Australia's largest stock trading and investment forum Australia's #1 stock forum

End of Coal, page-33

First 33 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
thecurious1

4,122 Posts.

2

29/06/18

12:31

Post #: 34036755
Share

Originally posted by sierra ↑

Here you go. Wikipedia.

Where are your references for your conclusions, thought bubbles, crap?

"A 2016 study estimated that global fossil fuel subsidies were $5.3 trillion in 2015, which represents 6.5% of global GDP.^[3] The study found that "China was the biggest subsidizer in 2013 ($1.8 trillion), followed by the United States ($0.6 trillion), and Russia, the European Union, and India (each with about $0.3 trillion)."^[3] The authors estimated that the elimination of "subsidies would have reduced global carbon emissions in 2013 by 21% and fossil fuel air pollution deaths 55%, while raising revenue of 4%, and social welfare by 2.2%, of global GDP."^[3] According to the International Energy Agency, the elimination of fossil fuel subsidies worldwide would be the one of the most effective ways of reducing greenhouse gases and battling global warming.^[4] In May 2016, the G7 nations set for the first time a deadline for ending most fossil fuel subsidies; saying government support for coal, oil and gas should end by 2025.^[14]
According to the OECD, subsidies supporting fossil fuels, particularly coal and oil, represent greater threats to the environment than subsidies to renewable energy. Subsidies to nuclear power contribute to unique environmental and safety issues, related mostly to the risk of high-level environmental damage, although nuclear power contributes positively to the environment in the areas of air pollution and climate change.^[15] According to Fatih Birol, Chief Economist at the International Energy Agency without a phasing out of fossil fuel subsidies, countries will not reach their climate targets.^[16]
A 2010 study by Global Subsidies Initiative compared global relative subsidies of different energy sources. Results show that fossil fuels receive 0.8 US cents per kWh of energy they produce (although it should be noted that the estimate of fossil fuel subsidies applies only to consumer subsidies and only within non-OECD countries), nuclear energy receives 1.7 cents / kWh, renewable energy (excluding hydroelectricity) receives 5.0 cents / kWh and bio-fuels receive 5.1 cents / kWh in subsidies.^[17]
In 2011, IEA chief economist Faith Birol said the current $409 billion equivalent of fossil fuel subsidies are encouraging a wasteful use of energy, and that the cuts in subsidies is the biggest policy item that would help renewable energies get more market share and reduce CO₂ emissions.^[18]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_subsidies

Expand

You missed a couple of points in that wiki article;

You may find this one familiar. I have invited you to disprove it a number of times over the last year or so - no response.

(eg motor vehicle exemptions is a fossil fuel subsidy ????)

As often stated, an economically and socially acceptable transition to increased renewable energy is the way to go.

Last edited by thecurious1: 29/06/18
Upvote

Reply

Top Stories

WC8

Pan Asia rebranding to 'clear confusion' after bagging $35M for Chile projects

ASX Market Open: Aussie market to leap on best 'Trump trade' bump since election day | November 22, 2024

GRL

To make modern missiles, you need 3D Printing. And in that gold rush, Amaero is selling shovels

BTH

Bigtincan's Board backs Investcorp offer: Why a NASDAQ listing could be game-changing

ALY

Alcidion inks deal with Vic health provider Peninsula for use of Miya Precision tech

There are more pages in this discussion • 86 more messages in this thread...

First 33 Last