. 2008. SPD Und Gewerkschaften: Vom Wandel Einer Priviligierten Partnerschaft. WSI Mitteilungen 61(5): 231–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Sensfuß, F., Ragwitz, M. and Genoese, M. 2008. The Merit-Order Effect: A Detailed Analysis of the Price Effect of Renewable Electricity Generation on Spot Market Prices in Germany. Energy Policy 36(8): 3086–3094.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2008.03.035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Smith, A., Stirling, A. and Berkhout, F. 2005. The Governance of Sustainable Socio-Technical Transitions. Research Policy 34(10): 1491–1510.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.07.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Smith, A., Voß, J.P. and Grin, J. 2010. Innovation Studies and Sustainability Transitions: The Allure of the Multi-Level Perspective and Its Challenges. Research Policy 39(4): 435–448.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.01.023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Snow, D.A. 2013. Framing and Social Movements. In: The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social and Political Movements. American Cancer Society.  https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470674871.wbespm434.
  91. Stam, C. 2018. European Commission Abandons Plans to Raise Climate Ambition. Euractiv.Com (blog), October 2. https://www.euractiv.com/section/climate-environment/news/european-commission-to-abandon-plans-for-rising-climate-ambition/.
  92. STATISTA. 2018. Fossile Energie: Kohle in Deutschland. Hamburg.Google Scholar
  93. STATISTA. 2019. Turnover of the Mining of Coal and Lignite Industry in Germany from 2008 to 2014 (in Million Euros). https://www.statista.com/statistics/422106/turnover-mining-of-coal-and-lignite-germany/.
  94. Stratmann, K. 2018. Energie: Kohleausstieg kostet die Verbraucher Milliarden—energieintensive Branchen schlagen Alarm. Handelsblatt, August 20, Online Edition. https://www.handelsblatt.com/politik/deutschland/energie-kohleausstieg-kostet-die-verbraucher-milliarden-energieintensive-branchen-schlagen-alarm/22931396.html.
  95. Strunz, S. 2014. The German Energy Transition as a Regime Shift. Ecological Economics 100(April): 150–158.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.01.019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Sühlsen, K. and Hisschemöller, M. 2014. Lobbying the ‘Energiewende’. Assessing the Effectiveness of Strategies to Promote the Renewable Energy Business in Germany. Energy Policy 69(June): 316–325.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.02.018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Taylor, R., Sotiris, P., Wanjiru, H., van Vliet, O.P.R. and Lieu, J. 2017. D6.3: Report on Investigating Agency at Firms and Individual Household Levels, Including Method/Model Documentation and Analytical Findings. TRANSrisk Report. TRANSrisk. University of Sussex.Google Scholar
  98. Thucydides and Crawley, R. 1910. History of the Peloponnesian War. London: J.M. Dent E.P. Dutton.Google Scholar
  99. Tillich, S., Praetorius, B. and Pofalla, R. 2019. Abschlussbericht Kommission “Wachstum, Strukturwandel Und Beschäftigung”. https://www.greenpeace.de/sites/www.greenpeace.de/files/publications/abschlussbericht_kommission_wachstum_strukturwandel_und_beschaeftigung_beschluss.pdf.
  100. Tveten, Å.G., Bolkesjø, T.F., Martinsen, T. and Hvarnes, H. 2013. Solar Feed-in Tariffs and the Merit Order Effect: A Study of the German Electricity Market. Energy Policy 61(October): 761–770.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.05.060.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Umweltbundesamt. 2015. Daten Und Fakten Zu Braun-Und Steinkohlen. Status Quo Und Perspektiven. Umweltbundesamt.Google Scholar
  102. Umweltbundesamt. 2017. Daten Und Fakten Zu Braun-Und Steinkohlen. Umweltbundesamt.Google Scholar
  103. UPSW. 2018. Konzepte Für Regionale Speicher Regenerativer Energien—Underground Pumped Storage. http://www.upsw.de/index.php/en/.
  104. Van Hook, J.C. 2004. Rebuilding Germany: The Creation of the Social Market Economy, 1945–1957. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511511936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Ver.di. 2015. Breiter Konsens für Energiewende erforderlich – ver.di unterstützt BDEW-Appell, 24 April 2015. https://www.verdi.de/presse/pressemitteilungen/++co++1a07d170-ea62-11e4-a2b2-5254008a33df.
  106. Weber, M. 1922. Wirtschaft Und Gesellschaft. Grundriss Der Verstehenden Soziologie. Mohr. Vol. 1. Tuebigen.Google Scholar
  107. Wehnert, T., Best, B. and Andreeva, T. 2017. Kohleausstieg—Analyse von aktuellen Diskussionsvorschlägen und Studien. Wuppertal Institut. https://epub.wupperinst.org/frontdoor/deliver/index/docId/6686/file/6686_Kohleausstieg.pdf.
  108. Wetzel, D. 2019. Darum Wird Der Kohle-Kompromiss Noch Richtig Teuer, January 26, 2019. https://www.welt.de/wirtschaft/article187744228/Darum-wird-der-Kohle-Kompromiss-noch-richtig-teuer.html.
  109. World Bank. 2018. Industry (Including Construction), Value Added (% of GDP) | Data. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NV.IND.TOTL.ZS?locations=DE-EU.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefan Bößner
    • 1
  1. 1.Stockholm Environment InstituteStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations