6 ms·

The wikipedia link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_subsidies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_subsidies. e.g. in the UK north sea oil exploration is h

by coriny 10y ago

The wikipedia link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_subsidies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_subsidies. e.g. in the UK north sea oil exploration is heavily subsidised: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/uk-government-pays-6bn-a-year-in-subsidies-to-fossil-fuel-industry-a6730946.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/uk-government-.... Of course there's lots of politics and commercial interests here, so I don't overly trust the upfront numbers given by articles in newspapers. As a reference point the UK has about the lowest consumer energy taxes in the EU, and the highest consumer prices.

CountSessine 10y ago
in the UK north sea oil exploration is heavily subsidised It seems very misleading to say "taxpayer support" for a tax preference, especially when tax revenue for north sea oil is going to be well over that 6bn.
- ZeroGravitas 10y ago
  It's all accounting at the end of the day. The oil belongs to the nation, they're "hiring" industries to extract it. Whether it's called a tax or a payment is all semantics at some level. This is part of why Norway can make around £400 Billion more money than the UK from a similar amount of oil, extracted from basically the same place: http://www.resourcegovernance.org/blog/did-uk-miss-out-%C2%A3400-billion-worth-oil-revenue http://www.resourcegovernance.org/blog/did-uk-miss-out-%C2%A... See also "Hollywood Accounting".
  - CountSessine 10y ago
    From the linked page, about half of that £400bn is equity in state-owned oil companies with no stake in oil fields outside the north sea; as someone who lives in a country that had an albatross state-owned oil company, that's going to become a very interesting investment once those oil fields dry up in the next 20 years. The article itself says the rest is partly because of lower taxes on the oil industry, but mostly because 1. The peaks of oil production in the UK's and Norway's fields were at different times when the market price of oil was different. 2. Norway has fewer fields but more reserves which made extraction more efficient. It's also worth pointing out that the £6bn/year figure in the Independent article seems to be a bit of a wank too.
dangravell 10y ago
> As a reference point the UK has [...] the highest consumer prices. No it doesn't, not even close... http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/File:Electricity_prices_for_household_consumers,_second_half_2015_(%C2%B9)_(EUR_per_kWh)_YB16.png http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/... http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/File:Natural_gas_prices_for_household_consumers,_second_half_2015_(%C2%B9)_(EUR_per_kWh)_YB16.png http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/... Unless I misunderstand what you mean by consumer prices?
- coriny 10y ago
  Ah sorry, I missed a key phrase out - _pre-tax_ UK prices are the highest, and they are by a long way. Post-tax they're nearer the middle as the UK has by far the lowest energy taxes. Unfortunately it's too late to edit my comment for clarification.

by coriny 10y ago

CountSessine 10y ago

in the UK north sea oil exploration is heavily subsidised It seems very misleading to say "taxpayer support" for a tax preference, especially when tax revenue for north sea oil is going to be well over that 6bn.

ZeroGravitas 10y ago
It's all accounting at the end of the day. The oil belongs to the nation, they're "hiring" industries to extract it. Whether it's called a tax or a payment is all semantics at some level. This is part of why Norway can make around £400 Billion more money than the UK from a similar amount of oil, extracted from basically the same place: http://www.resourcegovernance.org/blog/did-uk-miss-out-%C2%A3400-billion-worth-oil-revenue http://www.resourcegovernance.org/blog/did-uk-miss-out-%C2%A... See also "Hollywood Accounting".
- CountSessine 10y ago
  From the linked page, about half of that £400bn is equity in state-owned oil companies with no stake in oil fields outside the north sea; as someone who lives in a country that had an albatross state-owned oil company, that's going to become a very interesting investment once those oil fields dry up in the next 20 years. The article itself says the rest is partly because of lower taxes on the oil industry, but mostly because 1. The peaks of oil production in the UK's and Norway's fields were at different times when the market price of oil was different. 2. Norway has fewer fields but more reserves which made extraction more efficient. It's also worth pointing out that the £6bn/year figure in the Independent article seems to be a bit of a wank too.

dangravell 10y ago

> As a reference point the UK has [...] the highest consumer prices. No it doesn't, not even close... http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/File:Electricity_prices_for_household_consumers,_second_half_2015_(%C2%B9)_(EUR_per_kWh)_YB16.png http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/... http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/File:Natural_gas_prices_for_household_consumers,_second_half_2015_(%C2%B9)_(EUR_per_kWh)_YB16.png http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/... Unless I misunderstand what you mean by consumer prices?

coriny 10y ago
Ah sorry, I missed a key phrase out - _pre-tax_ UK prices are the highest, and they are by a long way. Post-tax they're nearer the middle as the UK has by far the lowest energy taxes. Unfortunately it's too late to edit my comment for clarification.