iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Robert Redford

GET UPDATES FROM Robert Redford
 

Stop Public Handouts to Oil, Gas and Coal Companies, Now

Posted: 06/18/2012 8:00 am

Join mass action today, Monday, June 18th-- Tweet & Facebook #endfossilfuelsubsidies

Every year, around the world, almost one trillion dollars of subsidies is handed out to help the fossil fuel industry. Who came up with the crazy idea that the fossil fuel industry deserves our hard-earned money, no less in economic times of such harsh human consequence? We fire teachers, police and firemen in drastic budget cuts and yet, the fossil fuel industry can laugh all the way to the bank on our dime? Something doesn't add up here.

We should not be subsidizing the destruction of our planet. Fossil fuels are literally cooking our planet, polluting our air and draining our wallets. Why should we continue to reward companies to do that?

As they go after more expensive and harder to access fossil fuels, it is like drilling a hole in our pocketbooks. We pay more at the pump. We pay in taxpayer subsidies to a highly profitable industry. And we pay in the rising costs of climate change in the form of floods, storms and droughts that hurt our homes and communities.

Our world leaders are gathering in Rio over the coming days for a historic meeting twenty years after the first Earth Summit. We are looking to our governments to show leadership and commit to real timetables and actions for fighting climate change, including ending fossil fuel subsidies. Sure, they've made commitments to stop these unnecessary payouts. But commitments need to become action to have any meaning. And despite strong words, we are not yet seeing action on the ground.

In the United States, President Obama has repeatedly proposed cutting $4 billion in annual federal subsidies to the oil and gas industry and several bills to cut fossil fuel subsidies are stalled in Congress.

Think about what else we could do with one trillion dollars. We could create clean energy jobs, limit greenhouse gas emissions that create climate change and help make a healthier and more secure life for our children. Instead, we give 12 times as much in subsidies to the fossil fuel industry as we give to clean energy industries like wind and solar.

If you have a dollar to invest -- investing that dollar in clean energy creates three times the jobs of the same dollar invested in the fossil fuel industry. In fact, studies show that fossil fuel subsidies slow economic growth. Clean energy is a great example of building a green economy. Ending fossil fuel subsidies is good for our pocketbooks, economic growth and for our health and environment.

In poll after poll after poll, the public says they want more renewable energy and less fossil fuels.

So why aren't our world leaders doing more to deliver what the public wants instead of what oil, gas and coal companies want? We need to hold our leaders accountable for the choices they make on our behalf.

People around the world are waking up to the absurdity of subsidizing Big Oil and Coal. Over a million people have already signed onto a petition to end fossil fuel subsidies. And on June 18, people from all over the world will be sending world leaders message on Twitter and Facebook to #endfossilfuelsubsidies.

Just last March, President Obama said,

Instead of taxpayer giveaways to an industry that's never been more profitable, we should be using that money to double-down on investments in clean energy technologies that have never been more promising.

These proposals have so far failed in the face of strong industry opposition and the fossil fuel industry is equally obstructive elsewhere in the world.

In a time of economic hardship, progressing climate change and a growing demand for reliable and clean sources of energy, using taxpayer money to help oil, gas and mining companies represent a reckless and irrational use of taxpayer money and government investment. We can do better. We need the fossil fuel industry to stop asking us to pay the price for their greed. We need our world leaders to turn their words into actions. And we can start by reminding them to #endfossilfuelsubsidies.

 
 
 
FOLLOW GREEN
 
 
  • Comments
  • 593
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (14 total)
photo
snowballinhell
Humans have a 100% chance of extinction
04:08 AM on 06/24/2012
Does anyone know how much we spend in subsidies vs what we receive in royalties? I assume we get royalties for the leasing of Federal lands (and waters). We need to know if our ledger books are running in the red or black for Big Oil.
10:10 PM on 06/20/2012
End all subsidies to business big or small. Government should be the referee not a player. Wealth is best left in the pockets of those who create it not voted out of their pockets by those who don't. You want to grow food to burn in your vehicle use your own garden. You like wind - think sailboat - what happens when the wind dies? You like solar. Hope you live in the desert where the most important GHG, water vapor, is MIA. Wait, what? Desert hot and low GHGs. Don't need heat trapping gas to be hot? Co2 was exhaled during the creation of this post. No living thing was harmed. Some even liked it.
12:38 PM on 06/20/2012
We should stop subsidizing the Government employees via their unions so the we can afford better recycling programs and financially support real efforts to curb pollution. Stop attacking the base of taxation that pays the way for Green initiatives!
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
02:34 PM on 06/20/2012
no. Unions are democracy. You want plutocracy. Rule by the big money and corporations.
High wages are good for the economy. When money clots in the top 1% or less, that's when it crashes, and democracy dies.

"When economic power became concentrat­­­ed in a few hands, then political power flowed to those possessors and away from the citizens, ultimately resulting in an oligarchy or tyranny." John Adams

"As riches increase and accumulate in few hands . . . the tendency of things will be to depart from the republican standard." Alexander Hamilton
03:02 PM on 06/20/2012
Sorry, Private Unions are fine as they have limitations of profitability to restrict their actions, Public Unions are evil as they spend vast amounts of membership moneis to elect Democratic politicians to Rubber Stamp inflationary demands on the tax paying base with no checks or balances.
photo
ParrotPops
It's feeding time at the zoo...
01:16 AM on 06/20/2012
". Do you believe the rich use more of the Federal Government Services, " What? Stop picking winners and losers? That's unamerican!
12:06 AM on 06/20/2012
Get rid of ALL subsidies and political market distortions on everything from sugar to solar panels . The political subset of force wielders is intrinsically dumber than the total market of free individuals .
08:24 AM on 06/20/2012
Absolutely. But the pols won't want that. Their greatest fear is that we would live out lives not needing them and realize just how insignificant they are.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
02:38 PM on 06/20/2012
Eventually maybe, but it's hardly fair to allow the companies that got these billion for 50 and 100 years to dominate the energy market and prevent green energy from replacing them.

Who's going to stop the damage to our commons and health, our wars for oil, and climate alterations? The market won't.

The market is not benign.

Unregulated markets are plutocracy.

When the free market leads to big money and corporations telling our republics, our democracies what they can do, that's plutocracy.

Haven't you had enough of that?

You really think the rich love you?
04:41 PM on 06/20/2012
Genders ,

You really think the politicians love you ? They make the market in Force . That's how they get rich .

No company in a free market can force you to do anything .

And the super-statists commit criminal fraud against the very building block of the biosphere which , along with H2O , you and all life on earth are made . That's tyranny .
12:43 PM on 06/19/2012
All of this about stopping fossil fuel subsidies but does everyone REALLY understand what supporting fossil fuels will do to our planet? This article I found explains it really well: http://eco18.com/global-warming-misconceptions/
12:06 PM on 06/19/2012
The President's proposal to cut $4 billion in annual federal subsidies to the oil and gas industry, will have zero effect on the profit margins and probably zero impact on retail prices.
It will benefit the taxpayer though, so I agree that we should do it.

Now, what to do about the massive subsidies given out in: Iran, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, and other major oil producers? That is where the big problems are.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WESmith
Energy Conservation can save you M-O-N-E-Y!!!!!!!!
07:56 AM on 06/22/2012
Profit margins:
Refiners of gasoline: 1.7%
Walmart: 3.4%
Oil&Gas companies: 5-8%
Apple Computers: 24%
Microsoft: 33.4%

We The People selling and taxing our Oil: 100% profit margin and equals 7 times what an Oil&Gas Compnay nets in profit. At least that is what US Government-approved financial reports, audited by third party accounting firms state.

We The People are Big Oil. We own the vast majority of oil in the US.
11:10 AM on 06/19/2012
Robert Redford is right on. Stop "COMMERCIAL SOCIALISM" If the government support for the people is socialism then government support for big business is Commercial Socialism. Obviously business thinks that is okay.

Dr. A.B.McPherson
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Prescott Auburn
Cool as Cool gets.
06:10 PM on 06/19/2012
I had not heard that phrase yet. "Commercial Socialism", I like it. Did you come up with that, or had I just not stumbled upon it?
08:27 AM on 06/20/2012
Except, Doctor, that you compare apples to oranges. For oil companies, tax breaks are given, meaning that nobody is being taxed to give money to them: they are allowed to keep more of theory that they have earned. For private individuals, my pocket gets picked and the proceeds funneled through the bureaucracy eventually ending up in the pocket of another individual. That is a major difference.
10:09 AM on 06/19/2012
Its obvious. They are making record profits. We don't need to be giving them subsidies.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WESmith
Energy Conservation can save you M-O-N-E-Y!!!!!!!!
08:02 AM on 06/22/2012
If we don't dangle that subsidy carrot out in front of them, they will not produce our oil for us and we will lose tens of billions of dollars in royalties and tens of billions in tax revenues.
Oil corporations sell $100 billion worth of products. They net $10 billion and pay $4 billion in corporate taxes. They pay government(s) $30 billion for the oil. They collect $35 billion in taxes for the government(s) from us to pass on to the government(s).
They are making record profits because of volume alone. They merged.
What seems obvious isn't really when one looks at real data.
02:30 PM on 06/22/2012
So if we don't do that, then they will just stop selling to us? Really?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mattmarion
09:57 AM on 06/19/2012
What's crazy? Henry Ford had a whole lab dedicated to making plastics out of vegetable oils and products. He built his first engines to run on hemp and other oils. So did Rudolph Diesel. It was only after the crusade against marijuana that oil was brought in as a replacement. They were using it as plastic and fuel for energy several generations ago and now, with all of our new technology, we can't even pull off what was already done and use renewable and sustainable source for oil (one that actually cleans the air as an added advantage and, if talking hemp, requires no pesticides, etc, just grows like a weed). What possible arguments can there be, that contain logic, for why we can't stop using crude oil and start growing oil instead? The economic impact alone would be incredible (slow down global warming, reduce cancer by a huge amount as well as the other problems that come from heavy air pollution and therefore health costs, reduce necessary national security spending by growing fuel not buying it, etc, etc). Makes no sense to just plough on as we are.
08:51 AM on 06/20/2012
Have you ever considered how much fuel is burned in the growing, harvesting, processing and transportation of those crops? Oil comes out of the ground with little fuel requirements. While it is true that distillation requires energy, it also yields multiple additional petroleum products. Transportation is also cheap and efficient. If there was money to be made, venture capitalists would be lining up to make it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WESmith
Energy Conservation can save you M-O-N-E-Y!!!!!!!!
08:06 AM on 06/22/2012
Gasoline is a waste product. It doesn't have to be made. It is left over after the profitable stuff is sold. They found a market for it so they didn't have to dispose it. Today, they don't mind making a nickel a gallon for gasoline. Most years they make a little profit on volume. And with the new low-sulfur diesel even more gasoline must be produced. That is why we had a glut in gasoline for a while and the price went down.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Damiano Iocovozzi MSN NP
Director, CEO, the Thomas Edwin Walls Foundation
09:15 AM on 06/19/2012
Dear Mr. Redford, There is so much more to this story. It seems to me that most politicians haven't a clue as to how to fix our myriad problems. Most are career politicians who have enjoyed a long shelf life due to corporate sponsors who are rewarded by lower taxes and few regulations. The other part of the deal is the consumer of oil who likes being warm, cooking with fuel, driving his car. No one thinks of the larger consequences like the ppm of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, changing temperatures, rain patterns, desertification, soil depletion, overpopulation & planetary degradation. Most political parties offer planks of denial, outrage over science, mendacious responses or changing the subject. I think no one has a clue: a plan for a sustainable planet. We have already over-developed enough that we could fill three earths & imperil each one with our exploitative, growth-oriented & wasteful mentalities. Smaller, fewer, second-hand, less-is-better could help turn around a situation which grows more dire each year.
12:31 AM on 06/20/2012
>

I've thought about it, but I concluded this doesn't matter...at least the incremental amount released.

- A scientist in a relevant field...please pick a new tack; this is boring
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Damiano Iocovozzi MSN NP
Director, CEO, the Thomas Edwin Walls Foundation
10:24 AM on 06/20/2012
Dear Mr. Mchughjj, I will in future try to be a bit more entertaining. Damiano
08:03 AM on 06/19/2012
Let me add some clarity to the overall view here. This is a forest not a tree. Mr Redford is describing a macro answer to a macro issue and doing his best to speak plain English to the readers. But there is a subplot in all stories.

1 Oil is our only real energy resource

Why ? Because the American people, their government and oil companies NEVER took real steps to convert to any alternative energy source with true commitment.

What is true committment ?
Transitioning the entire economy from fossil fuel to another alternative energy. Oil is the ENTIRE economy of the US.

2 Oil is National Security leverage and therefore drives our Foreign Policy = because of this the War Industry WANTS oil to stay strong. Period. End of discussion.

What do you mean by leverage ? Did you take World History in Highschool ? Did you ever hear of World War II ? Why do you think we won ? Answer = OIL. We won because we had more OIL. The Brits, the French Resistance, Russia etc... we out lasted the bastards. There transportation and mobility declined to a stagnation. It's a lesson that will NOT be forgotten easily.

Why is it a big isssue? Because "they" WANT to win. The war never stopped it just went into economics. Wake up. You've been watching WAY too much E! channel.

3 Oil owns our government. They are our government. You've been electing candidates that were CREATED by Oil.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:58 AM on 06/19/2012
For better and for worse, the fossil fuels are the most reliable and have the least front end expense. When the equation changes, the renewables will come into their own. When that occurs, don't expect that you'll get any break from the renewables industry. They will be very much in control of an energy dependent population much like the oil companies today.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:40 AM on 06/19/2012
hey pip, right now there is NO alternative energy, science has NOT DEVELOPED A BATTERY strong enough to life off a 747, GOT IT, AND YES, UNTIL THEN, OIL IS KING, AND RUNS OUR COUNTRY, which some people would like to SHUT DOWN, and I won't mention any names like the MAN CHILD, AND HIS FOLLOWERS.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
parlimentMike
Terrorists keep you in fear
07:36 AM on 06/19/2012
We should also be including big Ag.
07:01 AM on 06/19/2012
I couldn't agree more. There's no valid, moral reason to subsidize these industries. That sure isn't capitalism.
lastpost
see biography
06:45 AM on 06/19/2012
"almost one trillion dollars of subsidies is handed out to help the fossil fuel industry."
Maybe, just maybe. We should be investing that in renewables, as a hedge against finite resource annihilation. Military technology manufacturers, may also care to consider that new market opportunity.

"Something doesn't add up here."
Ignore the red ink. Factor in the campaign contributions.

"several bills to cut fossil fuel subsidies are stalled in Congress."
Why would they dirty their hands pushing those though, when they have getaway cars ticking over nicely outside?

"Just last March, President Obama said,"
Is it just me, or is it getting warm around here?

"We can do better."
Twitterers, doin’ it for ourselves.