Dieser Artikel ist auch in deutscher Sprache verfügbar: Zum deutschen Artikel.
In fact, it is not necessarily the case that a party has to go along with the U-turns at local level that its party is making in the federal government. Take, for example, the Building Modernisation Act, through which the Merz government is suggesting to the public that it still makes sense to invest money in fossil fuel heating systems. This at a time when international conflicts have long since become conflicts over fossil fuels and prices on the world market are skyrocketing.
The CDU group on Leipzig City Council not only attempted, through a motion, to cancel the neighbourhood association LQEG – which is tasked with managing the expansion of district heating – once again; it also tabled a substantial parliamentary question that called into question Leipzig’s entire heating plan.
This interpellation was called on 3 September, immediately following the CDU parliamentary group’s defeat in the vote on LQEG. Yet even the CDU parliamentary group leader, Michael Weickert, clearly did not feel inclined to open a new debate on the matter.
In fact, the response from the Sustainable Development and Climate Protection Department left nothing to be desired in terms of clarity.
It explained very clearly why Leipzig – earlier than many other German cities – embarked on district heating planning. And why the district heating connection for new urban neighbourhoods – which the CDU parliamentary group has so strongly questioned – is a sensible way of securing the city’s heat supply even when fossil fuels simply become ever more expensive or are no longer available at all.
An overview of the key questions and answers
Will the city of Leipzig continue to prioritise district heating for the more densely populated inner-city areas, even under the future federal legal framework, which will be significantly more open to new technologies?
Yes, district heating generally remains the most robust, secure and economical solution in the long term for highly densely populated inner-city areas. The ability to supply areas with high heat demand, the use of existing infrastructure, and the potential to systematically harness renewable heat and waste heat make it a key component of Leipzig’s heat supply and the preferred solution for densely populated inner-city areas.
Being open to different technologies does not mean that every technology is equally suitable for every location. At the same time, it would be economically inefficient to operate parallel heat supply infrastructures in the long term, some of which would see declining utilisation rates. The spatial differentiation of the heating plan therefore remains technically sound.
What impact does the city expect on the economic viability and further expansion of Leipzig’s district heating network?
The GModG is a very important piece of legislation, but it is not the only one that determines the economic viability of district heating expansion. The Federal Government has only just presented the key points of the district heating package, thereby reinforcing the view that the expansion of district heating networks is a central pillar on the path to a climate-neutral heat supply.
Viewed in isolation, the GModG increases the economic risk of district heating expansion in the short term. District heating expansion requires high upfront investment and sufficiently high connection rates. If property owners potentially postpone replacing their heating systems or opt once again for gas or hybrid heating systems, the targeted connection rates may take longer to materialise. However, further adjustments to the legal framework could counteract this.
In any case, the competitive position of decarbonised district heating is likely to improve in the long term, as fossil fuel heating systems face increasing requirements for climate-neutral fuels, as well as rising CO₂, fuel and infrastructure costs. Furthermore, district heating generated from local sources has the potential to insulate consumers from the international market risks associated with natural gas. All of this, as outlined in the heating plan, argues in favour of a significant expansion of existing district heating infrastructure.
Does the city administration anticipate, as a result of the GModG, a decline in planned district heating connections in favour of individual heating solutions (e.g. gas-hybrid heating systems or heat pumps)?
Property owners have the option of continuing to use existing gas heating systems for longer or, in the event of faults, to opt for repairs and temporary solutions in the first instance. It remains to be seen whether this will actually reduce the incentive to connect to district heating; after all, the choice of heating technology depends on many factors (cost-effectiveness, long-term prospects, effort involved, contribution to climate protection, etc.).
Even if interest in district heating connections were to decline in the short term, this is more likely to result in a delay rather than a permanent lack of demand for district heating. However, from the city administration’s perspective, the long-term need for a climate-neutral and economically viable heat supply remains.
What are the implications, from the city administration’s perspective, for ongoing or planned investments by Leipzig’s municipal utilities in the expansion of district heating?
The decarbonisation of the heat supply through the expansion and transformation of district heating must and should continue, given the statutory target year of 2045 and the City of Leipzig’s target year of 2038, within the framework conditions agreed by the city and municipal utilities.
The network expansion may need to be geared even more strongly towards heat density, the likelihood of connections and economic viability, so that investments and customer acquisition are even more closely interlinked. In general, however, a further increase in investment and the associated rise in financial requirements are to be expected.
What impact does the City of Leipzig expect on tenants in terms of future heating and service charges? (The explanatory notes to the draft bill themselves indicate that no significant changes are to be expected for tenants with regard to service charges)
The assertion that the GModG will not entail any significant changes to service charges falls short in the long term. From 2028, for newly installed fossil fuel heating systems, certain gas network, CO₂ and other fuel costs will be shared between landlords and tenants. This means that, in future, the tenant will no longer bear the running cost risks alone; a significant proportion will remain with the landlord. It remains to be seen to what extent the landlord will pass on the higher costs to the tenant through rent increases.
Investment decisions should therefore not be guided by today’s gas price, but by the question of which heating system will result in the lowest and most reliable total costs for owners and tenants over the entire lifetime of the property.
This overall economic assessment, which was carried out as part of the heating plan, shows that, in suitable areas, decarbonised district heating can offer significant long-term advantages in this regard. In particular, the integration of local heat sources such as solar thermal energy or waste heat significantly reduces fuel price risks.
How does the city administration assess the greater openness towards gas and hybrid heating systems envisaged in the GModG against the backdrop of Leipzig’s climate protection targets?
The GModG creates greater freedom of choice in the short term. However, the statutory objective of the GModG – a greenhouse gas-neutral heat supply by 2045 – remains unchanged. A gas heating system newly installed today can still be operated in 2040 or 2045, but must then be supplied with fuels that are either largely or entirely climate-neutral.
This results in a delayed effect. With a delayed transition, the Act will increase the pressure on legislators and the public to act and invest in the 2030s and 2040s.
Overall assessment:
The GModG strengthens Leipzig’s heating planning. The greater the openness to individual technologies, the more important long-term infrastructure planning becomes. In the short term, district heating, heat pumps, gas and hybrid solutions will compete more intensely with one another.
In the long term, however, the key framework conditions will remain in place – climate neutrality by 2045 at the latest, increasing requirements for fossil fuel heating systems, the costs of climate-neutral fuels and the economic necessity of avoiding parallel infrastructure.
Empfohlen auf LZ
So können Sie die Berichterstattung der Leipziger Zeitung unterstützen:
There is one comment