German industrial output falls to 2005 levels as auto sector craters

But its also true that things CAN get through regulations. 1000 pages of environmental impact assessment takes time. But it doesn't take years. Things can be done in parallel if someone actually gave a fuck.

Sadly no one does because by the time anything starts 2-3 new governments/administrators/mayors have been in place. And people don't like to work on things someone else already took credit for.

Specifically, if you see a budget breakdown, generally things are rounded to the nearest 1%, and the sum of numbers shown often turns out not to be 100% because of that rounding.

Is it? Because that's definitely how China is doing it:

https://rhg.com/research/chinas-subsidies-are-fueling-involu...

The big problem imho is that due to greed and technical incompetence (especially regarding electronics and software), quality and value have gone down. The high prices are no longer justified, and customers are drawing the logical conclusion.

In rural regions workshops output is limited by their internet speed as the can only download that many CAD files from customer per day.

Look at a brand new, not cheap Audi Q3 with it's hard plastic grey on grey interior and then compare it to something like a Zeekr X or Xpeng G6 et al. It's night and day quality and feel.

The counterpoint to that is JP has to sacrifice (shadow subsidize exports) by managing exchange rate, i.e. JP went from 5-6T nominal GDP to 4T just through FX depreciation in last 20 years. They import expensive inputs but fx/account/spreadsheet their way into selling (up until PRC auto) competitive cars, which really domestic JP households pay for by essentially subsidizing exports (i.e. household -> industry transfer) which worked for a while with low / negative interest rates, but that era coming to end last few years ("easy" era with yen carry trade) and now there is CoL crisis especially for imports. Meanwhile PRC auto is eating at their shares.

Germany being stuck with Eurozone/eurobux has much less ability to pull this lever - they can't unilaterally devalue euro. So JP currency manipulation game, which itself is short/medium term trick that broke down with PRC's structurally cheap autos isn't option. If DE could play the FX game same will happen, they can prop up some sales (though long term can't compete with PRC producer prices), in exchange for domestic purchase power tanking.

TLDR if German could do a JP, which they can't, it will result net smaller German economy by essentially having germans subsidize exports and eat buckets of shit via imports, BUT MUCH WORSE THAN JP. JP still "only" 20% export:gdp, DE is 40%. Imagine Germany go from 4.5T GDP to to 2.5T. It would be anniliation.

E: Forgot this is all WHILE JP is still importing cheap RU LNG from Sakhalin2, despite US pressure, and only got US to back off buy also buying some LNG from alaska. Meanwhile US told Germany to jump off a cliff and they did.

In the EU, car companies only sell large (and very expensive) SUVs.

If you want to have a fully electric car on top of that, the bill will be far too high for most people.

This is also why the EU is seeing a switch where people can't buy their cars anymore and have to lease them or hope their employer will do it for them as part of a company car package.

(And then two more, Deutschlandradio and Deutsche Welle)

We can see though that it turned out to be worse for Russia than for Europe: they haven't found another export market when Europe declined imports, only other candidate is China but knowing they are the only ones, they demanded, and got, deep discounts. Pricing of "Power of Siberia" supplies is not public and it's been claimed that given transportation costs, it actually sells gas cheaper than Russian internal prices.

Germany had plans (before the Schroeder government laid the foundation for the whole nuclear shutdown) to build new and more nuclear reactors. After the initial buildup phase from 1970 to the late 1980s (latest in operation was Neckarwestheim 2 in 1989 not counting test reactors, only 9 years before Schroeder, not really a "long time"), most good sites had a reactor or maybe 2 or 3. The plan then was to plan for replacing the oldest ones and add a few more to existing sites, starting in the late 1990s when the first reactors start to approach an age of 30, to be replaced by their finished replacement reactor on the same site at 40 before 2010. Those plans included pebble bed reactors (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernkraftwerk_THTR-300 unsuccessful due to technical problems), fast breeder reactors (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNR-300 unsucessful due to green opposition) and improved PWRs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_(nuclear_reactor) co-developed with France, nowadays a few have come online).

The reason why nobody wanted to build them was green opposition. This started before Chernobyl, for example in opposing the Wackersdorf reprocessing plant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wackersdorf_reprocessing_plant and blocking the refueling operations of existing plants. The green party never got past 10%, but mostly because the parties in government accepted their demands out of fear of strengthening them, because they needed them for a coalition, or because after Chernobyl saying anything positive about nuclear became political suicide. Misinformation was rampant, any German PWR was equated to a Chernobyl in waiting. Experts disagreed and were ignored by media and politicians, shouted down by the greens as industry minions wanting to poison us all.

The reactors shut down under Schroeder were quite profitable, but getting old enough that they would have been switched off soon anyways. Nuclear reactors become more and more profitable over time, because most of the cost is in the initial construction and the financing. After the building is paid off, running cost is quite low, fuel cost is negligible compared to personnel for example. But at some point, repairs, downtime and necessary improvements make it too costly after all. That's when the originally intended replacement should have started, but this was stopped by the Schroeder goverment and the Greens.

And while I don't know whether the Russian influence on and financing of green movements is true or not, it is logical. Russia never had any chance to export its nuclear technology to western countries. Western nuclear power plants were, at least since the 80s, safer and better. The only thing the west could have bought (and actually does still buy) from Russia is uranium. But that is by far a smaller export for Russia than oil and gas. And there are uranium reserves in many western countries, Canada, Australia, the US, Germany and the Czech republic do have large deposits that are only partially exploited, and many other (third-world) countries do have uranium mines and do export (which is why the west is buying there, it's just cheaper). So uranium isn't really a reliable or big business for Russia. Oil and Gas, however, are. And since oil and gas are high-volume goods, imports are far less flexible than uranium imports. Basically, if you want it cheap, you need a pipeline, which is the perfect leash for the Russians to hold. And lo and behold, Schroeder, while making plans to shut down all German nuclear power plants over time, planned to increase gas imports from Russia, which was upheld during the later Merkel years. Schroeder was, after his term, rewarded for this with a position at Russia's state gas producer Gazprom. So it would be in Russia's interest to reduce nuclear power use in Europe and get Europe dependent on their gas.

Btw. the meaning of "green" has changed. Back in the Schroeder days and before, green was largely pro-environment and anti-nuke. But CO₂ emissions and global warming weren't a huge topic. Open-pit coal mining and coal plants were opposed on grounds of landscape destruction, resettlement and pollution. But CO₂ was never the big topic that it is nowadays. Therefore, back in those days, even for the Greens, "clean" gas power plants were a viable replacement.