URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Renewable Revolution
  HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Fossil Fuel Folly
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 5559--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Fossil Fuel Subsidies - The Invisible Ones are Worse Than th
       e Obvious Ones!
       By: AGelbert Date: August 8, 2016, 5:44 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-080816184719.png[/img][/center]
       To show you that the cratering of fossil fuel prices (and
       STOCK!) is NOT a recent trend, here's last year's one year
       performance Oil & Gas Writing on the Wall (Street).   8)
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-080816185404.png[/img][/center]
       The totally unjustified price increase earlier this year was due
       to SPECULATION, not "supply & demand", as the recent wailing
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/165fs373950.gif
       and gnashing of
       teeth by oil trader crooks evidences[/I]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/fossil-fuel-folly/fossil-fuel-profits-getting-eaten-alive-by-renewable-energy!/msg5521/#msg5521<br
       />when they got their arses handed to them by the Chinese.
       Last year, reality was asserting itself in the stock market.
       Reality has a habit of doing that, despite the most energetic
       efforts at corruption and rigging by the champions
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp<br
       />
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif<br
       />
  HTML https://smileyshack.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/stupid-im-with-arrow-left.gif<br
       />of profit over planet.  8)
       Fossil Fuel Corporations are going to lose[i] a lot of money.
       Here's why. It is in the category of correct accounting
       procedures. Perhaps it is such a shock to the corporate world
       that they had to invent a new accounting term (i.e. Stranded
       Assets.).
       "Stranded Assets", the new term for fossil fuels and the
       accompanying infrastructure plant and equipment, in real world
       accounting, means "LIABILITIES".
       When that realization FINALLY hits the balance sheet preparers
       in the corporate world, the red ink will produce a TORRENT of
       fossil fuel industry bankruptcies. GOOD!  ;D
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML http://www.ceres.org/images/press-release/Graphic_FossilFuelAssets.jpg/image_large[/img][/center]
       And let's not forget all those refineries, pipelines, drilling
       rigs and, last but not least, ocean going oil tankers that will
       find it rather difficult to carry olive oil or biofuels instead
       of crude oil....
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191258.bmp<br
       />
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191456.bmp
       [move]
       Looky here, a floating white elephant![/move]
       [center]
       [img
       width=640]
  HTML http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/82/Hellespont_Alhambra-223713_v2.jpg[/img][/center]
       [center][I]Hellespont Alhambra (now TI Asia), a ULCC TI class
       supertanker, which are the largest ocean-going oil tankers in
       the world[/i][/center]
       #Post#: 5771--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Fossil Fuel Subsidies - The Invisible Ones are Worse Than th
       e Obvious Ones!
       By: AGelbert Date: October 4, 2016, 5:41 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center]When you’re in a carbon hole, stop digging
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/301.gif
       [/center]
       Published on 03/10/2016, 4:53pm
       [move][font=courier]Coal mine expansion makes dirty fuel cheap
       and delays the transition to clean alternatives. A moratorium is
       in order, argues Richard Denniss[/font][/move]
       By  Richard Denniss
       A world that is tackling climate change needs fewer coal mines,
       not more. But despite the simple truth of that statement, very
       large new coal mines are still being approved, subsidized and
       built around the world.
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183337.bmp<br
       />
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/126fs2277341.gif
       In Australia, for example, the proposed Adani Carmichael mine –
       the largest ever in the country – would boost world coal output
       by around 40 million tonnes per year, enough to push the world
       price of coal down by around 1–2%.
       Reducing greenhouse gas emissions in line with the goals of the
       Paris Agreement will require a broad range of measures, given
       that less coal will be needed in a low carbon future.
       A simple first step for a world committed to a safe climate
       would be a moratorium on new coal mines, such as that proposed
       by the then-President of Kiribati, Anote Tong.
       In addition to the obvious benefits of reducing coal production,
       avoiding unnecessary investment in unnecessary projects, and
       pushing up the price of coal, a moratorium on building new coal
       mines has a number of political economy, equity and diplomatic
       benefits.
       Coal is by far the largest contributor to global emissions, and
       financially and politically, coal is the weakest member of the
       fossil fuel family. A moratorium on new coal mines further
       weakens the political power of the industry: Not only does it
       separate coal from the oil and gas sector, but it also separates
       the interests of the owners of existing coal mines from the
       interests of those proposing new coal mines.
       Closely related to this is how a moratorium on new mines fits
       with the need for a “just transition” away from coal. Avoiding
       new mines helps to protect the jobs and wages of workers in
       existing coal mines, some of which might otherwise be forced to
       shut down early amid competition from new, often subsidized,
       coal mines.
       This means a moratorium can help to support a more just and
       orderly transition for affected communities. When global demand
       for coal is flat or declining, every new coal mine built lowers
       both the market share and price received by all existing coal
       mines. That means new coal mines not only delay the transition
       away from coal; they also hurt existing coal miners’
       livelihoods.
       [center]Study: Existing coal, oil and gas fields will blow
       carbon budget  [img
       width=50]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-150715183719.png[/img][/center]
       At a diplomatic level, the call for a moratorium allows
       countries that are committed to global climate action to place
       diplomatic pressure on the small number of countries that are
       committed to the construction of new coal mines.
       In this sense, the call for a moratorium is the diplomatic
       equivalent of a divestment or "Keep it In the Ground” campaign.
       Forcing countries such as Australia to defend their right to
       significantly expand their coal exports is likely to help
       marginalize the views of such countries in existing foreign
       policy forums, including international climate negotiations.
       As world demand for coal declines over time, the result will be
       lower prices. This will, inevitably, induce further demand, and
       thus delay the point at which renewable energy is significantly
       cheaper than coal fired electricity.
       In addition to avoiding unnecessary investments and protecting
       the jobs of workers in existing coal mines, supply-side policies
       such as a coal moratorium can help to keep upward pressure on
       price and, in turn, augment and speed up the rate at which
       demand-side policies and technological change can drive
       reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
       Richard Denniss
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/19.gif
       is chief
       economist at The Australia Institute, tweeting @rdns_tai. To
       learn more about efforts to achieve a moratorium on new coal
       mines in Australia, see:
  HTML http://www.nonewcoalmines.org.au
       .
  HTML http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/10/03/when-youre-in-a-carbon-hole-stop-digging/
       [center] [img
       width=280]
  HTML https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CCi1IdQWYAAcO5Y.jpg[/img]
       
       [img
       width=370]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-270716175152.png[/img][/center]
       #Post#: 5988--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Fossil Fuel Subsidies - The Invisible Ones are Worse Than th
       e Obvious Ones!
       By: AGelbert Date: December 2, 2016, 6:04 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center]Germany tells World Bank to quit funding fossil fuels
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/47b20s0.gif
       [/center]
  HTML http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/12/01/germany-tells-world-bank-to-quit-funding-fossil-fuels/
       #Post#: 6421--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Fossil Fuel Subsidies - The Invisible Ones are Worse Than th
       e Obvious Ones!
       By: AGelbert Date: February 8, 2017, 1:06 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Agelbert NOTE: ANYONE who claims that there is not ample proof
       on this thread of the gargantuan, and totally unjustified,
       subsidies (THEFT from taxpayers) the fossil fuel industry
       welfare queens get annually from our government (and foreign
       governments all over the world too!) is REALLY off their
       rockers.
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/126fs2277341.gif
       To the ignoramous who complained about lack of fossil fuel
       subsidy proof here: Argue your point or STFU.
       [move]Fossil Fuel Subsidies in the U.S.[/move]
       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.
       Are you looking for information about International Fossil Fuel
       Subsidies?  Then go here.
       How much money does the U.S. government give oil, gas and coal
       companies?
       In the United States, credible estimates of annual fossil fuel
       subsidies range from $14 billion to $52 billion annually, while
       even efforts to remove small portions of those subsidies have
       been defeated in Congress, as shown in the graphic below
  HTML http://priceofoil.org/content/uploads/2012/05/FIN.USCapitolSubsidyGraphicFlyer.pdf
  HTML http://priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/
       #Post#: 6487--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Fossil Fuel Subsidies - The Invisible Ones are Worse Than th
       e Obvious Ones!
       By: AGelbert Date: February 16, 2017, 3:30 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center] [img
       width=300]
  HTML http://graysondemocrats.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/end-oil.jpg[/img]<br
       /> [/center]
       [center]Fossil fuels subsidies ‘jeopardising climate deal’, say
       major investors
       [/center]
       Published on 15/02/2017, 12:01am
       
       [center]A group of investors and insurers who manage $2.8trn has
       called on the G20 to end public funding for coal, oil and gas by
       2020   [img width=100
       height=60]
  HTML http://cliparts.co/cliparts/Big/Egq/BigEgqBMT.png[/img][/center]
       By Karl Mathiesen
       Investors with US$2.8 trillion  :o under management have called
       on the world’s leading economies to stop subsidising fossil
       fuels within four years.
       The group, which includes insurance brands Legal & General and
       Aviva, issued a statement on Wednesday calling for a 2020
       deadline to be set for a phase out of subsidies for coal, oil
       and gas by the G20 nations. G20 foreign ministers are meeting
       this week ahead of a leaders’ summit in Hamburg in July.
       The G7 nations have pledged to end their subsidies by 2025, but
       much of the world’s carbon emissions growth is coming from
       countries on the next rung of the economic ladder.
       The G20, which encompasses many of the world’s emerging
       economies, have agreed to phase out “inefficient fossil fuel
       subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption” over the “medium
       term”. But despite increasing pressure from civil society and
       some countries within the G20, the commitment has remained hazy.
       The group of fund managers, many of which hold large fossil fuel
       investments, said a clear signal from the world’s biggest
       economies would give them the confidence to shift capital
       towards clean energy.
       Meryam Omi, head of sustainability and responsible investment
       strategy at Legal and General, said: “The current level of
       inefficient subsidies and lack of transparency are jeopardising
       the global goal of meeting the Paris climate targets and of
       ensuring a secure, healthy and reliable energy system.
       [quote]“As investors, we are faced with a tremendous opportunity
       to finance the low carbon transition and, as such, we look for
       the governments to set a clear timeline and a plan for phasing
       out fossil fuel subsidies to enable an orderly transition. "
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/19.gif[/quote]
       Subsidies can come in the form of tax breaks, direct finance and
       indirect assistance but the definition is a subject of debate.
       Because of this, estimates of global fossil fuel subsidies vary
       widely, but even conservative estimates set the annual spend in
       the hundreds of billions.
       Secretary general of the Mercator Research Institute Brigitte
       Knopf leads a task force charged with advising on the G20
       meeting’s climate agenda. She said the topic of phasing out
       fossil fuel subsidies would be discussed at the meeting.
       “However, in the current political situation we will see what is
       realistic in the end,” she said. The meeting will be the first
       multilateral talks attended by the new US president Donald Trump
       and a major test of his anti-globalist agenda.
       The US has led on this matter in the past, last year presenting
       a joint peer review with China. Germany and Mexico are set to
       follow suit. But Trump has already reversed many of the
       pro-climate initiatives of his predecessor Barack Obama.
       On fossil fuel subsidies, Knopf said “a clear deadline would
       certainly help with this endeavour. However, a phase-out year of
       2020 is very ambitious. In 2016, the G7 have agreed on a date of
       2025 and I don’t expect that the G20 can become more ambitious
       than the already positive signal of a joint 2025 deadline. It is
       also very well possible for the G20 to come out with a two-step
       approach of different speeds, meaning that the industrialized
       countries agree to phase out earlier than the emerging
       economies.”
       Shelagh Whitley, head of climate and energy at the ODI, said
       ministers and leaders meeting in Hamburg in July must heed the
       financial sector.
       “Global investors and insurers are sending a clear message to
       governments that burning public money through fossil fuel
       subsidies is not just bad for the planet, but bad economic
       policy too,” she said.
       A similar call was made by three insurers ahead of last year’s
       of G20 nations in China. In repeating their statement they were
       joined by a dozen investment groups and insurers. In terms of
       wealth managed, the group is equal in size to the world’s
       largest public fund - the US Social Security Trust Funds –  and
       more than three times larger than the largest sovereign wealth
       fund, Norway’s.
       Foreign ministers from the G20 will meet in Bonn, Germany, later
       this week.
  HTML http://www.climatechangenews.com/2017/02/15/fossil-fuels-subsidies-jeopardising-climate-deal-say-major-investors/
       Agelbert NOTE: The U.S. Trump Fossil Fuel Government's Front
       Man, Tillerson
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif
       
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-311013201314.png,<br
       />will, of course, fight common sense policies to phase out foss
       il
       fuels tooth and nail. If he is successful [img
       width=30]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-070814193155.png[/img]<br
       />, we are doomed.  :(
       [quote]"The fossil fuel industry swallows up $5.3 trillion a
       year worldwide in hidden costs to keep burning fossil fuels,
       according to the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
       
       This money, the IMF noted, is in addition to the $492 billion in
       direct subsidies offered by governments around the world through
       write-offs and write-downs and land-use loopholes.
       In a sane world these subsidies would be invested to free us
       from the deadly effects of carbon emissions caused by fossil
       fuels, but we do not live in a sane world. "  -- Chris Hedges
       [/quote]
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-110217171320.png[/img][/center]
       #Post#: 7124--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Fossil Fuel Subsidies - The Invisible Ones are Worse Than th
       e Obvious Ones!
       By: AGelbert Date: May 12, 2017, 10:04 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [img
       width=100]
  HTML https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/all/themes/clew/logo.png[/img]
       [move]German Government plans to phase out support for fossil
       fuel heating systems by 2020
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/19.gif[/move]
       The federal economy ministry (BMWi) plans to phase out support
       for heating systems that run entirely on fossil fuels by 2020,
       as part of its new “Energy efficiency and heat from renewable
       energies” strategy.   [img width=25
       height=30]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-080515182559.png[/img]
       Industry [img
       width=40]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-311013200859.png[/img]<br
       />opposition to the plans is inevitable, Dana Heide writes for
       Handelsblatt.
       The government aims to “clean up the current parallel, and
       sometimes muddled” support for energy efficiency measures in
       buildings, Heide says.
       In a press release, state secretary Rainer Baake said the plans
       “implemented an important measure of Germany’s Climate Action
       Plan 2050”. But it remains to be seen if the strategy will be
       carried through by a new government after the federal elections
       in September, the article says.
  HTML https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/end-fossil-heating-support-nrw-state-vote-key-coal-exit
       #Post#: 7413--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Fossil Fuel Subsidies - The Invisible Ones are Worse Than th
       e Obvious Ones!
       By: AGelbert Date: June 30, 2017, 7:20 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Agelbert NOTE: ALL of the following events are part and  parcel
       of just ONE aspect of the PREDICTED Catastrophic climate change
       activity from having TOO MUCH CARBON DIOXIDE in our Atmosphere.
       There will be a LOT MORE of them. This is just the leading edge.
       Catastrophic climate Change is HERE NOW.
  HTML http://s15.rimg.inf
       o/dcda0e08e538cb37431314e6bd49279b.gif Every
       COST we incur because of these storms is a HIDDEN SUBSIDY for
       the fossil Fuel Fascist Polluters.
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif
       
       Have a nice day.   [img
       width=30]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-120716190938.png[/img]
       [center]
  HTML https://youtu.be/bkaChcbYpE8[/center]
       [center] [img
       width=30]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300714025419.bmp[/img]<br
       />Sky split open: Moscow hit by ‘downpour of the century’ (VIDEO
       S,
       PHOTOS)  [img
       width=30]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300714025456.bmp[/img]<br
       />
       [/center]
       Published time: 30 Jun, 2017 15:18
       [move][font=courier]Moscow Region has been hit by a powerful
       storm that brought heavy torrential rains and hail. The capital
       has not seen such a storm in almost 100 years, according to
       meteorologists.  :o  [img
       width=50]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-150715183719.png[/img][/font][/move]
       
  HTML https://www.rt.com/news/394826-moscow-storm-hail-rain/
       [center] [img
       width=240]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-270716175152.png[/img][/center]
       [quote author=edpell link=topic=9882.msg134048#msg134048
       date=1498865174]
       Driving home today (in NY State) I was in the hardest downpour I
       have ever seen. I was driving uphill on had 6 inches of water on
       the road. There was rain mixed with sleet and small branches.
       Two lanes reduced to 5 MPH all with flashers on. Then after
       about 15 minutes it stopped.
       [/quote]
       There will be more of these events and they will occur more
       often. They are called microbursts. Their increasing frequency
       and duration are part of the predicted Catastrophic climate
       Change now arriving thanks to the fossil fuel polluter fascists.
       We had a couple of them recently in Vermont:
       [quote]Two Microburst Event on 18 May 2017
       1.) Introduction:
       On 18 May 2017 scattered strong to locally severe thunderstorms
       erupted across portions of the Champlain Valley, as well as
       parts of central and northern Vermont. A warm, moist, and
       unstable air mass was in place from the Eastern Adirondack
       Mountains into Vermont with surface temperatures in the mid-80s
       to lower 90s. The temperature reached 93 degrees in Burlington,
       VT, which tied the all-time record for warmest maximum
       temperature for the month of May, along with breaking the daily
       maximum temperature for the date. This impressive heat helped to
       fuel the afternoon and evening showers and thunderstorms.
       This severe weather event had three areas of concentrated that
       included Western Addison County on Potash Bay Road, South
       Burlington/Williston area, and across the Northeast Kingdom near
       Barton, VT. The NWS Burlington Office determined from a storm
       survey the damage which destroyed a camp and knocked down trees
       and powerlines on Potash Bay Road in the town of Addison, VT was
       caused by a microburst with estimated wind speeds of 80 to 100
       mph. Another microburst occurred in South Burlington causing
       trees and power lines to come down, along with a measured 58 mph
       wind gust at Burlington International Airport, before we lost
       power to the observing equipment. Additional damaging
       thunderstorm wind gusts blew over a tractor trailer in Barton,
       VT with areas of trees and powerlines down in parts of the
       Northeast Kingdom. Figure 1 below shows a plot of storm reports
       across the North Country on 18 May 2017.
       See Appendix A for entire listing of severe weather reports
       received by NWS BTV.
       [/quote]
       Read more at link:
  HTML http://www.weather.gov/media/btv/events/2017-05-18%20Microbursts/summary.pdf
  HTML http://www.weather.gov/media/btv/events/2017-05-18%20Microbursts/summary.pdf
       [center][img
       width=340]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-110217171320.png[/img][/center]
       [move][I][font=impact]The Fossil Fuelers   DID THE Climate
       Trashing, human health depleting CRIME,[COLOR=BROWN]   but since
       they have ALWAYS BEEN liars and conscience free crooks, they are
       trying to AVOID [/color]  DOING THE TIME or     PAYING THE FINE!
       Don't let them get away with it! Pass it on!
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/176.gif
       [/font][/I][/move]
       #Post#: 7541--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Fossil Fuel Subsidies - The Invisible Ones are Worse Than th
       e Obvious Ones!
       By: AGelbert Date: July 23, 2017, 10:28 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
  HTML http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kY-ZnpWbJdw
       The fossil fuel industry is NOT PAYING IT; [i]WE ARE![/I]
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/minzdr.gif
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/2mo5pow.gif
       [img
       width=110]
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif[/img]http://www.pic4ever.com/images/swear1.gif
       #Post#: 7604--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Fossil Fuel Subsidies - The Invisible Ones are Worse Than th
       e Obvious Ones!
       By: AGelbert Date: July 31, 2017, 7:53 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center]The Republican Crocodile Tear "Tax Reform" SCAM
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/mocantina.gif
       to get more SWAG
       for Rich Corporate Welfare Queens [/center]
       [center]"Skinny Repeal" Failed  ;D, So Watch Out for "Tax
       Reform" Next (w/Congressman Keith Ellison)[/center]
       [center]
  HTML https://youtu.be/Ab6ZtAdPQfw
  HTML https://youtu.be/Ab6ZtAdPQfw[/center]
       July 28, 2017
       Thom is joined by Congressman Keith Ellison (D-MN, 5th District,
       Deputy Director - DNC) to talk about the failure of "Trumpcare"
       and what tricks republicans will be up to next that we'll need
       to shut down.
       Congressman Ellison and Senator Sanders will counter the
       Republican attempt to cut more money from badly needed social
       services by offering a bill that REALLY can cut Government costs
       a LOT  (but the Repukians will be quiet as DEATH about that
       OBVIOUSLY excellent TAX REFORM Bill because it CUTS the subsidy
       SWAG from the fossil fuel "Industry" polluter  WELFARE QUEENS).
       [center][img
       width=230]
  HTML https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/05/c7/d8/05c7d881009dec85c4f24ed8561bf288.jpg[/img][/center][move][/move]
       Yeah, I know. The Bought and paid fors like Pelosi and the other
       Blue Dog and Bitch Devilcrats will not support the
       Sanders/Ellison Bill either.
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183337.bmp
       [move]Sorry Grandma. Meals on wheels was just cancelled so that
       subsidies for our loyal servants, the Fossil Fuel Industry,
       would not be. Have another banana, Grandma.[img
       width=30]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-120716190938.png[/img][/move]
       [center][img
       width=300]
  HTML http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle-pics/Flag_of_the_United_States.png[/img][/center]
       #Post#: 8117--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Fossil Fuel Subsidies - The Invisible Ones are Worse Than th
       e Obvious Ones!
       By: AGelbert Date: October 14, 2017, 4:02 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center]The U.S. Tax Code — $4.6 Billion In U.S. Oil Company
       Subsidies
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/acigar.gif
       [img
       width=50]
  HTML http://www.smilies.4-user.de/include/Spiele/smilie_game_017.gif[/img]<br
       />
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/2z6in9g.gif
       Per Year [/center]
       October 14th, 2017 by Cynthia Shahan
       In a new study of 800 undeveloped U.S. oil fields, researchers
       found that about half of the fields will never go into
       production … if oil company tax breaks are taken out of the
       picture. In related matters, without a shadow of a doubt,
       renewable energy offers jobs. Renewable energy offers jobs with
       a future — not temporary part-time work, but jobs that are
       probably sustainable well on into the future.
       Obama was supporting such policies — an end to oil and other
       fossil fuel subsidies, solar power for low- and moderate-income
       families that also created jobs, a program to train 25,000
       veterans for new solar jobs, and much more. He was pushing for a
       fresher, more productive future.
       What person does not want pure air to breathe, clean water to
       drink, a future for their children that makes them less likely
       to get cancer, heart problems, etc.? Yet, we still have oil
       subsidies — taxpayers covering oil company costs in a variety of
       ways.
       “In a new study Monday in Nature Energy, SEI researchers looked
       at newly discovered U.S. oil fields that have not yet been put
       into production — all 800 of them,” Tim McDonnell of The
       Washington Post reports.
       [quote]“The researchers found that about half of these
       undeveloped fields would never go into production, (assuming an
       oil price of $50 per barrel, close to where it is today) — if
       oil company tax breaks are taken out of the picture. The study
       is based on the current range of subsidies and doesn’t account
       for changes that could result from the new GOP plan.
       “But [size=12pt]if the range of subsidies offered today remain,
       those new wells could produce up to 17 billion barrels over the
       next few decades, SEI found, which in turn would produce around
       six gigatons of carbon dioxide. To meet the goal set out under
       the Paris climate agreement to keep warming ‘well below 2
       degrees C above pre-industrial levels,’ the United States can
       emit no more than 30 to 45 gigatons of CO2 between now and
       2050.”[/size][/quote]
       A society of sustainable, productive work in clean energy is
       inspiring. Instead, sacrificing jobs, the economy, and American
       health and well-being, the current White House wants to go in
       the wrong direction. It is something akin to the infamous
       delusion of a young, uneducated queen saying, “Let them eat
       cake.” That is what the administration sounds like too many days
       of the week. Fortunately, useful information continues to
       stream.
       [img
       width=70]
  HTML http://www.funny-emoticons.com/files/funny-animals/blue-bird-emoticons/801-listen-up!.png[/img]This<br
       />is how you create jobs:
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML https://c1cleantechnicacom-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2016/12/IRENA-jobs-in-renewable-energy.png[/img][/center]
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML https://c1cleantechnicacom-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2017/04/US-Wind-Energy-Jobs-AWEA.png[/img][/center]
       Tax reform is a vitally important issue. It can help fight
       climate change. McDonnell clearly points out, “Just not the kind
       of tax reform Trump and Republicans are proposing.”
       Going on: “the oil industry is still calling it a win, citing
       proposals that would make it easier for oil companies to recover
       their investments in exploration and to shield profits earned
       from drilling overseas, in addition to lowering the corporate
       tax rate to 20 percent.”
       Can someone please ask Trump on what kind of planet he sees his
       grandchildren and great-grandchildren living if he continues to
       ignore clean air initiatives?
       Maybe an imploding planet is a metaphor for the president’s
       state of health.
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML https://c1cleantechnicacom-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2015/12/oiled-bird-3_l1.jpg[/img][/center]
       “The tax blueprint also expands Trump’s reversal of Obama-era
       climate measures. In 2009, President Barack Obama joined other
       Group of 20 leaders in a pledge to phase out fossil fuel
       subsidies eventually. The GOP tax plan gives little indication
       of keeping that commitment — and that could have significant
       implications for U.S. oil production and the climate.”
       Backwards, backwards, backwards — into a quicksand of confusion
       and tragedy for the well-being of the general population. This
       heartless tax shelter for the profiteers of future pre-existing
       conditions — and not a few dollars to help hungry children in
       schools. Ignoring solar job potential while subsidizing some of
       the richest companies in the world.
       McDonnell continues, “Already, the U.S. oil industry benefits
       from a dozen specialized subsidies adding up to about $4.6
       billion per year, according to a 2015 review by the Obama
       administration. Among other things, the subsidies reduce the
       costs of labor and equipment involved in drilling — and shield
       some of the profits earned on the oil itself. Those tax breaks
       and other subsidies don’t just help the industry a little bit.
       In many cases, they determine whether it’s even worth drilling
       in the first place, according to a study earlier this year from
       the Stockholm Environment Institute, a nonprofit research
       organization.
       Without federal and state subsidies, nearly half of U.S. oil
       production — about 45 percent — would be unprofitable at current
       prices, the researchers found. So, unless oil prices go
       rocketing up, reducing or eliminating those subsidies would
       likely lead to a significant reduction in oil production over
       time".
  HTML https://cleantechnica.com/2017/10/14/u-s-tax-code-4-6-billion-u-s-oil-company-subsidies-per-year/
       Agelbert NOTE: These God Damned (and I'm not swearing here)
       Fossil Fuel Polluter WELFARE QUEENS go out of business or most
       humans die, PERIOD.
       [center]
       [img
       width=640]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-280817124413.png[/img][/center]
       *****************************************************
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page