Oil subsidies in USA - have we discussed them lately?

[Rhea]

http://harvardmagazine.com/2014/01/the-fix-in-fossil-fuels

“If you just look at the track record of these subsidies in the U.S. tax code and what’s happened to U.S. production over the last 40 years…[there is] basically no correlation,” he reports. “The problem is that the current tax breaks do not target new technologies, nor do they target pollution-reducing technologies. The current tax breaks are indiscriminate and apply even now, when oil prices have been at their highest all-time levels over the past five years. They enrich firms that would have drilled wells anyway. In fact, the impact on U.S. production is negligible.”

If the subsidies were eliminated everywhere, global oil consumption could fall by more than four million barrels per day—benefiting consumer nations, including the United States. In addition, global carbon dioxide emissions contributing to climate change could fall about 7 percent by 2020 and about 10 percent (more than five billion tons of carbon dioxide per year) by 2050. “If the U.S. could actually deliver on what the president committed to in 2009, and…get rid of these production subsidies,” he says, “it has the potential to leverage a lot of change and behavior in other countries.”

this article came out last year, but I was browsing for current subsidy levels and came across it today. I am interested in understand what subsidies exist specifically for oil/gas/coal (or functionally for oil/gas/coal) and what they purport to provide the economy and what they actually do provide to the economy.

Versus what those same dollars could do if applied to alternative/renewable/sustainable energy subsidies.

 

[Rhea]

Here's another article that attempts to quantify the subsidies

http://priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/

What is a fossil fuel subsidy?
A fossil fuel subsidy is any government action that lowers the cost of fossil fuel energy production, raises the price received by energy producers or lowers the price paid by energy consumers. There are a lot of activities under this simple definition—tax breaks and giveaways, but also loans at favorable rates, price controls, purchase requirements and a whole lot of other things.

How much money does the U.S. government provide to support the oil, gas and coal industries?

In the United States, credible estimates of annual fossil fuel subsidies range from $10 billion to $52 billion annually yet these don’t even include costs borne by taxpayers related to the climate, local environmental, and health impacts of the fossil fuel industry. As of July 2014, Oil Change International estimates U.S. fossil fuel subsidies at $37.5 billion annually, including $21 billion in production and exploration subsidies.

 

[coloradoatheist]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/energysource/2012/04/25/the-surprising-reason-that-oil-subsidies-persist-even-liberals-love-them/



Here's an article discussing the subsidies. On the largest programs as a subsidy is Low income energy consumption. It helps poor people pay their energy costs, so people think of that as a good subsidy.

 

[bilby]

The use of oil for domestic heating is almost unheard of outside North America.

 

[dismal]

It's not common in the USA either outside of the Northeast. Even up there a lot of new construction goes with propane (by truck). But the NIMBYs and BANANAs will probably not keep natural gas out forever.

 

[Rhea]

It's not common in the USA either outside of the Northeast. Even up there a lot of new construction goes with propane (by truck). But the NIMBYs and BANANAs will probably not keep natural gas out forever.

NIMBYs and BANANAs? I know what a NIMBY is (Not In My Back Yard), but not a BANANA. But what does either have to do with keeping natural gas heating out of areas? Are you confusing natural gas heating with natural gas hydraulic fracturing? Most of the anti-frackers are not anti gas, they are anti fracking.

 

[bilby]

It's not common in the USA either outside of the Northeast. Even up there a lot of new construction goes with propane (by truck). But the NIMBYs and BANANAs will probably not keep natural gas out forever.

NIMBYs and BANANAs? I know what a NIMBY is (Not In My Back Yard), but not a BANANA. But what does either have to do with keeping natural gas heating out of areas? Are you confusing natural gas heating with natural gas hydraulic fracturing? Most of the anti-frackers are not anti gas, they are anti fracking.

BANANA = Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything.

 

[Axulus]

All the subsidies should be eliminated (implement a carbon tax if your worry is about carbon), but, on a per unit basis, the oil subsidies are pretty tiny:

 

[dismal]

NIMBYs and BANANAs? I know what a NIMBY is (Not In My Back Yard), but not a BANANA. But what does either have to do with keeping natural gas heating out of areas? Are you confusing natural gas heating with natural gas hydraulic fracturing? Most of the anti-frackers are not anti gas, they are anti fracking.

BANANA = Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything.

I think it's anyone, but yeah.

- - - Updated - - -

It's not common in the USA either outside of the Northeast. Even up there a lot of new construction goes with propane (by truck). But the NIMBYs and BANANAs will probably not keep natural gas out forever.

NIMBYs and BANANAs? I know what a NIMBY is (Not In My Back Yard), but not a BANANA. But what does either have to do with keeping natural gas heating out of areas? Are you confusing natural gas heating with natural gas hydraulic fracturing? Most of the anti-frackers are not anti gas, they are anti fracking.

No, people in much of the northeast do not have gas pipelines so they do not have gas heat.

 

[TV and credit cards]

All the subsidies should be eliminated (implement a carbon tax if your worry is about carbon), but, on a per unit basis, the oil subsidies are pretty tiny:

If time was your per unit basis, the chart might look a bit different.

Here's an interesting article on carbon capture: Microcapsules capture carbon safely

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

All the subsidies should be eliminated (implement a carbon tax if your worry is about carbon), but, on a per unit basis, the oil subsidies are pretty tiny:

What you said verses what you showed are not equivalent.

What you said is that fossil fuel subsidies are "pretty tiny". What this chart shows is that fossil fuel subsidies per Billion BTU produced are "pretty tiny".

It is obvious that for new technology, that subsidies verses production would be high... it'd be the reason why they have the subsidy in the first place!