Construction costs are currently skyrocketing

To produce H2, strategic and economic cooperation with desert countries could be established. Here, H2 could be produced comparatively cheaply through photovoltaics.

Theoretically, that always sounds good. Practically, there is a lack of water, renewable electricity, and the possibility to transport the hydrogen here. Even if all three problems can be solved (in 30, 40 years, when we must already be CO2 neutral), the hydrogen will be more expensive than our own (because of the very complex transport) AND we will once again be dependent on other countries. Why would anyone want that?

Of course, the production of H2 costs money or energy as opposed to natural gas. As the name suggests, it is freely available in the earth :) However, as of today, there are not many alternatives. It was clear from the beginning that achieving the climate goals would cost all of us (a lot of) money. Not doing it, however, costs even more...

2 weeks correspond to about 20 TWh of electricity. ...
The only realistic option is practically to replicate the entire grid with gas power plants as backup.

You understand that this was the worst-case scenario. Germany cut off from the rest of the world. In fact, we are already very well connected across Europe. This already reduces the two weeks to just two days.
With some grid expansion, the blackout risk then approaches zero. That means you only need to buffer for a few hours. So, the gas power plants (which we already have) are only needed for about 10 more years if some effort is made. And no one minds if a few dozen are kept afterward to burn renewable methane occasionally, in case a flood damages something somewhere.

Pallets only make sense if they are made from waste wood.

No. Why should they? Same problem. From a climate protection perspective, pellets are exactly counterproductive. Always. With the old wood waste called coal, people understood this, but not here? This means something for construction costs and building operating costs! Regarding what I have read here about H2: If the chemical industry switches to H2, their electricity demand will triple. The performance previously provided by nature to form chemical bonds now has to be carried out by itself. Reducing entropy always costs energy. If the industry acts as a competitor for green energy like this, nothing will move socially because of the price spiral. Then the energy must not only be 100% green, but also available in triple the amount. I don’t have a better idea than step by step, even if there is actually a lack of time. No society can keep up with the autistic approach of the theoretical optimum.

Should the waste wood be composted?

Should the waste wood be composted?

Yes!

Residual words. Words, words, blah blah blah blah blah