Fossil Fuel Subsidies Must End – Investor Group tells G20

by John Brian Shannon

In advance of the G20 Hamburg Summit in July 2017 investor groups that control $2.8 trillion in assets report that fossil fuel subsidies are counterproductive to G20 economies.

This latest call to remove fossil fuel subsidies came two years after the G20 Brisbane Summit where leaders announced their intention to, “reaffirm our commitment to rationalise and phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption.”G20 Brisbane Leaders’ Communiqué (November 2014, Item #18)

The 16-member mega-investor group says G20 nations should set a clear timeline “for the full and equitable phase-out by all G20 members of all fossil fuel subsidies by 2020,” and mobilize “to accelerate green investment and reduce climate risk” in a report submitted to G20 foreign ministers preparing for the upcoming G20 Summit in Hamburg, Germany.

G20 fossil fuel subsidies total $452 billion a year according to the Overseas Development Institute and Oil Change International.

A Must Read: Empty promises:
G20 subsidies to oil, gas and coal production

Fossil Fuel Subsidies chart from Empty Promises - G20 subsidies to oil, gas and coal production. Image courtesy of ODI and Oil Change International
Annual G20 Fossil Fuel Subsidies (2015)

Meanwhile, annual subsidies for renewable energy in the G20 nations amounts to only 1/4 of the annual subsidy awarded to fossil fuels, which have received mega-billions of subsidy dollars every single year since 1918.

G20 Fossil Fuel Subsidies total 452 billion globally 2015, while Renewable Energy Subsidies total 121 billion globally 2015
Annual G20 Fossil Fuel Subsidies = $452 billion. Renewable Energy Subsidies = $121 billion (2015)

For the next few paragraphs, let’s look at the United States exclusively…

Fossil Fuel Subsidies - Energy subsidies from 1918-2009. Image courtesy of Nancy Pfund
1918-2009 Fossil Fuel Subsidies vs. Renewable Energy Subsidies in the U.S. The Historical Role of Federal Subsidies in Shaping America’s Energy Future: What Would Jefferson Do?

The average annual subsidy for Oil and Gas alone in the U.S. from 1918-2009 totals $4.86 billion.

Adding all those (oil and gas only) subsidy years together gets you the astonishing figure of $442,260,000,000. in total from 1918-2009 — that’s half a trillion dollars right there, folks.

Which doesn’t include wars to protect foreign oil exporters to the United States.

Nor does it include so-called ‘externalities’ which are the negative costs associated with the burning of oil and gas — such as the 200,000 annual premature deaths in the U.S. caused by airborne pollution, along with the other healthcare costs associated with air pollution, the environmental costs to farmers and to the aquatic life in our rivers and marine zones, and higher infrastructure (maintenance) costs.

Fossil Fuel Subsidies chart from DBL Investors What Would Jefferson Do. Total Capital Gains tax allowance coal subsidy 1.3 trillion 2000-2009
Fossil Fuel Subsidies chart from DBL Investors What Would Jefferson Do? which shows the capital gains allowance (a type of subsidy) enjoyed by the U.S. coal industry that totals $1.3 billion over the 2000-2009 timeframe.

This chart shows only the U.S. capital gains allowance! There are other coal subsidies, direct and indirect, at play in America — in addition to the externality costs of coal.

On the Externality Cost of Coal
Harvard Medicine

Each stage in the life cycle of coal—extraction, transport, processing, and combustion—generates a waste stream and carries multiple hazards for health and the environment. These costs are external to the coal industry and are thus often considered “externalities.”

We estimate that the life cycle effects of coal and the waste stream generated are costing the U.S. public… over half a trillion dollars annually.

Many of these so-called externalities are, moreover, cumulative.

Accounting for the damages conservatively doubles to triples the price of electricity from coal per kWh generated, making wind, solar, and other forms of non-fossil fuel power generation, along with investments in efficiency and electricity conservation methods, economically competitive. — Full Cost Accounting for the Life Cycle of Coal (Harvard Medicine)

Fossil Fuels = High Subsidy Costs, High Externality Costs and Lower Employment: When Compared to Renewable Energy

In addition to the direct and indirect subsidy costs of fossil fuels, there are the externality costs associated with carbon fuels, but almost more important, is the ‘lost opportunity cost’ of the carbon economy.

Over many decades in the U.S., conventional energy producers have tapered their labour costs to only a few persons per barrel of oil equivalent (BOE) while renewable energy hires more workers per BOE, which will result in a significant net gain for the U.S. economy.

Infographic: More Workers In Solar Than Fossil Fuel Power Generation | Statista You will find more statistics at Statista

Even with the paltry subsidy regimes presently in place for U.S. renewable energy in the year 2017 — once fossil fuel subsidy costs, the externality costs of fossil fuels, and the ‘missed opportunity’ costs (fewer jobs per BOE) are factored-in to the equation, renewable energy really begins to shine.

And best of all — by 2020 and without any subsidies (yes, really!) renewable energy will regularly beat highly subsidized conventional energy generators at their own game — by lowering electricity costs, by lowering healthcare and infrastructure costs, and by creating thousands of new, good-paying jobs.

Who was saying that renewable energy was a pipe-dream?

China to add 100,000 Public EV Charger Units in 2017

China to Fast-Forward EV Charging Installations to Combat Historic Air Pollution Levels

To combat the air pollution in China’s rapidly-growing cities, the Chinese government operating in conjunction with China’s big-city mayors, are making rapid progress towards Electric Vehicle infrastructure in an attempt to roll back historic pollution levels and consequential high healthcare costs.

In addition to the existing fleet of 150,000 public Electric Vehicle (EV) chargers operating in China in 2016, China plans to add 100,000 more public charging units, for a total of 250,000 units by the end of 2017.

These units are in addition to the 900,000 private Electric Vehicle charging units that will be installed in China by January 1st, 2018, for a grand total of 1,250,000 individual EV chargers, made up of public and private charging locations across the country.

 China EV charging station in Xiangyang, Hubai province. Image courtesy of VCG - China Daily

China EV charging station in Xiangyang, Hubai province, Jan 4, 2017. Image courtesy of VCG – China Daily

A comprehensive electric vehicle powering grid will be rolled out in major Chinese cities including Beijing, Shanghai, and Shenzhen. The country’s energy planner on Thursday vowed to further expand its public fast-charge networks to enable users to power… Continue reading China to add 100,000 Public EV Charger Units in 2017

Poland’s unhealthy coal addiction kills 50,000 annually

Poland's coal industry. Fill photo courtesy of REUTERS/Ina
Poland’s coal industry is responsible for 50,000 premature deaths annually and is a major contributor to air pollution in the country. File photo courtesy of REUTERS/Ina Fassbender

The soupy gray smog shrouding Polish cities this winter is one of the most visible symptoms of the European Union member’s addiction to coal, a deadly habit forcing many to stay indoors or don masks before venturing out.

A report issued last month by the International Energy Agency (IEA) identified air pollution as “one of the largest environmental health risks” facing Poles.

It also urged Warsaw to rethink its dependence on coal and focus instead on developing cleaner energy sources.

According to the IEA, coal accounted for 81 percent of Poland’s electricity generation in 2015 and the heavily indebted coal-mining sector—one of Europe’s largest—provided more than 100,000 politically sensitive jobs.   Read more at: phys.org

Professor Anna Doboszynska, a specialist with more than two decades of experience treating lung disease, minces no word minces no words about the health risks that large-scale coal burning in Poland poses… Continue reading Poland’s unhealthy coal addiction kills 50,000 annually

Will Theresa May and Donald Trump Solve the #1 Challenge of Our Time?

by John Brian Shannon – Originally posted at LetterToBritain.com

UK Prime Minister Theresa May was invited to the White House on January 27 to be the first foreign leader to meet with the new American president, Donald Trump.

It’s always an honour to be the first invitee of the new president, and the timing couldn’t be better as the Western economic order is beginning to churn.

In the West, the past 70 years have been a relatively stable era with increasing wealth (although since the Reagan-era tax cuts, obscene inequality has become a destabilizing force) and social mobility has increased dramatically since the creation of the internet.

This combination could prove extraordinarily useful to motivate leaders to provide the kind of leadership required of the times — or 2017 could prove to be the pivotal moment in the unravelling of the Western democracies.

President Trump wasn’t elected U.S. president because American citizens were bored by the Democrats.

Americans voted Trump/Pence to overthrow the existing plutocracy in Washington, not to overthrow foreign governments.

Regardless how many Middle Eastern conflicts the West has prosecuted, the rich keep getting richer and the poor keep getting poorer. But this time the problems are here at home, not in some faraway country.

Americans voted for Barack Obama (2008 and 2012) and now Donald Trump (2016) in large part to stop the unfolding economic disaster in the West. Britons may have held similar ideas to American voters about a sustainable economic plan when they voted for Brexit.

Will Prime Minister of Britain Theresa May and President of the United States Donald Trump work together to solve the existential challenge of our time? Image displays the share of the world’s total wealth for the Top 1% vs. the Bottom 99%. Image courtesy of OXFAM
Will Prime Minister of Britain Theresa May and President of the United States Donald Trump work together to solve inequality, the existential challenge of our time? Image displays the share of the world’s total wealth for the Top 1% vs. the Bottom 99%. Image courtesy of OXFAM.

The chart below (from 2010) reveals the bottom 80 percent of Americans share just 7 percent of the nation’s wealth, but it’s much worse now (in 2017) and this phenomenon is no longer confined to the United States.

Theresa May must work with Donald Trump to roll back record inequality
Britain’s Theresa May must work with U.S. president Donald Trump to roll back record inequality that will eventually destroy the entire middle class. You can see the bottom 80% compete for only 7% of America’s total wealth. (This image is from 2010. It’s actually much worse now)

That trend will not change until politicians are bigger than the challenges that confront them, and actually do something about the record inequality sweeping the West.

It’s not a call to ‘do something, anything, anything at all’ — as some so-called ‘solutions’ might be worse than the problem.

But what citizens of the Western nations require is an acknowledgement by politicians of the sheer scale of the problem, and some initial steps to slow the rapid transfer of wealth away from the bottom three quintiles to the top 1 percent. (Even tiny baby-steps are preferable to the decades-long stony silence on the matter)

Theresa May and Donald Trump must ensure that globalization and free trade work for everyone.
Britain and the United States must ensure that globalization and free trade work for everyone. Image courtesy of the New York Times, You can’t feed a family with GDP by Neil Irwin.

Inequality ignored, will only result in citizens ‘giving up’ on their governments and ‘giving up’ on democracy — and we know how that will end. Badly. For everyone.

Including powerful politicians who serve for amazingly short stints of time in office. Once you’re in politics, four years pass by like a long summer!

Today’s toxic combination of ultra-low taxes on the rich and unrestricted globalization aren’t working for 3/5ths of the population. In 10 years, it won’t be working for 4/5ths of the population. And let’s remember, all of them are voters.

Here’s how that looks

In 2016, more than 50 percent of the world’s wealth was owned by the 1 percent.
By 2030, more than 70 percent of the world’s wealth will be owned by the 1 percent.
By 2045, more than 85 percent of the world’s wealth will be owned by the 1 percent.

Put another way; Do you really want to live in a world where 8 billion people are fighting over the then-remaining 30 percent of the world’s wealth?

Can you imagine what it’s going to look like in 2045 when 9 billion people are fighting over the then-remaining 15 percent of the world’s wealth?

At that time, you’d better be living on an island in the mid-Pacific that doesn’t appear on any map, in a castle with 100-metre high concrete walls.

I respectfully suggest to Prime Minister Theresa May and President Donald Trump that if inequality isn’t addressed this year, it’ll be too late. Just look for a remote island in the Pacific Ocean… now, before the rush begins.

The time involved in getting new legislation passed, combined with the lag time involved for it to take effect during the following fiscal cycle, is years after the day it is first discussed.

Can Theresa May and president Donald Trump cooperate to solve record inequality.

Let’s hope that January 27, 2017 will come to be known as, ‘The day the decline of the bottom-three quintiles was halted and reversed’ by these two great leaders.

Renewable Energy dena Start Up Energy Transition Award - Banner_Startup_Energy_700x116px

Solar Power Electricity now Cheaper than Fossil Fuel

Electricity Produced by Solar Power beats Electricity Produced by Fossil Fuel – on per MWh price!

Meeting electrical grid demand via solar power at a lower per MWh cost is now possible, when compared to meeting total demand from conventional electricity producers such as fossil fuel, nuclear or even hydro-electric power.

The WEF report notes that “utility-scale, thin-film solar PV plants produce cheaper power, on average, than new natural gas plants.”

A record low electricity price was achieved in Chile in August 2016. At $29.10 per MWh, solar electricity cost about half the price offered by a local coal competitor.

The cost of production of electricity through the utilization of solar energy is outpacing other alternatives, as the investment in solar panels is turning out to be comparatively cheaper than a comparable investment in coal, natural gas or other options, according to a new World Economic Forum report… Continue reading Solar Power Electricity now Cheaper than Fossil Fuel