4 ms·

Well, how about the fact there's an absolutely enormous, untaxed negative externality? It's implicit - normally you tax something to reduce use of something har

Well, how about the fact there's an absolutely enormous, untaxed negative externality? It's implicit - normally you tax something to reduce use of something harmful. Renewable energy would be far more competitive if this was factored in. Fossil fuels are causing incredible economic damage - but in a way that isn't captured by traditional economic models. It's going to have huge costs to future generations - if we taxed it, not only would we get off fossil fuels faster, we might then have extra cash around to soften the blow when it inevitably comes.

legolas2412 10y ago
Yes, there should be carbon tax. But the OP wants to know of the coal subsidies even Elon musk calls so huge that solar subsidies are "cents on the dollar". How about providing actual subsidies for coal, also the difference between taxes for coal and solar. Of course they should be compared per Kwhr (which in my opinion Elon musk didn't do).
- ZeroGravitas 10y ago
  80% of US coal mined by the big three companies is sold by the federal government to them at 1 dollar a ton. That coal will cause between 22 and 237 dollars worth of costs to the nation. http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/news/new-report-details-how-federal-coal-leasing-and-exports-undermine-obamas-climate-plan/ http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/news/new-report-details-how-fe...
  - CountSessine 10y ago
    What's the market value of one ton of coal? Has a group other than greenpeace done the accounting on the 'cost' to the nation? Are you not intrigued by the enormous error-bars on that figure ($22-$237)? Maybe this is a complete wank? How does the nation benefit from having inexpensive coal power available? What's the value per ton generated?
    - ZeroGravitas 10y ago
      I believe that the "social cost" in the report is a value generated by the federal government itself. Also, error bars generally make me more confident in a number. Coal can be burned in old or new plants with different levels of scrubbing for example. I'd also point out that this conversation started with you "just asking questions" about subsidies, and you've attacked every answer you've received.

legolas2412 10y ago

Yes, there should be carbon tax. But the OP wants to know of the coal subsidies even Elon musk calls so huge that solar subsidies are "cents on the dollar". How about providing actual subsidies for coal, also the difference between taxes for coal and solar. Of course they should be compared per Kwhr (which in my opinion Elon musk didn't do).

ZeroGravitas 10y ago
80% of US coal mined by the big three companies is sold by the federal government to them at 1 dollar a ton. That coal will cause between 22 and 237 dollars worth of costs to the nation. http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/news/new-report-details-how-federal-coal-leasing-and-exports-undermine-obamas-climate-plan/ http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/news/new-report-details-how-fe...
- CountSessine 10y ago
  What's the market value of one ton of coal? Has a group other than greenpeace done the accounting on the 'cost' to the nation? Are you not intrigued by the enormous error-bars on that figure ($22-$237)? Maybe this is a complete wank? How does the nation benefit from having inexpensive coal power available? What's the value per ton generated?
  - ZeroGravitas 10y ago
    I believe that the "social cost" in the report is a value generated by the federal government itself. Also, error bars generally make me more confident in a number. Coal can be burned in old or new plants with different levels of scrubbing for example. I'd also point out that this conversation started with you "just asking questions" about subsidies, and you've attacked every answer you've received.