An American’s comparative analysis on Germany and the United States’ climate policies to see the different ways we are coming together to reach climate neutrality and curb climate change.
As an American studying abroad in Germany, there are many similarities and differences I have seen in the cultural day-to-day life. One thing that is vastly different is the way people contribute to climate change and sustainability. I wanted to take a look at how Germany and the United States plan to handle climate change through their policies and climate action.
When conducting the analysis I decided to look into what the US and Germany have communicated in official channels. Globally, each country plays key roles in how the world addresses climate change. Both have outlined ambitious plans to reduce emissions and achieve climate neutrality, though their approaches differ.
Domestic Policy
In 2021, the US rejoined the Paris agreement, pledging to reduce emissions to 50-52% below 2005 levels by 2030 and net-zero emissions by 2050. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 allocates over $369 billion for clean energy, while the EPA (Environmental Protection Agenca) implements new regulations targeting power sector decarbonization, methane emission reductions, and strengthened vehicle emissions standards.
Germany, through its Climate Protection Act and national climate strategy, has embedded its climate goals into legally binding legislation. Under the act, Germany aims to cut emissions by 55% by 2030 and reach climate neutrality by 2050. Sector-specific targets cover energy, transport, industry, and agriculture, and the government regularly evaluates progress through an independent Expert Council on Climate Issues.
Green Energy Initiatives
Generally, the U.S. energy transition relies on a mix of federal incentives and state-level initiatives. The IRA provides substantial tax credits for renewable energy development, electric vehicle deployment, energy-efficient housing, and carbon capture technologies. However, with the decentralized nature of U.S. energy policy creates variability in implementation across different states.
Germany’s Energiewende (“energy transition”) is a nationally coordinated strategy focused on phasing out nuclear and coal power, all the while significantly boosting renewable energy. The government aims for renewable energy to account for 80% of electricity consumption by 2030. Supportive policies include feed-in tariffs, energy auctions, and investment in grid infrastructure. The complete nuclear exit by 2023 and the planned coal phase-out by 2038 are critical milestones, though they raise questions about short-term energy security and costs.
According to Dr. Daniel Aldrich, a professor of political science at Northeastern University in Boston, one of the biggest ways the world is having an impact on climate is the, “Decentralized electricity cooperatives in North America, Europe and Japan which produce their own electricity, have low consumption, and seek to use solar, wind, and geothermal”. By the US and Germany, both having initiatives that incentivize a movement towards diverse renewable energy it will contribute to the decentralization of energy.
International Leadership and Cooperation
The U.S. State Department emphasizes the importance of cooperation through global initiatives that support vulnerable nations with adaptation funding, satellite technology, and climate data-sharing. However, meaningful progress depends on collective action—wealthier nations must honor funding commitments to initiatives like the Green Climate Fund.
Germany maintains a strong profile in international climate diplomacy. As one of the leading EU members, it supports collective climate action. Germany works with developing nations to expand renewable energy access and climate adaptation capacity, and its Federal Government regularly participates in multilateral climate negotiations and policy dialogues.
Challenges
When asked about the biggest challenges to environmental policy, Dr. Aldrich identified three major obstacles. The first, he explained, is the influence of the fossil fuel industry, which “has a strong financial incentive in delaying action on climate change and in producing disinformation on the causes and potential solutions to discourage collective political action.” In a world driven by financial interests, the industry benefits from shaping the public narrative, making it difficult to justify and implement effective political responses to climate change.
Furthermore, Dr. Aldrich’s second point was, “Politicians who receive funding from the fossil fuel industry and continue to support policies which subsidize the industry, reduce environmental regulations on drilling, fracking, oil production, and internal combustion engine use, and refuse to set a realistic price for carbon (through a carbon tax).” With political campaigns reliant on this funding, politicians have effectively become puppets for the fossil fuel industry. They pass legislation, spread misinformation, and encourage practices that actively harm the environment.
Lastly, Dr. Aldrich stated, “The general public has lost faith both in government and their own ability to have efficacy in the field, that is, make their voices matter.” As distrust of government and industry experts grows, misinformation has found fertile ground to spread and mislead the public. Ultimately, this shift undermines the authority of knowledgeable voices and empowers messages that enable the fossil fuel industry to profit from ecological destruction.
Conclusion
While the United States and Germany share a strong commitment to addressing climate change, their strategies reflect their distinct political and governing structures. The U.S. approach primarily relies on tax incentives to encourage investment in green energy alternatives, whereas Germany emphasizes regulations, such as feed-in tariffs, and specific targets to drive change. Both countries offer valuable models for other nations, underscoring the importance of flexibility, cooperation, and sustained policy momentum in the global effort against climate
change.
At the end of the day, climate change affects everyone no matter your nationality. It is imperative that people continue to prioritize environmentally friendly options. While what we do day to day may just be a drop in the ocean compared to everything that needs to be done to fix climate change. Hopefully, one day businesses, lobbyists, and governments around the world will realize that sustainability is worth the investment not only for their own gain, but for the entire world’s.
Leave your comments, thoughts and suggestions in the box below. Take note: your response is moderated.
