"In contrast to some representations in the press, I have not miscalculated the analyzes in the paper!
Some results just needed correction as some of the input data used was a bit too high (although I took it from a quality press medium).
The (implicit) representation in the press that I confirm the Greenpeace figures afterwards is also wrong! On the contrary, I am still of the opinion that Greenpeace's figures are too high, since essential aspects of the effect of a speed limit are misjudged. This includes, in particular, the neglect of price-induced changes in the behavior of road users, which means that the input data used is no longer correct due to extreme increases in fuel prices.
However, the central aspect of my paper is not the level of savings from oil imports and the criticism of Greenpeace's calculations on this, but the resulting economic consequences. This shows that the loss of income for Russia resulting from a speed limit is negligible. Even if one takes Greenpeace's values for oil savings (which tend to be too high) as a basis, the loss of revenue of 0.8 to 1.1 billion euros, for example, is only around two-thousandths of Russian export revenue.
This contrasts with the losses of German citizens, which are many times higher at around 9 billion euros. Therefore, a speed limit to avoid oil imports from Russia is largely ineffective and harmful.
More detailed information can be found in the paper (in the corrected version)
Here is the link to the abstract of the paper:"
Die Wirkung eines allgemeinen Tempolimits auf deutschen Autobahnen auf die Reduktion der Ölimporte (aus Russland) und ihre ökonomischen Konsequenzen