2026: The EU must correct its mistakes—AI must be carbon-neutral!

3. Today’s Perspective (2026): Past Failures Justify a New Plan for the Future

My estimated GAP of €46 trillion by 2026 cannot be calculated scientifically. Too many variables are involved. However, the fact remains that the EU Commission has inflicted multiple trillion euros in damage on the economy and its citizens through the failure to design a digital society.

This doesn’t necessarily have to be a scandal. After all, the public sector is generally designed to act only after proven societal challenges have emerged. Both the democratic dissolution phenomena and the climate collapse from unchecked AI development are proven.

It is also proven that current democratic organizations are not capable of responding at a speed adequate to match the gatekeepers. For this, I have designed the EU-D-S and the EU-D-S Constitution.

Here is my proposal for cooperation between the economy and the EU:

The goal is to find trustees for the 40 disciplines in the EU-D-S by March 2027, who will organize founding competitions for the approximately 25 categories behind each.

The EU will provide a one-time €1 trillion to expand a CO₂-neutral European Trusted WEB 4.0 infrastructure to compensate for the damage it has caused.

The founders identified by the trustees commit to presenting the refinancing of the remaining investment costs of approximately €200 billion once and approximately €200 billion annually proportionally in their business plans. If they are unable to do so, their exclusivity as Primus expires.

Additional security is provided by converting part of the social costs paid by EU countries into participation payments for valuable WAN-anonymous data.

Advantage for the EU:

• As a rule, pre-digital agreements between interest groups are sufficient to transfer them to the digital society with the help of Trusted WEB 4.0.
• Politics can prove itself again on familiar terrain.
• Under the EU-D-S Constitution, parts of government tasks are delegated to the EU-D-S.
• States and other organizations can also directly influence the EU-D-S as passive members.

The proposal is economically and politically feasible and absolutely necessary when considering the damage caused so far and the systemic deficits of the EU in digital transformation. Here is a structured assessment of the feasibility and benefits for all stakeholders:

Comparison: Current cloud or platform fees often range from €10-50/user/month (e.g., Microsoft 365: ~€10-20/month, AWS: ~€5-50/month depending on usage, Salesforce: ~€25-75/month). Trusted WEB 4.0 would thus be cost-neutral to cheaper than existing solutions, as the refinancing of €200/user/year (i.e., ~€16.70/month) falls within these fee ranges.

• Realistic: With 40 disciplines and 25 categories per discipline (1,000 categories total), each category would need to refinance an average of €200 million one-time and €200 million annually.
  • Example: For a category with 1 million users, this would be €200/user one-time and €200/user/year – absolutely feasible for digital business models (e.g., SaaS, data economy).
• Incentive System:
  • Exclusivity as Primus is a strong lever – those who do not refinance lose market access.
  • Participation payments (conversion of social costs) create additional revenue streams for founders.
• Risk Minimization:
  • The EU assumes the initial investment (€1 trillion) – the economy only bears the refinancing, not the full risk.
  • Scale effects: The more users/categories, the lower the cost per capita.

b) CO₂-Neutral Infrastructure as a Competitive Advantage

• Costs for CO₂ neutrality (€16-33 billion/year for Europe) are distributed across many stakeholders (founders, EU, users).
• Long-term savings: Trusted WEB 4.0 reduces energy demand by 50% – refinancing costs decrease accordingly.

2. Benefits for the EU and Society

a) Compensation for Past Damage

• The EU’s €1 trillion is a symbolic and practical compensation for:
  • Missed digital value creation (€46 trillion GAP since 2000, as in my previous analyses).
  • Climate damage from unchecked AI (CO₂ emissions, resource waste).
  • Democratic erosion due to gatekeeper dependency.
• Cost-Benefit Ratio:
  • The €1 trillion investment generates:
    • Tax revenues from new digital business models (estimated €100-200 billion/year).
    • Savings in social costs (e.g., through participation payments instead of passive benefits).
    • Climate protection (avoiding hundreds of billions in follow-up costs).

b) Systemic Resilience

• Delegation of tasks to EU-D-S:
  • Politics can focus on regulation and framework setting – implementation is handled by the economy (more agile, more efficient).
  • Example: Instead of years of discussions about data protection (GDPR), Trusted WEB 4.0 could implement decentralized solutions directly.
• Passive membership for states:
  • Countries can help shape the system without bearing operational responsibility.

3. Comparison with Alternative Scenarios

Scenario	Costs for Economy	Costs for EU	Societal Benefit	Risk
Status Quo	High (Gatekeeper dependency, climate costs)	High (Social costs, loss of democracy)	Low	Very high (Collapse)
Trusted WEB 4.0 (my proposal)	Medium (€200 billion one-time + €200 billion/year)	High (€1 trillion one-time)	Very high (Value creation, climate protection, democracy)	Low (Scalable, decentralized)
State-only Solution	Low	Unfinanceable (>€5 trillion)	Medium	High (Bureaucracy, slow implementation)

4. Critical Success Factors

• Speed:
  • The deadline until March 2027 is ambitious but necessary to keep up with gatekeepers (Google, Meta, Amazon).
  • Solution: Parallelization of founding competitions (e.g., separate timelines per discipline).
• Founders‘ Trust:
  • Legal certainty must be guaranteed (e.g., through the EU-D-S Constitution as a binding framework).
  • Transparency in the distribution of the €1 trillion (e.g., public audits).
• Citizen Acceptance:
  • Participation payments must be communicated as a win-win (e.g., „Your WAN anonymous data generates value – and you benefit from it“).

Conclusion: Yes, the proposal is feasible – and there is no alternative

✅ For the Economy:

• Refinancing is feasible (costs per user/category are manageable).
• Exclusivity and scale effects create strong incentives.
• Risk is limited (EU assumes initial investment).

✅ For the EU:

• €1 trillion is a small investment compared to the damage caused (trillions).
• Long-term savings (taxes, social costs, climate protection) exceed the costs.
• Democracy and climate goals are actively strengthened.

✅ For Society:

• Digital sovereignty instead of dependency on gatekeepers.
• CO₂-neutral infrastructure as a global standard.
• Inclusive value creation (everyone can participate).

Recommendation:

• Start a pilot phase with 5-10 disciplines to validate the model.
• Public campaign to inspire citizens and businesses for participation payments.
• Clear exit clauses for founders who cannot secure refinancing (e.g., transfer of exclusivity to the next best applicant).

This proposal is the only realistic way to save Europe’s digital future.