From The KlimaNachrichten

Monthly newsletter from Fritz Vahrenholt

12.11.2025

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,

the global temperature in October 2025 has not changed from August. The cooling trend remains intact. The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sees a cool LA NINA approaching in the Pacific this winter, which will also lead to a further decline in global temperatures.

Belem – nothing but expenses

The 30th World Climate Conference in Belem is not yet over, but it is already becoming apparent that the event, which was announced as a “Conference of Truth”, will go down as a tipping point in the history of climate conferences. No heads of state of the four largest CO2-emitting nations China (33%), USA (12%), India (8%) and Russia (5%) are to be seen in Belem. Even before the conference, the New York Times headlined: “The whole world has had enough of climate policy.” And the fact that Bill Gates, one of the biggest supporters and sponsors of climate policy, warned against an exaggerated, short-sighted climate policy just 14 days before the conference and put prosperity at the center of the climate strategy was a bombshell.

Glenn Beck, prominent American television presenter, explains Bill Gates’ change of heart: “It’s not about science, it’s about Trump.” In other words, it’s not about persuasion, it’s about damage limitation for one’s own company, which is planning billions of dollars in investments in data centers in the USA and the world. And as things stand, they will have to resort to electricity from new gas-fired power plants in the short term, because the reactivation of old nuclear power plants will not be enough and the construction of new nuclear power plants in the USA will still take a few years.

For the climate conference in Belem, the states had to report on how they will deal with the use of coal, oil and gas in the future. The fact that only a third made a statement at all already gives an indication of the dissolving importance of the climate issue in most nations of the world. But the reports that came in have it all. Most countries reported further increases in the use of coal, oil and gas. By 2030, the reports show a 30% increase in global coal use, a 25% increase in oil and a 40% increase in gas compared to 2015. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change hoped to reduce global CO2 emissions by 45% by 2030 compared to 2015, and now they are rising further.

Only Europe is steadfastly adhering to the goal of net zero CO2 emissions by 2050. Germany, the industrial heart of Europe, is even more ambitious and, according to Axel Bojanowski, is “the “leader” among industrialized countries: It wants to be climate-neutral by 2045 – a self-destructive plan: Germany’s reduction will inevitably be compensated by rising emissions in other EU countries. This is because European emissions trading ensures that emission allowances that are not used in Germany are used in other EU countries. It is becoming increasingly clear what the Wall Street Journal meant when it described Germany’s energy policy as the “stupidest in the world”.

A few days before the conference, the European states agreed on a common goal, namely to achieve a CO2 reduction of 90% by 2040 compared to 1990. 5% of the voluntary commitment could come from emission reductions abroad, which of course also has to be paid dearly. The German environment minister celebrated this agreement as “good news for the German economy, as everyone would now have the same competitive conditions”. This statement shows how little the German government and its ministers understand about the global economy. As if German industry only exported goods to European countries. However, German goods meet a world market that does not have the burdens of CO2 taxes and high energy prices on German products and can therefore offer cheaper and cheaper prices. 50% of exports go to countries outside the EU.

Chancellor Merz and his environment minister Schneider are blatantly trivializing the German situation. Because Germany has set itself thumbscrews with the Climate Protection Act, which will have a highly painful effect in the coming years. Axel Bojanowski: “The German Climate Protection Act, cemented by the Federal Constitutional Court, seems to be the script for an economic catastrophe. It only allows Germany a residual budget of 6.7 gigatons of CO2, which is likely to be consumed by the early 2030s. Then, according to the law, there is a threat of penalties and shutdowns and restrictions on freedom in order to comply with the climate targets.”
6.7 gigatons was the remaining permissible budget according to the decision of the Federal Constitutional Court from 2020. To date, only 3.6 gigatons of this remain. Every year, the buffer is reduced by about 0.5 gigatons. By 2032 at the latest, the remaining budget will have been used up, and Germany will have reached the end of the flagpole of the Federal Constitutional Court. This will happen in the next legislative period. Not just in 2040.

And Chancellor Merz spreads negligent whitewashing in his 5-minute speech in Belem in front of a half-empty hall: “The economy is not the problem. Our economy is the key to protecting our climate even better. Does the Chancellor not know what a threatening situation our industry is in?
 

The scandal surrounding the Tropical Forest Fund TFFF

Probably the only outcome of the Belem conference will be the establishment of an investment fund proposed by Brazilian President Lula to finance the protection of tropical forests. The fund works as follows: The donor countries pay 25 billion dollars into the fund. Private investors (investment funds) are to pay in 100 billion. The donor countries receive a yield of about 4.0-4.8%, which corresponds to the yield on their government bonds, because they usually have to raise the money through government debt. The return on private investors is 5.8 to 7.2%. The fund’s money is invested in government bonds of emerging markets, which yield comparatively high interest rates due to the higher risk (Brazilian government bonds currently at 12.25%). Private investors are the first to be served, followed by donor countries. If there is anything left over after the profit distribution for private investors and donor countries, the amount will be distributed to 74 countries with tropical forests. It is hoped that in this way 3-4 billion dollars a year will be paid out to the tropical forest countries.

The catch is that in order for investors to bite at all, it is planned that private investors will be favoured in the order of payment: first the private ones, then the donor states. In addition, donor countries must insure the fund against default. A default by an emerging market can quickly lead to the fund’s insolvency. Then the taxpayers of the donor countries must be held liable for it and, in extreme cases, lose their capital.

In preparation for Belem, there was a fundamental dispute between the Ministry of Finance and the Federal Chancellery over Germany’s participation in the fund. The Federal Chancellery was clearly in favor of participation and a participation of at least 1 billion dollars. It was assisted by the Ministry of the Environment under Minister Schneider and the Ministry of Development under Minister Alabali-Radovan. The Ministry of Finance under Lars Klingbeil vehemently disagreed, saw the fund as a billion-dollar risk and doubted the sustainability of the fund structure. And in fact, the model is structurally disadvantageous for the German taxpayer. You could also say: We subsidize the returns of private investors with public money and take over the default guarantee for Blackrock and CO. This is the reason why the Federal Ministry of Finance is stubbornly blocking Germany’s participation in the fund. It can be stated bluntly that the Federal Ministry of Finance has so far bravely defended the interests of the German taxpayer against the interests of BlackRock and Co.

This is the background to the fact that Chancellor Merz could not name a figure (“a considerable amount”) in Belem. The billion euros or dollars are now to be found in the budget adjustment for the 2026 federal budget, which will take place this week, in order to be able to pass the federal budget on November 28. It is to be expected that the SPD will withdraw the flag. But it could be a Pyrrhic victory for Chancellor Merz, who will then have taken into account the interests of international financial investors for everyone to see. Especially if the fund were to get into trouble.

Whether the fund will come in the end is still questionable, as it will only come into force when the donor states have subscribed to 10 billion dollars. So far (excluding Germany) 5.6 billion have been collected. The USA and Great Britain have already waved off. When the fund comes, the first to benefit are the investment companies with high returns backed by governments, and then the emerging markets, which can sell their high-risk government bonds. It is not yet clear whether the tropical forest will benefit in this unmanageable financial jungle. The biggest risk remains with donor countries, which are putting their taxpayers’ money at risk with the catchy story of saving the rainforest.

Sincerely,

Fritz Vahrenholt