Structural Failure and Fear of Responsibility: The Intellectual Endgame of the Coal Phase-Out – When Responsibility Becomes Flight

The coal phase-out, once celebrated as a landmark project, has become a symbol of political irresponsibility. Instead of collaborative solutions, mutual blame, evasive maneuvers, and paralyzing disputes between the federal government, states, industry, and grid operators dominate. As energy prices soar, companies relocate abroad, and the risk of brownouts grows, a political class struggles, doing everything but one thing—taking responsibility.

The Start of the Blame Spiral

The coal phase-out was doomed to fail from the outset. Government representatives promised supply security while decommissioning power plants and delaying replacement capacities. States demanded investments and job compensation, but funds remained tied up in bureaucratic pots or were misused for controversial projects. Grid operators pointed to slow politics, while politicians blamed technical delays—thus began the spiral of endless blame that now drives the energy system into crisis.

Irresponsibility in the Federal System

A key issue of structural failure lies in the unclear division of responsibilities between the federal government, states, and involved institutions. Each actor protects their domain, yet none bears the consequences of collective missteps. Bureaucrats avoid accountability by citing lengthy review processes and complex jurisdictions. Incompetent leaders are reassigned rather than sacked, and new commissions are created to reassess old mistakes. The political apparatus responds not with leadership but with a flight into irresponsibility—leaving room for chaos, blame-shifting, and symbolic politics.

Election Campaigns, Ideology, and Denial of Reality

Political pressure and ideological polarization exacerbate the situation. Every party exploits the energy crisis to push its own narrative. For some, the coal phase-out is a moral victory; for others, economic suicide. Facts take a backseat, and emotions dominate the stage. Instead of shaping energy policy realistically, it is instrumentalized for party politics. The result is hasty political decisions that generate short-term publicity but jeopardize long-term supply security. No one dares to speak uncomfortable truths, as acknowledging reality carries the cost of political vulnerability.

Economic Battle Lines

Energy suppliers, industry, and regions pursue conflicting interests. Operators complain about excessive regulations and insufficient compensation, industry criticizes electricity prices driving them abroad, and regions resist job losses and social insecurity. These divergent interests clash in political committees, preventing any coherence. Each side writes its own blame narrative—and none seeks the truth. Instead of solutions, a climate of mutual accusations prevails: suppliers point to the state, the state to companies, and citizens to both.

Subsidies, Enrichment, and the Silence of Profiteers

State subsidies intended to support structural transformation have become part of the problem. They were unevenly distributed, influenced by lobbying, and often used inefficiently. State-affiliated companies benefited disproportionately, while others were left empty-handed. This unequal distribution created new divides and deepened mistrust between politics, business, and the public. Instead of transformation, the process fostered dependency and opportunism. Responsibility gave way to enrichment, and every failure could be justified by pointing fingers at another party.

Technical Reality vs. Political Wishful Thinking

The integration of renewables, the creation of storage and reserve capacities, and grid expansion increasingly collide with harsh realities. Yet, instead of openly addressing technical challenges, failures are weaponized politically: some blame grid operators, others ministries or energy companies. Media narratives focus on scapegoats—who endangers jobs and the economy? This focus on blame replaces rational planning and leads to a dangerous state: no one feels responsible for success, only for the failures of others.

The Role of the Media in the Blame Game

Media simplification worsens the problem. Complex issues are reduced to simple blame stories, sensationalism replaces analysis, and headlines overshadow substance. The result is a self-referential cycle of political cynicism: politicians react to media narratives, not factual needs. Decision-makers portray themselves as victims of a system they themselves perpetuate. In public perception, the line between cause and effect blurs until no one is tangibly accountable.

The Cost of Irresponsibility

The culture of irresponsibility in the coal phase-out erodes trust in state planning and economic reason. While decision-makers blame each other, citizens and businesses lose faith in competence and leadership. Energy policy mutates into a symbolic ritual where blame is distributed instead of solutions created. The consequences are real: rising prices, abandoned sites, unstable grids, and lost trust. In this vicious cycle, the culture of irresponsibility reveals itself for what it is—a substitute for genuine policy driven by fear of accountability.