After the no to the CO2 law, environmentalists are hoping for the cantons
Climate protection
After the no to the CO2 law, the cantons should reduce emissions – now there is a showdown at the ballot box in Zurich
After the no to the CO2 law, the environmentalists are hoping for the cantons. A groundbreaking vote is due to take place in Switzerland’s largest canton at the weekend. The fronts run quickly the same as in the national climate vote in June.
Now the cantons have to fix it. That has been the tenor in the camp of environmentalists since it was clear that Switzerland will not receive a new climate law so soon. As a reminder: On June 13th, the people briefly presented the CO2 law. Environment Minister Simonetta Sommaruga will soon have a new car. But it will be years before the law comes into force – time that Switzerland actually does not have. Because by 2030 they must have cut their greenhouse gas emissions by half compared to 1990 levels.
That is why all eyes are now on the cantons. There the rules for the building sector are tightened. In some places, more climate-friendly energy laws targeting oil and gas heating systems by name are already in force. Elsewhere there is still a dispute. For example in Zurich. This weekend, the electorate will decide how things should continue in the future with the 120,000 oil and gas heating systems that are always in operation in the canton – and cause 40 percent of CO2 emissions.
An explosive starting position
Just a few months after the no to the CO2 Act, of all places, the population in the largest canton is going to the ballot box to vote on a climate-relevant bill. That is already explosive in itself. In addition, the political fronts are running similarly to the vote in June. At that time, SVP, homeowners and the oil industry had announced the CO2 law against all other parties and the economic umbrella organization Economiesuisse.
Now history should repeat itself. On their website, the no camp manages the triumph of summer. «CO2 law through the back door? Coercion! »Is what they say there. Former SVP National Councilor Hans Egloff fought on the front line against the law. Egloff is president of the national homeowners association and says the new energy law is going too far because it claims to make Zurich a model canton. That is why the referendum was called.
A thorn in Egloff’s side are the new rules for fossil heating in particular. If homeowners want to replace their old oil or gas heating, when will they switch to a climate-neutral heating system – such as a heat pump – in the future. Exceptions are only provided in hardship cases: If the costs for the climate-neutral solution over the entire service life are five percent higher than those for an oil or gas heating system, a heating system can be installed again. In fact, says Hans Egloff, this is “a compulsion to change” – and it goes too far.
In Aargau, Bern and Solothurn the people said no
The energy law revisions in the cantons go back to an agreement of the energy directors on dealing with fossil heating. The goal: to switch to climate-friendly systems. Each canton decides for itself on the implementation details. The fact that the new energy laws sometimes have a difficult time at the ballot box has been shown in Aargau, Bern and Solothurn, for example. There they were chosen. In the majority of the cantons – 17 in total – new laws are already in place.
Bastien Girod says it is important that a clear signal now comes from Zurich. “This law is very urgent, especially since we are currently not moving at the federal level,” says the Zurich National Council and President of the National Council Environment Commission.
The omens are good for those in favor. The FDP, which passed the yes slogan in the vote on the national CO2 law, but was anything but united behind the law, is now more united in Zurich. In addition, the population of Zurich approved the CO2 Act in June with 55 percent yes votes. And yet the nervousness in the run-up to the vote is palpable. This became apparent when the Zurich tenants’ association refrained from making a voting recommendation. The background: The association fears that landlords will use energy-saving renovations to issue mass layoffs. In the supporters ‘camp, there was great outrage about the lack of backing from the tenants’ association.