While we wait for the first flowers to bloom, nature's actual rebirth begins in secret. Not in meadows or treetops, but in the soil. That is where the stability of ecosystems throughout the year is determined. That is where carbon is bound or released. That is where water is stored or lost. That is where resilience—or erosion—arises.

Microorganisms ramp up

As soil temperatures rise, bacteria and fungi become active again. They decompose organic material, release nutrients, and drive the nitrogen and carbon cycles.

This may sound technical, but it is systemically relevant:
The faster organic matter decomposes, the more CO₂ can be released. At the same time, nitrogen that is available to plants is produced, enabling growth. It is a fine line between productivity and emissions.

Mycorrhizal networks reactivate themselves

Fine fungal threads connect plant roots underground to form complex networks. These mycorrhizal systems greatly expand the effective root surface area, improve water uptake, and enable nutrient exchange between plants.

In stressful years—drought, heat, nutrient deficiency—these networks are often more crucial than the plant itself. Without functioning soil biology, there can be no stable vegetation.

The carbon buffer is now making a decision

Soil is one of the largest terrestrial carbon reservoirs. Whether it acts as a sink or becomes a source depends heavily on moisture, temperature, and biological activity in the spring.

A mild winter without frost can cause microbial processes to continue, resulting in continuous CO₂ emissions.
A winter with little snow also reduces the natural insulation of the soil. Frost penetrates deeper, and the soil structure can be damaged.

These are not academic details. They affect agricultural yields, water retention, and climate dynamics.

Earthworms as an indicator of system health

Earthworms are not a footnote. They improve soil structure, increase infiltration, reduce surface runoff, and create stable pore systems. Where they are absent, the risk of erosion and nutrient loss increases.

Intensive soil cultivation, pesticide use, and compaction weaken precisely those organisms that are supposed to generate resilience.

Why this is relevant

The public debate focuses on emissions, energy, and industry. Soil often remains a side issue, even though it is a strategic infrastructure.

Without living soil, there can be no food security.
Without humus formation, there can be no stable carbon sequestration.
Without functioning microbiology, there can be no biodiversity.

Spring does not begin with blossoms. It begins with biochemical processes that we cannot see—but should understand.

With spring just around the corner, many garden owners are keen to get their hedges and shrubs back into shape. However, there are clear legal requirements to bear in mind when reaching for the shears. Today, we want to explain to #Beetschwestern which cuts are permitted, when restrictions apply, and when pruning is actually mandatory.

When is hedge trimming permitted and when is it prohibited?

Section 39(5) of the Federal Nature Conservation Act stipulates that hedges, bushes, living fences, and other woody plants may not be cut back or radically pruned between March 1 and September 30. The aim of this regulation is to protect breeding birds and other wild animals. Gentle pruning and maintenance cutting are permitted, for example to prevent overgrowth, unless birds are breeding in the woody plants, in which case they must be left undisturbed.

PLEASE NOTE: This regulation applies not only to public green spaces, but
also to private properties. The only exceptions are trees in home gardens and
allotments, but even here there are restrictions.

More information about the different times for hedge trimming for different species can be found in this #Beetschwestern article:

The right time to prune my shrubs

What should be considered when pruning trees?

Trees on private garden plots may generally be pruned or felled throughout the year. However, some experts advise garden owners to check whether their municipality has enacted a tree protection ordinance. This may prohibit the felling of certain trees or at least make it subject to approval. Such ordinances vary considerably from municipality to municipality.

ATTENTION: If there are birds or other animals in a tree, for example due to an active
nest, the intervention is not permitted. The Federal Nature Conservation Act clearly states that
the habitats of wild animals may not be destroyed without good reason
. This also applies to pruning that is actually permitted.

When does pruning become mandatory?

There are situations in which pruning is not only permitted but even necessary. If a tree or shrub poses a threat to public safety, for example because a hedge is in danger of falling onto the sidewalk after a storm or is growing too far into the street, the prohibitions of the Federal Nature Conservation Act do not apply (Giessen Administrative Court, Ref.: 4 L 438/23). Nevertheless, some experts recommend consulting with the relevant nature conservation authority in advance.

How tall can hedges grow?

The permissible height of hedges and shrubs is regulated by the respective neighbor law of the federal states, about which the municipal administration can provide information. Not only the height is decisive, but also the distance to the neighboring property. Usually, a height of two meters applies to hedges—measured from the ground—if they are planted at least 50 centimeters from the property line. If the hedge is further away, it may generally grow taller.

If your neighbor's hedge is too high or too close to the boundary, you can demand that they trim it or remove it, in compliance with legal regulations, of course. However, depending on the state, this right to have the hedge trimmed or removed may be excluded after a certain period of time. In North Rhine-Westphalia, for example, the exclusion period is six years, while in Hesse it is only three years. And, of course, you can only ask your neighbor to trim the hedge if you yourself comply with the required height (Koblenz Regional Court, Ref.: 13 S 6/20).

Is cherry laurel prohibited?

Cherry laurel is particularly popular as a hedge plant. Cherry laurel is classified as a potentially invasive species by the German Environmental and Nature Conservation Association (BUND). This means it is a species that spreads rapidly and can disrupt native ecosystems.

What to do with invasive plants in the garden?

Unlike in Switzerland, where the plant has been banned since 2024, there is currently no general ban in Germany. Cherry laurel may still be purchased, sold, and planted in private gardens. Restrictions may only arise from local regulations, such as municipal statutes, guidelines for allotment gardens, or club regulations.

Today's climate protection efforts do not primarily suffer from a lack of technology. They suffer from misguided economic incentives. The current system rewards emission avoidance, but it hardly addresses the actual core problem: CO₂ that is already in the atmosphere will remain there for centuries. Traditional emission certificates legitimize emissions without creating a genuine obligation to recover them. This is precisely where so-called clean-up certificates come in, which follow the principle of extended producer responsibility.

The idea originates from climate economics, including the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), and can be found in a recent study on this topic, among other places. The approach is radically simple: whoever emits emissions also assumes responsibility for their subsequent removal. A certificate is then no longer a permanent right to pollute, but a temporary loan—with an obligation to return it.

Instead of "I am allowed to emit CO₂ today," the logic in the future will be: "I am emitting today and commit to removing this amount from the atmosphere later."

This is a fundamental paradigm shift.

"Linking the right to emit to a take-back obligation would not actually be anything fundamentally new," explains Kai Lessmann, PIK researcher and lead author of the above-mentioned study. "This has long been practiced in parts of the economy—for example, in the return of deposit bottles or old electrical appliances. It is the principle of extended producer responsibility: companies are not only responsible for the quality of their goods, but also for the disposal of their waste. And here we show the potential this principle offers for climate protection."

Why this is more economically sound

In the existing EU Emissions Trading System, certificates are traded that effectively represent perpetual emission rights. This creates three structural problems:

There is no built-in mechanism for net zero. Even with perfect reductions, there remains a residual that is not addressed.
Negative emissions are optional and mostly voluntary. Accordingly, they are underfunded.
The costs of long-term climate damage are not included in the price.

Clean-up certificates solve this problem elegantly. They force the market to treat CO₂ removal as an integral part of the value chain. Removal becomes not just a "nice to have," but a mandatory factor of production.

This automatically creates demand for carbon removal, innovation is capitalized, and long-term storage gets a real market price. This is how a functioning market economy works.

Extended producer responsibility principle also makes sense for emissions

"Given the potential benefits highlighted in this economic analysis, the EU should seriously consider introducing clean-up certificates," says Ottmar Edenhofer, PIK Director and Chair of the EU Advisory Council on Climate Change (ESABCC), who co-authored the study. "The combination of emission rights and buyback obligations would give the economy important flexibility on the path to climate neutrality. And it would subsequently, after 2050, help finance the net-negative emissions necessary to meet the 1.5-degree limit."

Why this is not yet a real system today

Here comes the sobering reality. Currently, clean-up certificates exist only as a research model and as loose private experiments. There is no government-regulated framework, no binding standards, and no integration into large emissions markets.

The biggest obstacles:

Measurability
CO₂ removal is technically complex. Permanence, leakage risks, and additional effects cannot be easily measured.
Lack of accountability
No one currently bears systemic responsibility if stored CO₂ escapes again in 30 years.
No regulatory framework
As long as governments do not integrate this into mandatory trading systems, everything will remain in pilot status.

And to be clear: most of the current "removal credits" on the market are of inconsistent quality and, in some cases, hardly reliable. This is a scaling problem, not a marketing problem.

What would need to happen for this to work

If clean-up certificates are to be more than just academic concepts, three things are needed:

Strict MRV standards
Measurement, reporting, and verification must be organized at the infrastructure level—not on a project-by-project basis.
Integration into existing markets
No parallel market. This must be built directly into ETS systems, otherwise there will be no demand base.
Long-term chains of responsibility
Issuers must be liable for the permanence of removal, not just for the initial purchase of the certificate.

Without these points, the whole thing remains a well-intentioned mechanism with no systemic effect.

Our pro.earth.conclusion:

Clean-up certificates are not a climate protection gimmick. They are a serious attempt to finally price externalities correctly. The concept is economically sound, technologically compatible, and politically feasible. But as things stand today, the idea exists. Models exist. There are small-scale experiments. What is missing is implementation at the system level. As long as countries are not prepared to link emission rights to a buy-back obligation, the market will remain asymmetrical – and net zero will remain a mathematical model rather than a reality.

Link

Original publication:
Lessmann, K., Gruner, F., Kalkuhl, M., Edenhofer, O., (2026): Emissions trading with clean-up certificates: How carbon debt can increase climate ambition levels. – Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jeem.2026.103307]
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0095069626000276

The pussy willow is one of the most important harbingers of spring and an important symbol of Easter. The pussy willow plays an important role for the awakening animal world. Its furry flowers serve as a vital source of food for many insects. For this reason, pussy willows are protected in Austria and Germany.

The goat willow, with its nectar- and pollen-rich furry catkins, is one of the most important sources of food for bees and other pollen collectors in early spring. Many insect species, such as the caterpillars of more than 30 different butterfly species and many beetle and sawfly species, as well as wild bees, depend on the goat willow. Unfortunately, goat willows are becoming increasingly rare in nature, which is why they are strictly protected.

Brief profile

Like all willow species, the plants are either male or female. The male willows can be recognized by their yellowish catkins. The female catkins are greenish and somewhat less conspicuous. Bees first fly to the male flowers and then, loaded with pollen, to the female ones. Willow blossoms provide bees with up to 70% of their annual pollen requirement and are therefore essential.

Willow trees grow up to 20 meters tall, are undemanding, and are considered pioneer trees. They grow up to an altitude of 1,500 meters.

Overview of protective regulations

In Germany, according to Section 39 of the Federal Nature Conservation Act(BNatSchG), NO branches may be cut or broken off between March 1 and September 30—regardless of whether they grow in your own garden or in the wild. This period is considered a closed season for tree, hedge, and shrub pruning, during which clearing and massive pruning are prohibited. Violations are punishable by fines of several thousand euros.

(7) The administrative offense may be punished with a fine of up to fifty thousand euros, and in other cases with a fine of up to ten thousand euros.

In Austria, palm willows are protected by law from February 1 to April 30. During this period, a maximum of three branches with a length of no more than 50 cm may be cut per person per day. Repeated violations of this regulation are punishable by fines of up to €7,620.

Leave catkins where they are and plant them yourself

Unfortunately, in nature, one often sees completely mutilated specimens with torn-off branch stumps and damaged bark due to human greed. If the damage is too severe, willow trees die. We therefore urge you to leave the catkins alone.

We can contribute to the reintroduction of the goat willow by planting it in our gardens and on our balconies. It is generally very easy to grow, but needs a sunny to semi-shaded location.

Furthermore, the goat willow can also be easily propagated using cuttings in moist soil.

The German Federal Environment Agency (UBA) recently published the results of a study of urine samples from children and adolescents taken in the spring and summer of 2025. In 92 percent of all samples, the breakdown product of a dangerous plasticizer was detected, which is banned in the EU due to its reproductive toxicity. The source of this is UV filters in sunscreens. From 2027, stricter maximum values for sunscreens will apply throughout the EU.

As early as 2024, the German Federal Environment Agency (UBA) detected mono-n-hexyl phthalate (MnHexP) in the urine of adults. MnHexP is a degradation product of the plasticizer di-n-hexyl phthalate (DnHexP), which is considered toxic to reproduction and is therefore not approved for use in the EU. The findings could be traced back to contamination of a UV filter in sunscreens. In addition to MnHexP, humans are exposed to other reproductive toxins, so every avoidable source should be eliminated.

"Based on the results from previous years, we were not surprised to find MnHexP in the urine samples from children and adolescents. What did surprise us, however, was the high proportion of contaminated samples and the sometimes very high concentrations."

Dirk Messner, President of the Federal Environment Agency

Almost all samples contaminated

Up to a value of 60 micrograms per liter (µg/L) of urine, no adverse health effects are to be expected. The Human Biomonitoring Commission at the UBA 2024 derived this value from the 2024 results. The Federal Institute for Risk Assessment has specified the tolerable daily intake for DnHexP as 63 micrograms per kilogram of body weight per day (µg/kg bw/d).

In the current ALISE (Aligned Study for Environmental Health) study of children and adolescents, 259 urine samples from children and adolescents aged 6 to 17 years have been examined to date, taken between April and July 2025. MnHexP was found in 238 of the samples (92 percent). Two study participants exceeded the HBM-I value of 60 µg/L with 83 and 107 µg/L.

UV filters in sunscreens are the cause

Product tests on sunscreens, which were initiated immediately at the time, confirmed the suspicion, and a patent for the production of the UV filter diethylaminohydroxybenzoylhexyl benzoate (DHHB) clearly shows that the plasticizer DnHexP can be produced during the production of the UV filter. At the same time, the product investigations revealed that the concentration of the plasticizer in DHHB varies and that sunscreens with the UV filter but without contamination are also available on the market.

More and more countries are banning sun creams

Multiple loads possible

Di-n-hexyl phthalate is not the only substance harmful to reproduction to which humans are exposed. For example, in the latest UBA study on children and adolescents (GerES V, 2014–2017), the total exposure to reproductive toxins in plasticizers was above the tolerable intake level defined by the EFSA (European Food Safety Authority) for the majority of participants, especially younger children. It is therefore important to eliminate avoidable sources of reproductive toxins and to keep important products such as sunscreen free of contaminants.

Ökotest: Food packaging contaminated with harmful substances

Messner says: "Children and young people have particularly sensitive skin. The use of sunscreen is and remains essential to minimize the risk of skin cancer."

We have already addressed the topic of sunscreen several times—here, for example, organic sunscreens compared to conventional ones:

The smell of summer