Construction costs are currently skyrocketing

You of course have your right to a wrong opinion, but you need to be specific: WHAT exactly is cheese?

Overall, it is surprising that the topic of CO2 gets such a high priority. You surely know the video about the composition of air and the influence of something involving 0.0000003% of the German population on the CO2 concentration. A volcanic burp or a large forest fire would probably release more CO2 into the atmosphere at once than we can save in 50 years. So we have no leverage there. All other narratives are built on that. The whole discussion about heat pumps, combustion engine bans, etc. has nothing to do with climate protection. Follow the money and the abolition of democracy similar to China are the backgrounds.

In the end, it doesn't really matter and would be less of a problem if we didn't want to phase out coal in 7 (!) years while also saving gas at the same time

It would also not be a problem if, beyond the persistent governments, the alternatives had been expanded instead of actively restricting their development.

Overall, it is cheese that the topic of CO2 is given such a high priority.

This is not a question that can be answered scientifically. It is (your) value judgment.

You surely know the video about the composition of air and the influence of something with 0.0000003% of the German population on the CO2 concentration.

I know several like that. The mistake is that the annual emissions are calculated as if they apply to the total amount. But the CO2 concentration is a stock variable, not a flow variable. So: wrong calculation, wrong facts. Still, the number is not large: about 1.8% of the annual emissions come directly from Germany. But that is still roughly six million times your number—and easy to find on Statista, for example.

A volcanic burp or large forest fire would probably release more CO2 into the atmosphere at once than we could save in 50 years.

That is demonstrably false, because in the time of CO2 measurements we have actually had “volcanic burps” and large forest fires. The measurement curve of CO2 concentration over time is just a click away.
( Who exactly is “we” here? We Germans, or we humans? )

All other narratives are based on that.

Specifically!
WHICH narratives?

a) The existence of the atmospheric greenhouse effect (Joseph Fourier, 1824)?
b) The effect of CO2 in particular (Eunice Foote, 1858)?
c) That we humans have approximately multiplied the atmospheric CO2 concentration by about 1.5 times up to now?
d) How the above-mentioned 1.5-fold amount acts quantitatively?

The whole discussion about heat pumps, combustion engine bans, etc., therefore has nothing to do with climate protection. Follow the money […]

That is again a personal judgment, not a question that can be answered scientifically.
( Weren’t you an engineer? )

Quite a bit going on today ^^

Does anyone have an Abus camera mounted outside and can recommend a model?

Thanks :)

However, one could simply acknowledge that it is only(!!) 1.8%. Even if Germany were to shut everything down tomorrow, it would do little good for the planet. 1.8% of 2°C is just 0.004°C.

Apart from that, the likelihood is high that various tipping points have long been exceeded. The poles are melting much faster than expected, and similar applies to the thawing of permafrost in Siberia.

On the other hand, it is not evident that other countries are being reasonable and following our path. In China, there reportedly hasn't even been a Europe section in the newspapers for years, let alone Germany.

Suicide out of fear of death is not a solution. Because unfortunately, that is exactly where we are headed. If Intel decides not to settle in Magdeburg because electricity is simply too expensive, that would be a signal for the industrial location. Because chip production is highly automated, hardly any people work there anymore, the wage factor hardly plays a role...

If even a highly automated production in Germany is no longer possible due to high energy costs, then good night.

Even if Germany were to shut down everything tomorrow, it would do little to help the planet. 1.8% of 2°C is only 0.004°C.

But mathematically, it doesn’t work that way. The relationship d(cCO2)/dT is neither linear nor dependent on the annual surplus, but rather on the share of the total increase since the beginning of that increase. It is correct that Germany alone would be ineffective if it were to stand and act alone. But it does not. And the giants China, USA, India do actually do something as well. It is simply not measurable how big the difference would be if they did nothing at all. What does not happen cannot be proven. Where I agree with you is that certain windows are already closed, but hardly anyone wants to talk about it. My conclusion is that we need to consider the consequences of climate change just as much as climate change prevention—that is currently very asymmetrical.