Job for the New Congress: Read the Latest Review of Wasteful Welfare for Dirty Energy

authordefault
on

The new Congress roared into Washington this week with what it sees as a mandate to cut government spending. Required reading for all its new members should beย Washington Monthlyโ€™s excellent new piece, โ€œGet the Energy Sector off the Dole.โ€ And, if you work in, invest in, or support scaling the clean economy, this important piece is worth your time to read asย well.

Americaโ€™s clean energy advancementsย are under a concerted propaganda and lobbying attack, underwritten by the dirty energy lobby, which wants Americans to think that clean energy is too โ€œexpensive,โ€ or โ€œdependent on subsidies.โ€ Cleantech needs your help to get the laugh track going on such claims, and this article can equip with you the foundation for doing that.

Some highlights from theย Washington Monthly piece:

Energy subsidies are the sordid legacy of more than sixty years of politics as usual in Washington, and they cost us somewhere around $20 billion a year.ย To put that sum in perspective, thatโ€™s more than the State Departmentโ€™s entire budget. Itโ€™s also enough to send half a million Americans to college each year with all expenses paid. Energy subsidies undermine the working of the free market, and they make rational approaches to long-term energy challenges and climate change impossible.ย They are not an aid to energy independence or environmental stewardship. They are anย impediment.

Energy subsidies take many forms. Some of them are direct outlays of taxpayer dollars, like payments to corn producers for ethanol. Most are in the form of tax benefits, such as the deduction for โ€œintangible drilling costsโ€ (labor, repairs, hauling, you name it) in oil explorationโ€”a notoriously abused provision of the tax code. The sheer number of subsidies is part of what makes them so hard toย track.

But one thing about them is easy to summarize:ย They are heavily tilted toward fossil fuels.ย Government statistics show that aboutย 70 percent of all federal energy subsidies goes toward oil, natural gas, and coal.ย Fifteen percent goes to ethanol, the only renewable source of energy that consistently gets bipartisan support in Congress (think farm lobby and Iowa). Large hydropower companies โ€” TVA, Bonneville Power, and others โ€” soak up another 10 percent.ย That leaves the greenest renewablesโ€”wind, solar, and geothermalโ€”to subsist on the crumbs that areย left.

Dirty energyโ€™s increasingly aggressive effort to negatively define cleantech pushes not just the idea that clean energy is too โ€œexpensive,โ€ but also that its โ€œdependenceโ€ on smart government support somehow means that cleantech isnโ€™t โ€œready.โ€ What to say, then, about the dirty energy lobbyโ€™s decades of dependence? Itโ€™s run upย a $72 billion tab at the taxpayerโ€™s bar from 2002 to 2008 alone.

Some pro-dirty energy libertarian mouthpieces, such as theย New York Timesโ€™ John Tierneyย andย Newsweekโ€™s George Willย skip right over that inconvenient problem, relying on the size of their media platform to move the anti-clean energy rhetoric. When pressed, however, about the best that apologists for this ridiculous system can offer is that taxpayers get a better โ€œreturnโ€ on our money than they would from investing in clean energy โ€“ more BtUs per dollar, theyย say.

But the reality is that the return on U.S. taxpayersโ€™ money politicians have handed to fossil energy hasnโ€™t just been weak, itโ€™s been terrible: ruined fisheries, mountaintops, and water tables;ย a money trainย toย foreign dictators who hate usthat is drifting to other nations.

Fatih Birol, the chief economist at the International Energy Administration,has named fossil fuel subsidiesย as one of the biggest impediments to global economic recovery โ€“ โ€œthe appendicitis of the global energy system which needs to be removed for a healthy, sustainable development future.โ€ For America, these subsidies arenโ€™t just reckless and stupid, they arenโ€™t even what people want. In fact,ย only 8 percent of Americansย prefer their tax money be given to highly profitable, mature industries such as ExxonMobil and Masseyย Energy.

The new, (supposedly) fiscally conservative Congress could do what it has committed itself to doing โ€“ cutting wasteful spending โ€“ by starting with arguably the most wasteful spending of all: corporate welfare checks for the highly profitable, highly polluting oil and coalย industries.

Related Posts

on

The elite agency has been going all out to win positive press for the hosts of the UN climate talks.

The elite agency has been going all out to win positive press for the hosts of the UN climate talks.
on

One of the sponsors of the UK pavilion has worked with major polluters to help them extract more oil and gas.

One of the sponsors of the UK pavilion has worked with major polluters to help them extract more oil and gas.
on

The Heritage Foundationโ€™s Project 2025 blueprint proposes sweeping anti-climate policies.

The Heritage Foundationโ€™s Project 2025 blueprint proposes sweeping anti-climate policies.
on

Former ExxonMobil climate scientist Lindsey Gulden: "It was after I was fired for reporting a garden variety fraud that I really sat back and thought about the implications for climate change."

Former ExxonMobil climate scientist Lindsey Gulden: "It was after I was fired for reporting a garden variety fraud that I really sat back and thought about the implications for climate change."