Sentences with phrase «of subsidies for fossil fuel»

A recent IMF paper put the magnitude of subsidies for fossil fuel energy sources at $ 5.3 trillion worldwide in 2015, including both direct fiscal costs and implicit subsidies from the failure to charge for environmental damages or tax energy at the same rate as other consumption products.

An anti-coal symbol represented the demand for a phase - out of subsidies for fossil fuels.

Not exact matches

Fossil - fuel subsidies drain government budgets, throwing up a fiscal wall that blocks state support for clean energy while protecting the interests of the oil industry.

A target of $ 250 million in reduced fossil fuel subsidies is our starting point, and a first step will be to allow for the use of the Canadian Exploration Expenses tax deduction only in cases of unsuccessful exploration.

«His weak green light to renewable fuels, refusal to cut fossil fuel subsidies and his call for further imports, completely undermines last year's recognition of the need to end the nation's oil addiction,» she said.

Ultimately, these results do show benefits of removing fossil fuel subsidies, especially in certain regions, but care is needed for implementation.

These fossil - fuel subsidies have allowed these countries to distribute resource revenue, bolstering legitimacy for governments, many of which are not democratically elected, Krane said.

A study published today, by a group led by the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), indicates that eliminating fossil fuel subsidies could curb global greenhouse gas emissions by as much as 5 % through 2030 while saving hundreds of billions of dollars in public money.

Assuming you believe in economic efficiency and a free market, you should be advocating a reduction in subsidies to energy companies for production of electricity by nuclear and fossil - fueled plants.

What we know from reading the actual findings of this study, as well as several other analyses of the climate impacts of fossil fuel subsidy removal, is that nixing oil, gas, and coal subsidies would be a big win for the climate, would saves money, and could free up resources to help the poorest and most vulnerable.

G20 country governments are providing $ 444 billion a year in subsidies for the production of fossil fuels.

Hakima El Haite, Environment Minister of Morocco, candidate for the presidency of COP22, said: «Not only do fossil fuel subsidies put a strain on government coffers but they also don't help the poorest of society.»

An unprecedented coalition of close to 40 governments, hundreds of businesses and influential international organisations has called today for accelerated action to phase out fossil fuel subsidies, a move that would help bridge the gap to keep global temperature rise below 2 °C.

We could start by phasing out all subsidies for the production of fossil fuels and ethanol.

-- Implementing a partial phase - out of fossil fuel consumption subsidies accounts for 12 % of the reduction in emissions and supports efficiency efforts.

Fossil fuel interests are using their clout at the White House and in Congress to sabotage every renewable energy program that comes along, while make sure massive government subsidies, on the order of $ 100 billion a year when you count it all up, continue to flow to the fossil fuel industry (U.S. military expenditures are $ 500 billion a year, and good chunk of that is devoted to protecting overseas oilfields, for exaFossil fuel interests are using their clout at the White House and in Congress to sabotage every renewable energy program that comes along, while make sure massive government subsidies, on the order of $ 100 billion a year when you count it all up, continue to flow to the fossil fuel industry (U.S. military expenditures are $ 500 billion a year, and good chunk of that is devoted to protecting overseas oilfields, for exafossil fuel industry (U.S. military expenditures are $ 500 billion a year, and good chunk of that is devoted to protecting overseas oilfields, for example).

Setting aside the fact that in many cases clean energy competes on its own merits — for instance in the case of well ‐ situated wind farms and Brazilian sugarcane ethanol — this analysis shows that the global direct subsidy for fossil fuels is around ten times the subsidy for renewables.

Fortunately, the relative added costs of today's renewable technologies are quite reasonable, especially if one factors in the subsidies that exist for fossil fuels and if we price carbon commensurate with the costs of its environmental damage.

Trillions are spent on war where oil is the key political factor, hundreds of billions on subsidies for rich companies that reap huge short - term profits, both in fossil fuels and pseudo-green technologies like corn ethanol and biodiesel.

For example, an «energy security fee» of $ 3.50 per barrel of imported oil would raise approximately $ 15 billion annually; reduced fossil fuel subsidies as proposed by the administration could generate upwards of $ 35 billion over ten years; a utilities electricity fee could raise at least $ 2 billion annually, as included in the Kerry - Lieberman American Power Act; and royalties on new offshore continental shelf drilling could raise more than $ 100 billion over twenty years.

Subsidies to fossil fuel industries are a huge problem, and have stood in the way of alternate energy development for a long time.

They involve billions of dollars of subsidies of fossil fuel industries, of airport expansion and of road building, regulations which favour dirty technologies over clearn ones, granting planning permission for coal fire stations but refusing it for wind turbines, etc..

The momentum created by such commitments spurred dozens of nations, joined by the World Bank and other influential institutions, to pledge to cut subsidies for fossil fuels.

Suffice to say that when you factor in all of the government subsidies and «externalities» (increased health costs from respiratory sickness, environmental degradation, etc; the stuff that we all have to pay for maybe not from our wallets but in our tax returns), the true price of fossil fuels is much, much higher than any individual or company pays.

in industrial countries, the withdrawal of subsidies from fossil fuels and the establishment of equivalent subsidies for clean energy sources;

Fossil fuel subsidies, lack of a carbon price, diverse fiscal regimes or uneven cost sharing for electricity grid costs are all obstacles that mean there is no level - playing field.

Furthermore, powerful actors with vested interests in fossil fuels are working to remove the incentives for wind power that has made it competitive with the dirty energy sector that enjoys billions of dollars in subsidies.

He also called for the removal of subsidies that increase the use of fossil fuels.

In the near term, federal policy could: i) level the playing field between air captured CO2 and fossil - fuel derived CO2 by providing subsidies or credits for superior carbon lifecycle emissions that account for recovering carbon from the atmosphere; ii) provide additional research funding into air capture R&D initiatives, along with other areas of carbon removal, which have historically been unable to secure grants; and iii) ensure air capture is deployed in a manner that leads to sustainable net - negative emissions pathways in the future, within the framework of near - term national emissions reductions, and securing 2 °C - avoiding emissions trajectories.

While such subsidies account for the majority of subsidies to fossil fuels, there are numerous others that are not captured by the price - gap approach.

Approaches to encourage the greater uptake of low - carbon energy - supply systems include reducing fossil fuel subsidies and stimulating front - runners in specific technologies through active government involvement in market creation (such as in Denmark for wind energy and Japan with solar photovoltaic (PV)-RRB-.

There was some bad news for Drax recently as the UK government decided that biomass subsidies would not keep climbing as the «carbon price floor» — levied on fossil fuel production (and due to rise further)-- on electricity consumption has caused a backlash from manufacturers, consumer groups and energy suppliers who are concerned that the «tax will push up prices, make the UK uncompetitive and force the premature closure of coal - fired power plants, increasing the risk of blackouts.»

The value of global fossil - fuel consumption subsidies in 2016 is estimated at around USD 260 billion, lower than the estimate for 2015, which was close to USD 310 billion.

Despite that, Saudi Arabia scaled back some fossil fuel consumption subsidies that artificially lowered the price of fuel for its citizens, increasing its country's gasoline prices by 50 percent last year.

Value for subsidy of fossil fuels >> > value of subsidy for greenies.

The European Commission today announced new subsidies for fossil fuels, with nearly $ 200 million for gas projects, as part of a larger package of energy investments for 2018.

Since 2009, the IEA has actively contributed to all energy work streams of the G20 — a group that accounts for 85 % of the global economy and 75 % of global energy demand — covering topics ranging from energy security and market transparency, to energy efficiency and the phase out of fossil fuel subsidies.

The analysis performed by the World Energy Outlook is aimed at demonstrating the impact of fossil - fuel subsidy removal for energy markets, climate change and government budgets.

The idea that fossil fuels benefit from both direct and indirect subsidies has been around for years, but analysis has generally been done in pieces (some of it done very well — Nancy Pfund and Ben Healy at DBL Investors published an excellent analysis of direct subsidies in the U.S. a couple years back) or without complete data robust enough to stand up to critique.

Such policies would encourage economic growth as the foundation for a cleaner environment, responsible development and use of fossil fuels until superior energy sources are found, and repeal of many of the regulations, subsidies, and taxes passed at the height of the man - made global warming scare.

Most developed countries supported a text calling for a transition to a green economy that included phasing out fossil fuel subsidies, the use and production of renewable energies, and creating «green» jobs in this new economic model.

Regardless of whether the IMF report gets to exactly the right number, the report provides a very credible starting point to argue over the right value to place on fossil fuel subsidies, and will be a baseline to begin rethinking the right pace for our global transition to clean energy.

Do you care, in any way shape of form, about the massive subsidies for fossil fuel usage due to externalities not within the contracted prices?

For an overview of the main national fossil fuel subsidies in Europe, click on the following map below (which you can also find on our website):

Each year the world's taxpayers provide an estimated $ 700 billion of subsidies for environmentally destructive activities, such as fossil fuel burning, overpumping aquifers, clearcutting forests, and overfishing.

«Campaigners call for an end to fossil fuel finance and subsidies to avoid dangerous global warming at a meeting to mark two years since the signing of the landmark agreement.»

This new report documents, for the first time, the scale and structure of fossil fuel exploration subsidies in the G20 countries.

The level of denial exhibited in this report is extremely damaging to the efforts of fossil fuel subsidy reform, especially since the German government had been so vocal in advocating for effective carbon pricing and ending subsidies.

The most the G20 gathering could manage this time around on the climate front was a solemn nodding of the heads when Obama suggested that it would be a great idea if they phased out subsidies for fossil fuels.

Meanwhile, natural gas, at 20 % of global fossil fuel reserves, offers the largest - scale, economic - without - subsidies substitute for either coal or oil.