MARBURG, Germany — This fairy-tale
town is stuck in the middle of a utopian struggle over renewable energy. The
town council’s decision to require solar-heating panels has thrown Marburg into a vehement
debate over the boundaries of ecological good citizenship and led opponents to
charge that their genteel town has turned into a “green dictatorship.”
Old and new coexist in Marburg, where a hilltop
castle overlooks a solar-powered building. The city seeks to expand solar use. Some Marburg residents are concerned about how
pending solar rules will affect historic buildings like these in the city
center.
The town council took the significant step
in June of moving from merely encouraging citizens to install solar panels to
making them an obligation. The ordinance, the first of its kind in Germany, will
require solar panels not only on new buildings, which fewer people oppose, but
also on existing homes that undergo renovations or get new heating systems or
roof repairs.
To give the regulation teeth, a fine of
1,000 euros, about $1,500, awaits those who do not comply.
Critics howled that the rule, which is to
go into effect on Oct. 1, constituted an attack on the rights of property
owners. The regional government in Giessen
stepped in and warned that it would overturn the rule.
City officials in Marburg
said, in turn, that they would take their case either to administrative court
or all the way to the Hessian state capital, where they would try to get the
state building code changed to protect their ordinance from officials in Giessen.
In the middle of this political chess match
sit homeowners like Götz Schönherr.
From his deck, Mr. Schönherr can see the
town’s famous hilltop Gothic castle as well as two of its three
power-generating windmills. On his roof, a solar panel glints in the sunlight.
He already uses the solar energy to heat his water,
which has allowed him to turn off his boiler for roughly six months a year, a
boon for his pocketbook but a decision he said he made for the sake of the
environment.
And yet Mr. Schönherr opposes the new
ordinance.
Mr. Schönherr had hoped to reinsulate his
home, but to do so, and to satisfy the solar regulation, he would have to
install a larger solar panel. It would cost him close to $8,000.
“That leads, in my case, and I would think
in other cases as well, that people say, ‘Well, let’s just not reinsulate the
roof,’ ” Mr. Schönherr said. “So it’s absolutely counterproductive.”
Officials in Giessen agree. “We have no problem with the
use of solar energy,” said Manfred Kersten, press spokesman for the regional
government in Giessen,
“but this was a poorly constructed ordinance.”
Germany is one of the world’s top champions of reducing
greenhouse gas emissions and promoting renewable energy. Thanks to hefty
federal subsidies, the country is by far the largest market for photovoltaic
systems, which convert sunlight into electricity.
Marburg, a historic university town where the Brothers
Grimm once studied, is a model of enlightened energy production and
consumption. In addition to the windmills and solar installations, the town’s
utility company buys hydroelectric power from Austria, is transitioning its fleet
of buses and other vehicles to natural gas and even lights footpaths with
solar-powered lamps. As a result, the Marburg dispute sometimes feels like an
argument between the enlightened environmentalists and the really enlightened
environmentalists.
“Marburg is already a leader when it comes
to the use of solar energy, but up until now they’ve always tried to convince
people rather than forcing them,” said Hermann Uchtmann, the opposition
politician behind the “green dictatorship” charge who leads a local citizens
political group, the Marburger Bürgerliste.
Like Mr. Schönherr, who is a member of the
group, Mr. Uchtmann hardly fits the predictable mold of the Luddite opponent of
renewable energy. He is a chemist at the local university who once built a
solar-powered desalinization station for the town’s sister city, Sfax, Tunisia.
“It’s unfortunate that they decided to
compel people, because I think you breed opponents that way rather than friends
of solar energy,” Mr. Uchtmann said. He said he found the demands too invasive
for existing homes, especially in the case of older citizens who might not live
long enough to justify the upfront costs of installing the solar systems.
“I’m right up against the border myself,”
said Mr. Uchtmann, who is 64. But he said he could support a solar-heating
requirement for new buildings.
Because the town of 80,000 has a level
population and relatively few new homes are built here, restricting the measure
to new construction would not go far enough for the politicians behind it.
“We have a serious energy problem with the
older homes,” Marburg’s
deputy mayor, Franz Kahle, said in an interview at the historic town hall on
the city’s colorful market square. To make a real leap forward, he said, a
dramatic step was necessary.
“Before, solar installations were the
exception and their absence was the rule,” Mr. Kahle said. “We want to get to
the point where the opposite is the case.”
He pointed out that building codes
constantly dictated what property owners could and could not do with their
homes and said that the solar regulation already offered exceptions for cases
of hardship or alternatives for those living in the shadiest spots.
Marburg’s law has attracted attention nationwide as a model
for environmentally active politicians.
“What they are doing in Marburg
is good and progressive, and we, and other cities, need to move forward with
similar initiatives as well,” said Birgit Simon, deputy mayor of Offenbach am Main and a
member of the Green Party . She said she hoped a
coalition of left-of-center parties in the state Parliament could change the
building codes to make the Marburg
ordinance sustainable and imitable.
Among Marburgers interviewed one sunny
afternoon this week, there was near universal support for the ordinance’s goals
but an almost equal level of confusion about its exact nature.
“In principle, it’s a really good idea,”
said Cornelia Janus, 35, who works at the university. But she questioned
whether the costs might be too high and whether historic buildings and
monuments would be protected.
“For a city like Marburg,” she said, gazing toward the
churches and the castle arrayed along the hillside, which draw tourists from
around the world, “that’s pretty important too.”
By NICHOLAS KULISH ; Published: August 6, 2008; Source: NY Times
|