Construction costs are currently skyrocketing

I am apparently being misunderstood. I do support the expansion of renewable energies and also look for ways to act in an environmentally friendly manner. The question I want to ask is whether it makes sense from an environmental policy perspective to additionally tax energy and to electrify mobility overall? I claim no. Those who have to commute to the city often do not have the money to buy an electric car. Although buying nowadays means financing 50% anyway. A study that was evaluated in the media shows that the electric car is more environmentally friendly than the combustion engine from about 160,000 km. And then the battery is also broken and has to be replaced very expensively. I consider this a subsidy for the automotive industry. Electrification cannot work like this. THAT is what I meant by the idealism that is outwardly represented. The massive expansion of public transport, the legal obligation of at least occasional home office (coupled with increasing digitalization) would be two important steps to sustainably address climate change. But certainly not additional costs that disproportionately burden the lower income groups and practically do not matter to wealthy SUV drivers (attention, a striking example to illustrate this). I don't have to set a price at all if I make the alternatives more interesting in terms of price and infrastructure than the environmentally worse option.

Incidentally, to finance this I would first and foremost take the black book and start there. Before more taxes are levied, tax waste should be curbed.

One could also poach a few hundred additional auditors from the Big 5 and hire them on attractive terms, specifically targeting the tax avoidance tricks of the top 5%. And introduce an e-car mandate for cities. Tax incentives only for efficient e-cars and not the x5-x7, Panameras, and co.

How should it be with commercial vehicles in the inner-city area?
Maybe the vehicle tax should be massively increased in a targeted way.
E-cars tax-free
The small combustion engine relatively low (not everyone can afford an e-car, but has to drive theirs until it can no longer be repaired. It would also be ecologically nonsense to replace young used cars)
The SUV pays a lot - not just a few pennies, but so much that it is noticeable in the wallet
Commuter allowance high (not everyone has public transport and public transport does not always make sense)
Reintroduction of shift buses initially free of charge, then heavily discounted.
The buses existed with us until the late 80s, early 90s. 3-4 stops in the village and directly in front of the factory gate for the start of the shift and picked up again at the end.

A study that was evaluated by the media shows that the electric car is more environmentally friendly than the combustion engine from about 160,000 km. And then the battery is also broken and must be replaced very expensively.

That is long outdated. Please take a look at the current studies on this. Depending on the model and manufacturer, it is between 30,000 and 60,000 km. Improving monthly. This is not to say that we should now all replace combustion engines with electric cars. We need far fewer cars on the roads. It is only meant to say that from now on you should definitely not buy any more combustion engines if you absolutely need a car. And yes, unfortunately, not every class offers something suitable yet. But in five years, that should also be history.

High commuter allowance (not everyone has public transport and public transport is not always sensible)

How about investing all the money spent on the commuter allowance into public transport? In my opinion, that would be the fairest way to reduce commuting without immediately making someone's job impossible.

Nuclear power plants to cover the base load would be, for example, climate-friendly. They are designed today so that in the event of a meltdown, the power plant becomes unusable, but nothing leaks. And the waste is already present anyway and is purely a question of quantity. Qualitatively, the waste problem remains with or without new nuclear power plants.