What could an energy supply look like that is socially just, democratic, and climate-friendly? As part of our project "Future for all – just. ecological. feasible.", we have developed a vision together with 10 leading thinkers.
In 2048 there will be: the 1250 Watt Society, an international climate council, solidarity-based production communities, the "Good Life" pilot regions in the old lignite mining areas, and South-North partner municipalities for the exchange of climate-friendly technologies and lifestyles.
In 2048 there will no longer be: CO²Emissions – neither in the electricity sector nor in transport or space heating, the energy and industry lobby, profits in the energy sector
A report from the future
I think I'll retire this year. I've been an energy services provider (colloquially known as an e-nerd) for two decades now; 2048 will be my last year!
I'm not dissatisfied with my work. We've achieved a great deal in the past 25 years. Back then, after the massive protests of 2020, it quickly became clear that governments had to abandon not only their rivalry but also the pursuit of economic growth in order to keep the planet habitable for humans. Of course, there was strong resistance from the energy and industrial lobbies, but an entire generation demanded change and forged alliances with social movements, civil society, and the scientific community. At the same time, one weather catastrophe after another raged – governments simply ran out of good excuses, and the bad excuses cost them votes.
These new power dynamics also changed international climate policy. The competitive climate negotiations were finally replaced in 2030 by an international climate council. This council consists of 100 people, representing 100 world regions. Within these regions, there are councils of 100 people each, and so on, down to the municipal level. Decisions are always made at the smallest possible level, and council members are strictly bound by their mandates. This means they cannot decide based on their own feelings but always require the approval of their own council.
Of the former climate negotiations, only the goals remain – although we have exceeded the 1,5-degree limit, we are well on our way to limiting warming to 1,8 degrees. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) coordinates global efforts and ensures that the emissions budgets for individual regions are adhered to. If necessary, this is enforced through trade restrictions, but usually public reprimands suffice. We in Northeastern Europe have a slightly larger budget than the average in the Northern Hemisphere, simply because it can get quite cold. Nevertheless, the budget initially represented a mammoth task – no more CO2 emissions from 2035 onwards, neither in the electricity sector nor in transport or heating. We energy service providers took care of the technical aspects. However, we quickly realized that we couldn't achieve this if energy consumption continued to rise. In response, NGOs proposed the "decreasing watt limit."
Based on the model of the 2000-watt society, energy consumption was to be continuously reduced, first to 2000 watts, then to 1500, and finally to 1250 watts. Scientific studies calculated that this would require us to consume roughly the same amount as in 1985. But the pioneers from numerous "real-world laboratories" contradicted this orientation towards the past – in solidarity-based production communities, ecovillages, and cooperative enterprises, they were already living an environmentally and socially just way of life with fewer watts. This search for new forms of living and economic activity then gained further momentum through the "Good Life" pilot regions in the former lignite mining areas and the South-North Partner Communities, a program for the exchange of climate-friendly technologies and lifestyles between the Global South and North.
While meeting the remaining energy demand in a CO2-free manner was still a challenge, our electricity sector already offered good alternatives in the form of renewable energies, and concepts for managing fluctuating sources (wind power, photovoltaics) were already in place by 2020. The question, therefore, was not so much whether, but how we could organize the production and distribution of electricity in a CO2-free way. Ultimately, we took a pragmatic approach, utilizing the existing electricity grid where suitable and finding decentralized solutions for areas that had opted for them.
"The profits came to an end pretty quickly when it became clear that all the fossil fuel energy infrastructure was pretty much worthless due to eco-taxes, emissions budgets, and decreasing wattage limits. The companies subsequently went bankrupt, and the energy supply threatened to collapse."
I'm proud to have helped with this whole development and still find my work very meaningful. Especially compared to before, when my job was to secure profits for some shareholders. Those profits came to an end pretty quickly when it became clear that all the fossil fuel energy infrastructure was practically worthless due to eco-taxes, emissions budgets, and decreasing wattage limits. The companies subsequently went bankrupt, and the energy supply threatened to collapse.
Fortunately, enough municipalities and cities had already bought back power plants and grids and converted them to be more environmentally friendly. These experiences led the federal government to support municipalities in repurchasing their local energy supply. The municipalities took on this task, but only on the condition that the electricity supply would serve as a public service in the future, with free basic budgets for everyone. I am also pleased about this development because an environmentally friendly, fully renewable energy system is much easier to manage when it can be planned collectively and is not left to a market that is difficult to predict.
And I'll miss my nerd collective, too. We're one of five teams for Northeast Europe, and the atmosphere is usually great. There are good reasons for that. On the one hand, the introduction of the women's quota for energy nerds in 2035 was fantastic for me personally; before that, I felt a bit isolated. On the other hand, with the introduction of the needs-based pay system, all those people who were there primarily for the good career opportunities and salaries left, but ultimately couldn't distinguish between ineffectual and productive work, and therefore delivered more of a superficial effort. Now I only have colleagues who are passionate about the local energy system for 300 million people.
And yet I'm stopping, simply because I want to do something completely different, and since the introduction of universal public services, I no longer have to worry about my financial future. Perhaps I'll travel a bit, maybe as a passenger on one of those sailing container ships to our partner community in Tanzania. I'm curious to see what all the technologies we've adopted look like in their original form.
Photos: DFID
