5 ms·

Create more jobs in renewables and the problem solves itself. I have a solar installation out of necessity in one particular application, and in another I purch

by jjawssd 10y ago

Create more jobs in renewables and the problem solves itself. I have a solar installation out of necessity in one particular application, and in another I purchase wind power from the grid by choice because it offers competitive rates in my electrical market. I voted with my wallet and you should be able to as well.

EGreg 10y ago
Not if the federal government keeps subsidizing fossil fuels to keep them competitive.
- jjawssd 10y ago
  What's the case for subsidies?
  - EGreg 10y ago
    Well you know, OPEC drops prices and that causes us to abort all future investment in fossil fuels. Can't have that. So let's subsidize them.
  - specialist 10y ago
    Sovereignty.
  - nikdaheratik 10y ago
    1. Oil security from something like the oil crisis of the 70s. 2. Domestic jobs, especially in places like North Dakota or Louisiana which wouldn't have nearly the tax base they do without coal and oil jobs.
- mistermann 10y ago
  What are the major forms of fossil fuel subsidization, and are there no subsidies for renewables? Just interested in the magnitude of what's really happening.
  - dude01 10y ago
    I've never seen good solid numbers that I liked. However, I'd say more than $100B/yr by US government, to protect our global supply chain of oil distribution. For instance, I'd say the entire cost of being in Iraq was an oil subsidy.
    - mistermann 10y ago
      Well it certainly could, when the renewables industry has a plausible plan for complete replacement of conventional energy, I'm happy to support it with my tax dollars, or even before. And when that infrastructure is in place, I will happily remove my support for protecting this supply chain. But until then, calling this a "subsidy" of the oil industry is a bit of a mischaracterization. (But not complete, as these costs should most definitely be included in a comprehensive analysis when setting policy.)
  - EGreg 10y ago
    How about these https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment/2015/may/18/fossil-fuel-companies-getting-10m-a-minute-in-subsidies-says-imf?client=safari https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment... https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment/2010/aug/03/fossil-fuel-subsidies-renewables https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment... And the USA isn't alone https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment/2015/feb/10/uk-spent-300-times-more-fossil-fuel-clean-energy-despite-green-pledge https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment... When the government stops subsidizing fossil fuels 10x more than renewables, look what happens: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/rundown/u-s-investment-in-renewable-energy-outpaces-fossil-fuels https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/rundow... But Trump and the Republicans might reverse that again.
    - mistermann 10y ago
      > https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment/2015/may/18/fossil-fuel-companies-getting-10m-a-minute-in-subsidies-says-imf?client=safari https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment... "The vast sum is largely due to polluters not paying the costs imposed on governments by the burning of coal, oil and gas. These include the harm caused to local populations by air pollution as well as to people across the globe affected by the floods, droughts and storms being driven by climate change." It's not that there isn't something important to be discussed there, but if that's the type of subsidy you're referring to when you say "oil is subsidized", it's going to be a messy, inconclusive argument, at least in part because your argument is based on (necessarily) made up numbers. > When the government stops subsidizing fossil fuels 10x more than renewables, look what happens No, that's what happens when renewables technology becomes economically competitive, this has nothing at all to do with the subsidy noted above.

by jjawssd 10y ago

EGreg 10y ago

Not if the federal government keeps subsidizing fossil fuels to keep them competitive.

jjawssd 10y ago
What's the case for subsidies?
- EGreg 10y ago
  Well you know, OPEC drops prices and that causes us to abort all future investment in fossil fuels. Can't have that. So let's subsidize them.
- specialist 10y ago
  Sovereignty.
- nikdaheratik 10y ago
  1. Oil security from something like the oil crisis of the 70s. 2. Domestic jobs, especially in places like North Dakota or Louisiana which wouldn't have nearly the tax base they do without coal and oil jobs.
mistermann 10y ago
What are the major forms of fossil fuel subsidization, and are there no subsidies for renewables? Just interested in the magnitude of what's really happening.
- dude01 10y ago
  I've never seen good solid numbers that I liked. However, I'd say more than $100B/yr by US government, to protect our global supply chain of oil distribution. For instance, I'd say the entire cost of being in Iraq was an oil subsidy.
  - mistermann 10y ago
    Well it certainly could, when the renewables industry has a plausible plan for complete replacement of conventional energy, I'm happy to support it with my tax dollars, or even before. And when that infrastructure is in place, I will happily remove my support for protecting this supply chain. But until then, calling this a "subsidy" of the oil industry is a bit of a mischaracterization. (But not complete, as these costs should most definitely be included in a comprehensive analysis when setting policy.)
- EGreg 10y ago
  How about these https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment/2015/may/18/fossil-fuel-companies-getting-10m-a-minute-in-subsidies-says-imf?client=safari https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment... https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment/2010/aug/03/fossil-fuel-subsidies-renewables https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment... And the USA isn't alone https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment/2015/feb/10/uk-spent-300-times-more-fossil-fuel-clean-energy-despite-green-pledge https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment... When the government stops subsidizing fossil fuels 10x more than renewables, look what happens: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/rundown/u-s-investment-in-renewable-energy-outpaces-fossil-fuels https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/rundow... But Trump and the Republicans might reverse that again.
  - mistermann 10y ago
    > https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment/2015/may/18/fossil-fuel-companies-getting-10m-a-minute-in-subsidies-says-imf?client=safari https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment... "The vast sum is largely due to polluters not paying the costs imposed on governments by the burning of coal, oil and gas. These include the harm caused to local populations by air pollution as well as to people across the globe affected by the floods, droughts and storms being driven by climate change." It's not that there isn't something important to be discussed there, but if that's the type of subsidy you're referring to when you say "oil is subsidized", it's going to be a messy, inconclusive argument, at least in part because your argument is based on (necessarily) made up numbers. > When the government stops subsidizing fossil fuels 10x more than renewables, look what happens No, that's what happens when renewables technology becomes economically competitive, this has nothing at all to do with the subsidy noted above.