Norbert Röttgen,

Ministers,

Ladies and gentlemen

I am delighted to welcome you on behalf of the Federal Government to this second Petersberg Climate Dialogue. The "Petersberg" is quite some way away but then again you are in the capital, in , a beautiful city, despite the fact that the weather could be considered more favourable to the rural areas of than to the city. I hope that you will be able to see this afternoon, tonight or maybe even tomorrow without rain.

I should like to extend a particular welcome to the South African Minister of International Relations and Cooperation, Maite Nkoana-Mashabane and convey my best wishes to the President of South Africa, Jacob Zuma. I discussed this event with him on the telephone. He would have liked to come but was unable to do so due to prior commitments. However, I am very pleased that and are jointly striving to prepare the conference in.

I liked the very fitting proverb about the camel we just heard. However, you should not advertise it openly at too early a stage because then we might end up with not even a goat. Until now I have only ever talked about myself in the same context as a camel when it comes to my ability to sleep like one. Throughout the week I can get by with little sleep and only feel the need to catch up at the weekend. Now I have learned a new saying about camels which, I am sure, I will also find helpful.

I think the Petersberg Dialogue is a very appropriate tool to lend depth to the discussions, to build trust and to prepare for what we have to achieve at . We are exactly half way between "Cancún" and "". On the basis of the outcome achieved at Cancún we now have a very good chance to set out the objectives for . I had a look at the agenda and the issues you will be discussing at this forum and I believe that they are extremely realistic. They set out different approaches which these discussions might result in. That is a sound basis to work in a focused manner for a successful outcome.

Global politics are certainly faced time and again with numerous challenges. The financial and economic crisis is not completely behind us yet. You will be aware from the discussions in right now of the potential dangers of excessive national debt. However, this does not mean that the threat posed by climate change has become less important. The lesson we learned once again from the financial and economic crisis should also be applied to other policy areas – that we need to make sustainable efforts, that we must not jump from one issue to the next but keep a long-term perspective on the issues that need to be resolved. This holds particularly true for climate protection and dealing with climate change.

I can only keep stressing what was spelt out for the first time in very concise terms in the Stern Review. There may be many reasons why it seems to be expensive and arduous to take action but there are by far more reasons to say: it will be even more expensive not to take action. Therefore we all have to join forces to advance the current process, the fight against climate change – and I should like to thank you for your efforts.

You know the topics at hand: rising sea levels and their impact on island states, the increased occurrence of extreme weather and many more. Certainly we must not draw instant general conclusions from isolated events but the nature of the events occurring in , the and elsewhere indicate that there are changes in the climate that we have to take very seriously.

I am not even speaking about threats to food or water supplies or migration and regional conflicts. You are well aware of these risks. You also know about the limited availability of fossil fuels and the competition for raw materials, and that ensuring efficient resource use is reason alone to protect the climate and fight global warming. We need sustainable management of resources and energy saving wherever possible. I keep telling this to all those who spend considerable time asking: is climate change really happening? Even without climate change there would be enough reasons to restructure our energy supply and change the way in which we use energy. In view of the fact that the global population will reach 7 billion people this year and is sure to grow to 9 billion, it is imperative that we take precautions and see to it that climate change does not gain further momentum.

For July, the month in which takes over the presidency of the Security Council, we put the topic "risks of climate change" on the Council's agenda. I welcome the fact that UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon clearly stated that he will keep climate change as one of his priority topics on the agenda during his second term in office. We know that climate change does not recognise any borders, it affects every country. Therefore, our goal remains a legally binding agreement even if we know how hard it will be to achieve.

We will have to overcome many obstacles on our way to such an agreement. It is certainly right to ask first of all what climate protection contribution individual states must make and how these contributions can be fitted into a fair and equitable system. And of course we know that the industrialised countries have a special responsibility to bear. But we also know: in view of the enormously dynamic development in emerging countries, the industrialised countries alone will not be able to achieve the goal of keeping global warming below two degrees. Emerging countries also have to make a contribution. The principle of common but differentiated responsibility still applies and will continue to do so. Since "" we are aware that this responsibility is most diverse. Looking at the year 2010, I think it is fair to say that we have taken first steps to translate this responsibility into joint action – and Cancún was a good example of this.

Poverty alleviation is a priority for almost all developing countries. Therefore, economic development and climate protection must not be seen as incompatible. Newly industrialising countries, which are gaining increasing economic weight, naturally want to retain their competitiveness. This means they will also have to learn how to combine economic growth with sustainable development. Only recently I had an in-depth discussion with Premier Wen Jiabao on how tremendously important this is for 's development. Of course, the industrialised countries also want to secure their level of prosperity but they will also have to learn how to achieve this through reduced resource consumption combined with ambitious sustainability targets, thus setting an example.

This means, on the one hand, that environmental and climate protection and resource conservation are a limiting factor for economic action but, on the other hand, respect for nature makes economic activity more viable for the future. is an industrialised country and I can tell you that we had an intensive energy debate following the events of and that we have embarked on a very arduous and ambitious course – a genuine transformation of our energy supply. We want to demonstrate that it is possible to do without nuclear power. At stake is, above all, the ability to maintain a level of prosperity as an industrialised country in the age of renewable energy sources. This will be 's task over the next ten years. We are sure we will succeed. But we also know that huge efforts will have to be made, not only by a few politicians, for this development must be supported by society, by industry, environmental associations and the population alike. Therefore electric power must be affordable, energy must be sufficiently available and our energy supply must be based on an environmentally sound system.

Against the backdrop of global developments we need a course which will, in the long run, lead to an approximation of per capita emissions, while at the same time allowing for economic development. If we look at what is needed – and I don't think there is any doubt about it if we accept the two degree target as a fact – we find that we will have to come to an average global CO₂ emission level of approximately two tonnes per capita. That would be reconcilable with the two

degree global warming limit. This is an ambitious goal if we look at the situation today. The United States has a per capita emission of approximately 20 tonnes, Germany of about ten tonnes and even China's per capita emission is already well above four tonnes. This proves that we have a daunting task ahead of us. And the industrialised countries must lead by example.

So now we need concrete measures in each and every country. Even though we were very disappointed by the outcome, it was the first time that so many countries announced specific measures. We will certainly not come to a final agreement in , but I hope that progress will be achieved on a number of issues. This could be the case in the following areas.

First of all: concrete reduction targets. Every country has to step up its efforts because the sum of all announced targets will still lead to an increase in global warming of more than two degrees. I think no one with knowledge of this topic will doubt this. Even those who are sceptical of binding targets have to concede that the proposals currently on the table are insufficient. So here we have some more work to do.

Secondly, the bodies and instruments developed at Cancún have to be fleshed out. Climate protection was on the agenda at the G8 Summit in , at which African countries were also represented. Reporting on the state of implementation of the Cancún outcome was, cautiously put, only mildly enthusiastic. I have the impression that a lot remains to be done here.

The third item is transparency. Even in the case of voluntary commitments, someone has to be able to verify if they are actually implemented. This cannot be done quietly behind closed doors and completed with a proclamation of "just believe us". On the contrary, we must develop uniform measuring procedures. We have to set out who will be doing the verifying and who the reporting. A lot still needs to be done in this area as well.

Finally, we have to develop a clear perception of how and with what objective we want to continue the negotiations – in other words, what legal form the agreement will take. I think this is among the most difficult items currently on the table. However, the Kyoto Protocol will expire and by 2012, at the latest, the future course will have to be clear – otherwise there will be huge disappointment. So, the more we can accomplish in , the better; in particular since we know how long-winded international processes can be. Even if an agreement were to materialise, ratification will be a lengthy process and in the case of some agreements can take forever.

Ladies and gentlemen, , as part of the European Union, is aiming at a single legally binding agreement. We would also be prepared to examine the option of a second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol. However, we are aware of the considerable difficulties involved in both tracks. But the message you can take home from and is that we are determined to step ahead courageously. We want to do our share, as I outlined earlier.

The German and European targets are ambitious. We intend to raise the share of renewable energies in total energy consumption to 60 percent by 2050 and the share in electricity consumption to 80 percent. Today we have a 17 percent renewables share in electricity production. By 2020 we want to double this figure to a 35 percent share. We are currently learning what it means to incorporate available but not 100 percent marketable renewable energy sources into the energy market. In this respect is experiencing very exciting times right now. A 17 percent share can just about be achieved by additional power feed-in and prioritisation. But if you want a renewables share of more than a third and if you cannot use market mechanisms to achieve this level your energy policy will fail. For this reason we have launched a very interesting law; the Federal Environment Minister has just presented it to the Cabinet. This law takes us far beyond the approaches pursued in the past.

We want to halve 's primary energy consumption by 2050 as against 2008 levels. That is a very ambitious target. German industry has already made a major contribution and we want to remain a successful industrialised country. Therefore savings have to be made primarily in the heating, building and mobility sectors if we want to halve our primary energy consumption and, again, we need a completely new approach to achieve these objectives.

In , we want to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent by 2020 compared to 1990 levels. In doing this we are meeting our Cancún commitments. The EU-wide emission reduction target is 80 percent by 2050 as against 1990 levels. To achieve this has to make considerable national efforts, but we also have to step up our bilateral cooperation in low-carbon development and more precisely in lighthouse projects and technology initiatives – nationally and in partner projects with industrialised and newly industrialising countries as well as with developing countries.

At the first Climate Dialogue, which was held in 2010, , and launched a partnership project for the development of climate strategies for emerging and developing countries. I think we should continue to launch projects of this kind. The initiative taken by the three countries has, as far as I am aware, developed very well. It now pools activities in around 30 countries.

is also taking part in the adaptation partnership initiative launched by , and the at the first Climate Dialogue and the Global Forest Partnership is also well under way. More than 70 countries are involved and I am delighted that and will chair the project starting July 2011. also contributes considerable funds to "REDD+". In doing so we are fulfilling our pledge – approximately 30 percent of our so‑called fast start contributions are spent on forest conservation. The total amount available is 350 million euros, which I believe will help to accomplish a great deal.

From 2012 onwards, the revenues from European emissions trading will flow completely and directly into our Energy and Climate Fund. My prediction is that there will be a certain degree of competition between national and international projects. I am well aware that the funds are much sought-after. We want to use them for innovative energy technologies, energy efficiency measures and climate and environmental conservation measures – internationally and at home.

Ladies and gentlemen, the auctioning revenues are already being used to fulfil the commitments we have made. For example, they are used to fund the International Climate Initiative of the Federal Environment Ministry. They help us to make meaningful contributions to local carbon markets in Africa, to the adaptation strategies of island states and to the conservation of rainforests, for example in the "Harpan Rainforest Initiative" in.

These positive examples demonstrate what can already be done today. However, we have to try and develop a dense network of such exemplary projects that stretches across the globe. We cannot allow these projects to be one-offs; they have to be spread more widely. Since it is useless to close our eyes to developments, we have to concede that global emissions are still rising at an alarming rate. We spend a lot of time trying to sort out who is responsible for what and who will bear what burden. Of course that needs to be determined. However, we also have to see to it that a growth in emissions is countered by concrete measures.

So it is a matter of practicalities but also of ethical responsibilities to the world. Let us, therefore, look to 2012. It is not only the year of the next climate change conference but also the time to discuss "Rio 2012". We will take stock of what has been achieved since in 1992. I believe we will see that progress has been made but in many cases this progress has been slow in coming. However, there have also been positive events such as the biodiversity conference last year. I think in 2012, twenty years after the Conference, it will become clear that the institutional structure for sustainable development is not sufficiently developed at global level.

UNEP and CSD must be upgraded. For this reason and the European Union support effective structural reform. We feel that the United Nations Environment Programme must become an independent UN specialised agency. And I should like to state one thing clearly: it would also be an opportunity to finally locate one of the major UN bodies on the African continent. I think it is more than justified that we finally do this. We have to adapt to the dictates of the 21^st century and that requires an organisation which deals with environmental and sustainability issues. We can only live up to the ambitious aims set at Rio and if environmental and climate protection are set on an equal footing with other important international policy areas. I am firmly convinced of this. We should join forces and strive for this goal.

I can assure you, ladies and gentlemen, that the South African Presidency has our full support for a successful outcome of the conference. But I can also assure you that there is still a lot more to be done. For this reason I would encourage you to make the most of your time here.

Thank you for coming to . Thank you for making this meeting possible with a sizeable and still manageable number of participants – at least by UN standards with its membership of over 190 countries.

UN processes are very complicated. Anyone with a life-long involvement in these processes ends up finding it quite normal that conference participants have to toil towards success in lengthy discussions. And there have been successes. However, it is not necessarily ideal to always meet with representatives of 170 or 180 countries. It is sometimes equally beneficial if some countries have faith in other countries to consider their interests and put forward ideas, make progress and find a structure.

The world is turning to – and this time around not for football but for climate protection. International agreements are crucial to long-term developments. So let me tell you again: we support but that alone is not enough. I call on all of you to support the climate protection cause. Try and make yourselves heard at home. I know that heads of government are always busy and have many problems to solve at present. And many people in the world currently have other problems and may ask: do we really have to deal with climate protection on top of everything else right now? Can't we delay this for one or two years? But the fact is that some of the issues on our current agenda such as desertification, migration and civil wars are only with us today because we did not deal with them in time.

That's what it is all about. Thank you very much.