CH4Ohio
Platinum Member
Where's the data for the $5.9 Trillion subsidy to "fossil fuels" that you mention? In what form was this subsidy paid and to who?
Other than standard business expenses and GAAP accounting, I'm not aware of any subsidies for drilling a well or building a pipeline.
Nevermind. Quick search took me to the IMF report that stated this $5.9 Trillion subsidy. Did you read the summary details?
They aren't saying that the oil, coal, and gas industry RECEIVED $5.9 Trillion. In fact, they say that only 8% of these dollars are "explicit subsidies" while 92% are "implicit subsidies". Lots of smoke and mirrors.
They say that our energy prices have been too low. They claim that's an "explicit subsidy" and that money would have been extracted from the public and society if coal, oil, and gas had been priced properly. They're calling that a "subsidy."
The much larger 92% is their estimate of the "environmental damage and impact" and the "negative health consequences" that society has to absorb. They state that this could be recovered with a heavy carbon tax, which we would all have to pay. They're saying that the cost to treat someone who gets skin cancer because we've damaged the ozone layer, for example, is a "subsidy" to the "fossil fuel" industry. (Really??)
The IMF report is very much an academic exercise and subject to debate as to the methodology. By the same token, the health implications and the environmental damage caused by mining rare-earth minerals in Mongolia to support wind turbines or EV batteries would be a "subsidy" for the "green" initiative.
Not really the same DIRECT subsidies and concrete tax credits we've been discussing.