Tesla: DT. Approval procedures hindrance for climate-relevant projects

Article menu

Tesla: DT. Approval procedures hindrance for climate-relevant projects-tesla

In a ten-sided paper, the “Tesla Manufacturing Brandenburg SE” criticizes, ie the offshoot of the car manufacturer for the construction of the plant in Grunheide, the obstacles of German approval rights. Writing to the Annual Administrative Court Berlin-Brandenburg as “Amicus Curie Letter” is to be understood as an indirect support letter for a lawsuit of German Environmental Aid (DUH). The DUH currently leads a legal dispute to the Federal Republic to request a concrete government program for the implementation of the Paris Climate Protection Agreement signed by Germany.

At the end of 2019, Tesla had announced under a lot of applause among other things from the part of politics to build an electric car plant in Germany. In July, to Teslas plans in Grunheide, the production is to start, but the official approval for the project is still out, Tesla is ranging with preliminary permits through the project. If Tesla is denied the pending and definitive environmental approval, the E-Auto manufacturer would have to remove the entire terrain at its own expense. In the fire letter, Tesla calls on as “Amicus Curiae” of the DUH the Federal Republic of granting energy-turning projects a licensing priority in order to achieve the national climate protection target 2030 established in the Federal Climate Protection Act.

This means that Germany must reduce its CO2 emissions by 2030 by at least 55 percent compared to 1990. “This necessarily follows that Germany must modernize, including the way it allows the production of sustainable goods and services and the construction of the necessary infrastructure,” says in writing. Tesla Brandenburg is familiar with the demands of DUH and believed that it lies in the interest of the Supervisory Board and the participants of this procedure to communicate his experiences with German approval procedures. This is also derived from the same proposals for significant improvements that are directly related to the appeal, namely the establishment of a suitable climate protection program.

With the production capacity of 500 targeted in greenhide.000 Electric cars A year ago, about 15 million tonnes of CO2 emissions on Europe’s roads would be avoided every year, Tesla writes about the climate benefit of E cars. A delay of only one month in the approval of the plant in Grunheiden would therefore “lead to over one million tonnes of additional CO2 emissions”. The elimination of unnecessary delays and the acceleration of the final approval decision can help, on the other hand, that Germany can also achieve its objectives as defined in the Federal Climate Protection Act also argues Tesla.

Tesla demands rights for climate-relevant projects

Teslas goal, only 20 months after the location decision with production, should not be ambitious, which can be observed with similar works in China, which are built within just one year, good. “Every investment project that intends to stop dangerous climate change should be implemented with a higher urgency and a narrow schedule,” says Tesla. The German approval framework for industrial and infrastructure projects as well as for spatial planning, however, are “in direct opposition to the urgency necessary for the fight against climate change of the planning and realization of such projects”.

In fact, German licensing procedures have not changed fundamentally for decades: “They come from a time in which the need to deal with global sustainability challenges were far less urgent than today”. For Tesla Brandenburg and the application for approval for the Grunheiden plant, this leads to “that there are 16 months after applying for approval still no timetable for the granting of the final approval“. This result is “particularly irritating, as the fundamental admissibility of the project was audited and confirmed by several courts, and no single judicial decision has questioned the fundamental admissibility of the project,” says Tesla.

Based on the experiences that Tesla Brandenburg has made the approval procedure in recent years, Tesla believes that there is a better way. For example, climate-relevant projects should be delimited by non-sustainable projects, calls Tesla. The approval processes for sustainable projects should also be smeared and accelerated, “by creating special, almost track approval procedures for them.”In addition, the indirect environmental impact of projects should also be considered in approval.

Tesla also observed that “in many cases the specific technical knowledge and qualifications on the activities to be approved are not available in the competent authority, and therefore also demands the establishment of a national resource pool of subject matter experts, as the lack of immediate expertise Too unnecessary long feedback loops. “The establishment of a flexible national pool of experts with technical expertise managed by the competent federal authorities would solve this problem,” says Tesla.

In summary, Tesla writes that the lengthy and cumbersome approval processes in Germany “detrimental investment in clean energy projects and infrastructure”. This makes it “practically impossible for Germany to achieve its climate goals”. Tesla Brandenburg therefore proposes “Respectfully that the Federal Republic of Germany does the basic changes to the relevant approval and spatial declarations and planning laws and procedures requested by DUH in this procedure immediately make the fastest possible implementation of sustainable projects to guarantee”. Only then will it be possible to achieve the required goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Please follow and like us:

4 thoughts on “Tesla: DT. Approval procedures hindrance for climate-relevant projects”

  1. As long as clubs from Bavaria, under the cover coils of environmental protection (redmilan, Zuneissichse, Schlingnatter) wind turbines to prevent through alleged citizens initiatives to prevent;
    And so long public broadcasters make themselves on the linguistic tube of Fake News-Producing Climate Dealers without performing a fact check before publishing in television ……. poor Germany.

  2. Now the construction of car is a climate-relevant project, but in the sense of a stress. Since you should leave the church in the village. An electric car is still a car. Rather, I see the argument of jobs as asset Pro Tesla factory.

    As far as approval procedures in Germany, I want to agree completely. This is a nightmare. That because everyone is not directly affected by directly affected and even can intervene legally, is completely wrong. And our officials in the authorities are neither fast nor dynamic or even smart, the regulations and processes are scary. So you can hardly make. There must be something to change urgently.

    Where you have to say, Tesla has behaved and commissioned a specialized planning office that is familiar with salamitics to authorities and paper floods for the opponents very well and successfully acted. Tesla himself has fallen back as unfamiliar and barely expressed something if any completely permanent interim decision came into the media. Which did not contribute insignificantly to success.

    In this respect, the Tesla flaps to open and operate the factory. And now, just before the end, you can also let out a bit of the displeasure.

  3. Germany is not China, yes what a surprise. The good Elon Musk will make other acquaintances. For example with unions that like he likes it so much ;-). Approval procedures are of course 5 quite scary and annoying. Very clear and so far known. You should have known that before.
    Work with the DUH … Well, the Abmahnverein also consists of Pseudo environmentalists who make the bags full and complain against everything that is not at three on the trees. With progress, climate protection & Co have little to do. Otherwise a wind farm would be more important than a bird what breeds somewhere in anywhere.

  4. A delay of only one month in the approval of the plant in Grunheiden would therefore “lead to over one million tonnes of additional CO2 emissions”.
    Has anyone right?
    A few data about it:
    Planned monthly production Grunheide at the beginning max. Ca. 40.000 Piece / month (planned up to 500.000 car / year)
    Average monthly driving power car Germany: CA. 1000 km / month (CA. 12000 km / year)
    Adoption of medium consumption cars with a conventional gasoline engine CA. 6 liters / 100 km
    CO2 emissions per liter of gasoline 2.5 (2.38) kg CO2 / liter

    Have fun in the calculation, contact me tonight again!


Leave a Comment