The TRUTH about fossil fuel subsidies.

[@brushlessmotoring]

As a science communicator, I can't think of anyone as effective and condensed as your videos - they are so well done, not too ranty, or preachy, humorous, and packed with meaningful links. So helpful to share with the lets-do-nothing-crowd on the socials - I apologize in advance for bringing them to your door!

[@AndrewThoesen]

My favorite recommendation for people in industry. It's digestible to the average person.

[@robertmarmaduke9721]

The Left and their Mandatory Energy Austerity New Climate Catholic are the politics of Envy, Terror and Lockdowns, like the Dark Ages before 1517,Martin Luther's 95 Theses, the Reformation and the Rennaissance threw off the Papal shackles of slavery to the 'Lords'.

[@Aliaxs]

I can recommend "Climate town". Also a great channel

[@robertmarmaduke9721]

Be sure to tune into Biden's +10% a year increase in gas and utilities fees, usage penalties and papal dispensation 'allowances"(sic), towards fossil fuels outlawed after 2035, so they can be shipped to EU, IN and CH, when 90% of Americans living paycheck to paycheck, or on Sec8-EBT to Sec8-EBT, and fighting every day Wide Open Borders of soon UNLIMITED foreign workers and welfare idlers, 90% throw off the yoke of EGS Climate Catholic, and beat down anyone carrying a Greta Thunberg '$ave the Planet!" fan card.

[@johnm838]

Except that he has no idea of atmospheric physics or high quality science (v. science driven by vested interests).

[@algfourty9185]

Measured in trillions, money stops even meaning anything on human scales. It's absolutely appalling how much hydrocarbons are being subsidised 😡

[@anydaynow01]

Yep, now I know why most of the chemical engineers at school came back from their summer internships with new cars!

[@davidmenasco5743]

At these levels, it ceases to be mere money. One billion dollars is a unit of Power.

[@daviddunn2297]

Thank you for highlighting the fact that none of the oil producers pay anything to the ecological damage they are causing Cigarette companies have done far better, perhaps some force needs applying?

[@daviddunn2297]

Money is the cause of most climate and ecological damage being done globally, surely we all must pay far more for oil and pay a price for all ecological damage! Scrap all existing taxes and replace with a single Natural Resources Tax collected at source and based on the Eco Damage caused by their use and consumption plus UBI and a Wealth Tax.

[@hitreset0291]

And how much has been wasted supporting these oil-soaked CEOs? All of it!

[@GoCoyote]

As an electrician in the power production industry, it is so nice to have someone calmly and clearly explain the implications of fossil fuel subsidies. Something that would add greatly to this information is the EROI for oil and gas, which some people put as low as 14 to 1. The US taxpayers have paid on average in inflation adjusted dollars, 4.8 billion dollars a year since 1918 in direct subsidies to the oil and gas industry, and just 0.38 billion (380 million) dollars a year in subsidies for renewables since 1994, yet utility scale renewables are now the cheapest source of energy. I find it especially ironic that so many people who become apoplectic at the idea of providing subsidies to renewables, are the same people who espouse free market capitalism at all costs, while saying that we cannot afford to switch from oil and gas to renewables since that would destroy our economy.

[@JustHaveaThink]

Well said!

[@jasonriddell]

rate of change is the "issue" "JOE AVERAGE" is seeing 10% inflation and near zero % wage increase and is "seeing" electricity rates double in 2 years and Gas prices up by 1/2 that is a LOT of change and now you "threaten" more taxes and MORE expensive energy?

[@GoCoyote]

@@jasonriddell This is the hidden cost of subsidizing a mature industry like the oil and gas sector (that has made record profits recently) at the expense of cheaper renewables. We should have removed subsidies and been paying higher taxes on fuel when gas was 2 bucks a gallon in order to help our transition to renewables. Now we have to pay both high fuel cost and the cost to switch at the same time. I remember reading about this issue 20 years ago, but it was political suicide for any politician to point this out, as Al Gore found out. The longer we wait, the more expensive it becomes to switch, and the more politicians want to hide the true cost of energy from fossil fuels, and the more taxpayers want to hide their heads in the sand, leading to ever increasing subsidies. The average taxpayer in the US spends over 1400 dollars a year in income taxes to subsidize their ever more expensive fuel. Fuel taxes used to cover the majority of road construction and maintenance costs, but now they cover less than 20% of road costs, and the rest is payed from income, property, and sales taxes.

[@lessanderfer7195]

@@jasonriddell Renewables are comparable or cheaper than Fossil Fuels, where do you get "you 'threaten' more taxes and MORE expensive energy?", DID YOU EVEN WATCH THE VIDEO? He literally showed how the perception is "MORE", but the reality is - Big Oil is SIGNIFICANTLY "MORE" costly than Renewable, in EVERY way. And clue for you, Subsidies LITERALLY come from your TAXES!!! The issue is - JOE AVERAGE needs to go back to school, cuz his ignorance is killing our planet, and our future!

[@stringlarson1247]

I just finished listening (again) to Nate Hagens speaking with Art Berman on Nate's podcast. Fantastic discussion about the entire 'oil isn't simply oil' or, in other words, the complexity of oil grades uses and refining, etc. 99.99% of the population has yet to learn of EROI and what it means to us and our entire standard of living/way of life.

[@mrbizi5652]

Nice work shining a light on a topic big oil doesn’t want anyone to know. There is NO way they need subsidies. If they do get one, then their CEOs need to forfeit their bonuses!!! That’s just fiduciary responsibility

[@vincentgrinn2665]

ofcourse they dont need subsidies, theyre gaining 6trillion in subsidies, and making 4 trillion in profits, thats 16bill per day and 10bill per day respectivly

[@tedclapham4833]

No they don't need subsidies, they need freedom of investment, freedom to build pipelines, build refineries and not be legislated out of existence. Hydrocarbon fuels have allowed the west to get where we are, but the anti human movement would have man back in caves if not extinct.

[@johnm838]

Governments are responsible for providing energy to their citizens and the businesses in their so subsidies are well justified. Energy is the lubricant that keeps society and the economy ticking along. Would anyone in Britain like to be paying the full cost of unsubsidized fuel?

[@alanhat5252]

@@johnm838 yes, I would quite happily pay the 5p/unit that solar or wind cost rather than the 38.6p/unit I'm paying at the moment. I'm buying Green energy, I would very much like to pay Green energy prices.

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

Carbon tax, we all pay And they complained about carbon taxes.

[@bramtencate2170]

0:38 one small error. Shell isn't royal anymore, neither is it Dutch... About 1 year ago the Dutch government wanted shell to start paying taxes. So they moved their headquarters to England, the dutch king revoked their royal state. So it's now just called Shell.

[@stepheneyles2198]

Just a mo... Does that mean they're not paying taxes now they've moved to England? 🤔

[@bramtencate2170]

@@stepheneyles2198 probably. Or at least very little taxes for profit. They payed some taxes in the Netherlands, for buildings and wages for example. But not over profits. When they finally had to, it was apparently cheaper to just relocate to England. So I suspect they also pay little taxes there now.

[@bramtencate2170]

@@stepheneyles2198 this isnt the full story by the way. In 2019 a Dutch foundation for protection against climate changed sued them. Around the 70/80's shell did a lot of research to climate change. They found out what we knew now. But in fear of their business they decided to hide their research. Fund lobby organisation who are in favour of fossil fuels. The foundation won the trial, and the judge decided shell had to reduce their carbon emissions with 45% by 2030. By moving their headquarters to England, the dutchies can't sue them again. This was the first trial ever won against a oil company for the consequences of climate change.

[@rklauco]

Well researched, quite depressing. I so hope more people will realize how bad the situation is and change the tune. But looking at my country of origin (Slovakia) - it goes exactly the other way.

[@fjalics]

Solar is the cheapest new generation, followed by wind. That makes it difficult to keep it from sneaking in. EVs are getting very competitive too.

[@toyotaprius79]

That'll need a global effort of everyone striking out

[@toyotaprius79]

Ireland is going backwards in a similar way. Fear of young people and fearful kneejerk reaction to the green agenda. Parish pump politics and a colonial mindset. The amount of fuss that gets wound up when a meadow in the middle of a roundabout isn't mowed down ... 🤦‍♂️💀

[@timgillman]

@@lawrencetaylor5407 It's just around the corner, but they are turning a blind eye.

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

Carbon tax, we all pay And they complained about carbon taxes.

[@ganjalogic]

I think one of the biggest problems is that subsidies often focus on keeping the unit price of energy low, which encourages high usage. If you instead subsidize a certain amount of energy (say a normal family's usage) and then make people or companies pay market rate beyond that, you strongly incentivize saving energy.

[@neilmorgan7737]

I just don't see how subsidies should be a thing at all. In a free market, we the customers would dictate the price. If we wanted to buy energy from fossil fuel giants we could pay whatever they were selling their energy for and if, like me, people wanted to buy renewable energy then I would have to pay what the price of production for that form of energy is. If fossil fuels are cheaper then for people like me who want to stop burning stuff and reduce emissions then I would have to stomach paying the higher price. If however, the truth was Renewables were cheaper then I would be better off and more and more people would see the financial sense even if they don't really care about the emissions side of things and only buy from renewable sources. I see subsidies as a mechanism to ensure the longevity of the fossil fuel industry in a transitioning world towards renewables.

[@artlewellan2294]

@@neilmorgan7737 There is no zero emission renewable energy that will enable society worldwide to continue driving, trucking, shipping and air travel the entirely unsustainable extent that occurs today, never mind its predicted growth. We must plan for significantly reduced travel and transport to a degree that's hard to imagine. Harder still to comprehend is the fact that plug-in hybrid PHEV tech offers more potential to reduce fuel/energy consumption, emissions AND insane traffic than all-battery BEVs and hydrogen fuel cell EVs. PHEV tech is especially applicable to long-haul freight trucks. BEV tech is best suited for lightweight EVs and short distance purposes. Combustible hydrogen in the ICEngine of a PHEV+H drivetrain will prove more effective than fuel cell EV tech.

[@theresabu3000]

You could maybe do that for a transitioning period. To keep small companies afloat that bank on the current system. And then lower the subsidiary every year. The big companies have the capital to change - they just don't want to now. I live in Germany and we are so dependent on coal and gas for energy - as well as for cars, planes, ships and trucks. Would really love it if we stop supporting this and change our support to other modes of transportation and energy. Denmark is a cool example as our small neighbor - it's possible to change quickly - if we really want to. The car company's don't really want that, and stepped on the breaks for the last 20 years.

[@adrianthoroughgood1191]

Give every citizen a monthly payment toward their energy costs. They can use it to pay for their higher fossil fuel bill or use it to pay off their loan they took out to buy solar panels and a heat pump.

[@asm_nop]

This is approximately what Canada has done with their carbon tax, and could easily be applied to fuel subsidies. Everybody pays fixed carbon rates on hydrocarbons, and then everybody gets a cheque equal to the amount of tax paid on an average annual usage. If you have average use, you get your money back. People with above/below average use will lose/gain some money.

[@5353Jumper]

Last time oil was at this price gasoline was half the price. Wages and other expenses in the petroleum industry were around the same. Someone somewhere is making huge profits, executive bonuses and shareholder returns.

[@mavigogun]

"Wages and other expenses in the petroleum industry were around the same"- while there may be a proportional truth there, the statement tastes very, very unlikely, overly broad, and specifically wrong.

[@HaroldBrice]

5353Jumper: Do not forget the role corrupt government plays in fiscally punishing citizens.

[@5353Jumper]

@@mavigogun it was only a few years ago, wages for most non executive positions have not even kept up with inflation since then so figuratively an accurate statement compared to the difference in the price of fuel.

[@jasonriddell]

2021 range the US oil exploration companies basically stated they will "invest" in stock buyback and other "wall street" friendly actions and NOT oil well exploration as high energy prices is high profits for wall street investors AND there C suite types get a lot of there "pay" in bonuses and stocks so a high stock price = high salary

[@macmcleod1188]

@mavigogun yes median wages have risen sharply from 50k per year to 56k per year. That's over 10%. It is much worse at the executive level. But one of the most significant costs at the pump are local property taxes and the minimum wage clerk who has fine from $1600 per shift per month (plus 7.5% more for social security) to 2,4pp per shift per month.

[@eriktempelman2097]

Point taken: these monsters are making so much money that they can buy all politicians with their spare change.

[@4literv6]

Yup like shell just bought out Volta for literal pennies on the dollar recently paying .85c a share when at it's peak it was over $15 a share. 🙂

[@neilreynolds3858]

Politicians are always willing to be bought - it's just a matter of the price - but we always shift blame to the people who do the buying from the people who are bought. That works to the advantage of the political class but does nothing to make things better for us since they're still on the market and somebody will always make another offer.

[@AntonBrazhnyk]

@@neilreynolds3858 It's safe to say (and very important to understand) those two groups are the same people. There is no government opposing business - it's just a myth made to fool regular people. Government is the part of business, it's judicial and power department. Democracy in capitalism is just circus to keep those at the bottom obedient. And btw there is only two classes that matter ("political" class doesn't) - the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.

[@sustainablelivingnl773]

You are so right. Government by the rich for the rich. Very sad.

[@BobQuigley]

How else do you expect Saudi Arabia to pay for their one half mile wide, 125 mile long, 1,000 foot high glass enclosed horizontal city??? In UK the price paid to own Parliament has been facing huge inflation pressures!! BP would have to pay their executives reasonable wages, think of the loss of yacht sales for UKs shipyards! In US cutting these profits are a direct thread to the Congressional Military Industrial Complex and it's owners operators the corporate Warfare Queens who never lose a contract. This would be catastrophic for the .01%!

[@mavigogun]

Ability to point all fingers: demonstrated. Constructive contribution: none.

[@موسى_7]

NEOM, fake environmentalism, or maybe not insincere but just really stupid

[@daveandrew589]

Those compensation figures are almost certainly significantly understated. Many CEO's also receive 'life insurance' packages which are actually funded annuities that pay off after their retirement. They will keep receiving large amounts of money well after they step down from their positions.

[@steveknight878]

I have never understood why they are called compensation. Compensation for what? The bother of dragging themselves into work occasionally to tell other people what actual work they should be doing? They should get a salary like everyone else, and if there are bonuses then everyone in the company should get a similar bonus. If large a company is doing well it is not just through the labours of one or two individuals.

[@cg986]

Awesome that you and Fully Charged are working together!

[@pdxyadayada]

Well said! You’re a hero in the continuing combat against fossil fuel corporate control..

[@MarioVesco]

As usual well thought out, structured, researched and packed. Truly appreciated!!

[@Withnail1969]

It's disinformation. Fossil fuels are heavily taxed at point of sale and make a major net contribution to the economy.

[@KellyandDoug]

Another great episode thank you. I wish we could have your videos shown at schools every week. To help create a greater all round public understanding of what is going on. It's people like you that will hopefully save humanity from its own greed and stupidity. thanks again for all the effort you put into your channel.

[@JustHaveaThink]

Thank you. I appreciate your feedback :-)

[@abrooks]

You mean the greed of people using fossil fuels to power their homes and transport?

[@johnlemaire8907]

Why can't you?

[@KellyandDoug]

@@johnlemaire8907 That is a good question. I am not a great public speaker and feel that some others would get the point across better me. I do try and do my bit 1 on 1 getting the message out there. I also do reviews on our channel of the power tools I use for my work as a gardener. I have now been almost fully electric now for over 3 years and will run or cycle to some jobs to cut down C02 if I don't need my own tools

[@MaryAnnNytowl]

​@@KellyandDoug but according to some folks, just the fact that you're on an electronic device is hypocrisy, since much of electricity is made by burning fossil fuels. Then, if you tell them, for example, that you're fully solar, they'll point out that there's toxic materials in the device you're using and the solar panels you power it with. Then, if you tell them you have recyclers that handle all your e-wastes, they'll claim that none of it gets recycled, just shipped overseas and dumped there, where poor people have to dig into the stuff to scrap it unsafely. You could even say you personally know the person that scraps your e-waste, and they would then complain about the hazardous chemicals needed to recycle many of the components. And on and on and on.❤ These trolls will ALWAYS find ways to try to claim "you're a hypocrite" so that people start thinking it's worthless to try. I know this type. I've dealt with this type for decades, both online and in person. It's like they're paid by the fossil fuel industries, as much as they deliberately ignore facts you place in front of them. Or just plain brainwashed, into some weird fossil fuel idolizing cult. It's freaking weird! Anyway, keep up what you're doing! And I hope you are registered to vote, and vote not just in national elections, but in the minor ones, too - even school boards are elected in many places, and they are the ones that can ban books, to hide information and help in the brainwashing of the next generation.

[@ruemeese]

Thanks - that level of subsidies is absolute insanity.

[@scottslotterbeck3796]

Go nuclear

[@melb5996]

So are the GREEN subsidies. They should all be scraped and let the market decide on how much people are willing to pay

[@elephantintheroom5678]

We love you Dave! Thanks for all you do to educate and inform us. If only the politicians and the journalists were required to watch your videos...

[@eg6841]

Simply WOW! 😮Thanks for your report and the precious links!

[@OldScientist]

As regards subsidies, a comprehensive analysis of US government subsidies per unit of electricity generated from 2010-2019 found that solar got 211 times more subsidies ($82.46/MWh) than natural gas ($0.39/MWh) and wind got 48 times more subsidies ($18.86/MWh) than natural gas.

[@WakefieldTolbert]

The per kWh is the best subsidy metric, but unfortunately usually missing from almost all discussions about how the Big Bad Gluttonous Oil Barons are getting taxpayer money....

[@middleclassthrash]

0:47 - 1:02 I nearly spit out my drink! That's probably the best bit of KZbin content I have ever seen. Thank you.

[@RandomGuy-nm6bm]

I made a screenshot just in case

[@JustHaveaThink]

My pleasure :-)

[@andrewradford3953]

Finer more gentle words have never been so apt. So many CEOs of companies that just make money hand over fist are worthy of this same accolade.

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

Carbon tax, we all pay And they complained about carbon taxes.

[@autohmae]

But 11:15 is the real deal

[@jonogrimmer6013]

This was an excellent and balanced explanation in my opinion. This is a great channel

[@JustHaveaThink]

Glad you think so!

[@colinmacdonald5732]

Of you think this is balanced, then you're beyond help.

[@alanhat5252]

@@colinmacdonald5732 give your head a wobble mate.

[@jonogrimmer6013]

@@colinmacdonald5732 hi please explain why it wasn’t balanced, I’m always looking to learn as should we all

[@neilmorgan7737]

@@colinmacdonald5732 The research that is presented in this and Dave's other episodes is sound. It may not back up your support for fossil fuel industry but nonetheless it is sound. Keep up the great work Dave and ignore trolls like @Colin Macdonald.

[@By_Rant_Or_Ruin]

Liked Shared, vomited, passed out, woke up, visited my personal counselor who I promptly depressed. We shook hands and agreed never to talk about it again. (Joking - mostly). Thank you for your video. It does help us all want to see the doom of every person and corporation that had anything to do with not just fossil fuels, but anyone who helped cover up the damage and spread false data about climate change. Assuming there is no such thing as divine revenge, then we must in fact take matters into our own hands.

[@ahn0x]

ppl predict ec0-m1l1tar1sm won't happen until a wet-bulb event happens... not sure what "our own hands" even means in this day and age

[@markfinley3703]

Have you listened to the podcast "Drilled"?

[@melb5996]

Speak for yourself. Climate alarmist will be the end of mankind if not stopped.

[@markfinley3703]

@@melb5996 there is an island in Louisiana that would like to disagree with you.

[@Navybyrde]

@@melb5996 how do you come to the conclusion that a demand for clean air and water threatens mankind ?

[@TheViktorofgilead]

Yes…. Pencils….

[@RandomGuy-nm6bm]

Ministry for the future, sign me up!

[@RandomGuy-nm6bm]

I wouldn't mind to be on the part of the executive function.

[@toyotaprius79]

​@@RandomGuy-nm6bm where does that fit into participatory democracy?

[@ordan787]

+

[@dragonwukong9]

John wick 😂

[@StogerStudios]

This is truly an incredible channel, I watch every video intently. Please continue to upload at this level of quality, research and frequency!

[@MonkeyChessify]

What in your opinion would actually spur real, rapid, and sustained cuts to emissions and transitioning off fossil fuels? We (globally) keep talking in decades (after decades of previous talking) yet it really feels like nothing short of catastrophe will actually spur real action

[@untitleddocument4197]

to be fair action is starting in large part due to renewable electricity being cheaper than fossil fuels. At this point it's down to governments to find ways to spend fossil fuel subsidy money on electric infrastructure

[@mavigogun]

Catastrophe is spurring substantive changes. What country are you in?

[@incognitotorpedo42]

Real action is happening right now, and has been for years. Have you noticed the rapid growth of the electric car industry? The rapid closure of coal fired electrical generators in much of the world as the price of renewables drops? The near total switchover from heavily power consumptive incandescent lighting to efficient LEDs? The trillion dollars that America recently agreed to put toward GHG reduction? There is a lot of action happening, and it will accelerate.

[@MonkeyChessify]

@@incognitotorpedo42 there is a lot of things happening yes yet emissions are still not going down. EVs and such won't get us there and many of these changes are things that should've happened decades ago

[@alanhat5252]

@@MonkeyChessify there's the problem, if what is happening now had happened 50 years ago it would probably have been all that was needed but now we're well onto the steep part of the exponential curve it's woefully inadequate.

[@scifithoughts3611]

I had to watch this episode more than once to grasp the situation. Good work!

[@OAK-808]

Brilliant and utterly depressing, as usual. Our poor children ...

[@steveknight878]

I do worry about the state of the world that we will be leaving to Keith Richards.

[@claudiamcbride9746]

I just found your channel for the first time tonight. Very impressed with your presentation. I will be a regular from now on.

[@Daniel-Davies-Gonstead-Student]

I've been thinking this stuff for a while so it was nice to see it articulated with numbers and words so elegantly in this video. Thanks!

[@waywardgeologist2520]

3:11 tax breaks aren’t subsidies, but letting companies keep more of their own money.

[@WakefieldTolbert]

I'm glad at long long last, someone pointed this out.

[@steevesdd]

The world spends trillions to find more fossil fuel. The world spends trillions on nuclear weapons. Either one of those expenditures invested in renewables would transition the world to a sustainable world. But world leaders can’t see away to make that transition. We can only hope that efficiencies of electrification kill the fossil fuel economy.

[@J-R-H82]

Subsidies for the biggest profiting companies is a kick in the teeth for any tax payer in any country. UK has a 20% VAT rate but fuel is charged at a much higher rate than that. Then the government think it's alright to give a portion of that back to the corporations that are publishing extortionate profit margins so they can invest in renewable energy projects and research. I have done a quick calculations and the government could install 20 million home solar and storage (4kw array+5kw battery) for about £200 billion, without any of the home owners contributing towards the installation and independent companies doing the work. The government would easily reduce that cost by 20% if the solar panels and batteries were brought in bulk.

[@joweb1320]

Good information, as always!

[@JustHaveaThink]

Glad it was helpful!

[@scottslotterbeck3796]

I inow Bald Dave makes his little ving scaring the crap out of people, but this is totally a non-starter if we went over to a nuclear economy. Limitless fuel, safe, clean, carbon-free. Always on.

[@joweb1320]

@@scottslotterbeck3796 He will have to do one on subsidies for nuclear in the future.

[@ShawnRitch]

Well done. I learned about " corporate welfare "( subsidies ) a few decades ago and am shocked that there hasn't been a revolution over it by now. People complain all the time over individuals that are struggling getting a few bucks to help them survive while our government takes our money and gives it to undeserving corporations. Last I checked, the US government was giving more money away as subsidies to these corporations than they do to people in need. The entire subject is absolutely appalling and makes me sick just to think about it.

[@jasonriddell]

most people would be "harmed" more if the subsidies were dropped quickly and energy prices SHOT UP and most "social programs" help the VERY poor and mostly leave the "middle class" out of it and the middle class has a LOT of voters that vote

[@MarilynStangl]

Well, since the filthy rich run the corporations and most governments, are you really surprised that they are lining their own pockets at every opportunity they get? And since they make the laws, they make the opportunities as well! Until we have a true democracy, one in which every bill (federal, state, and local) is on the yearly ballot with open but secure voting procedures, then corruption on a massive scale will continue!

[@keithyinger3326]

Often wondered how in the world they can say we've reported billions of dollars in profits, yet last week they were saying there was a shortage on fuel because some Refinery is down for maintenance or something, and that's why the prices are as high as they are. Or the war with Russia and Ukraine means there's less oil. Somebody is getting screwed here, and it's definitely not the oil companies that seem to have a monopoly and charge whatever they want.

[@Lord.Kiltridge]

As far back as 20 years ago, I started advocating for gasoline taxes rising annually to reach $2 per litre over 15 years, much higher taxes on oil and gas producers, and obviously cancelling all subsidies. with the proceeds going towards improving sustainable green technology. People thought I was mad, but where would Canada be now if we had?

[@mavigogun]

Saying "we should do this" isn't meaningful advocacy, clearly- ya gotta DO.

[@bunny_apocalypse]

​@@mavigogun you need to tax oil and gas producers and take their subsidies yourself

[@MrDead1975]

w*nker

[@incognitotorpedo42]

Where would Canada be now? I dunno, in their post-civil war period?

[@HaroldBrice]

Lord Kiltridge: Where would Canada Be.... Frankly Canada (and anyone else who followed those ideas) would be riding in horse-drawn buggies. And probably starving.

[@steved4429]

Oh dear where to start! I'll concentrate on the UK where I live, and judging from the accent where the video is from. The production "subsidies" are tax treatment that all businesses benefit from, because if cost of production was taxed as opposed to profits, no one would bother producing anything. Talking of taxes, big oil was paying 40% CT (double other businesses) and now windfall taxed at 75%! The second bit addressed the direct type as in the price cap recently introduced. This was needed, and other countries have similar schemes, because of high prices. Prices are high for various reasons, post Covid bounce back, the war etc. But another cause of high cost is renewables, but that is a whole other discussion. Lastly "indirect" subsidies, i.e. not paying for the supposed damage caused. Well depends how you measure it, and I would not trust the IMF, they hardly ever get predictions right (same as IPCC). Just because an organisation has "international" or "world" in it's name, does not make a divine source of information. Anyway, there are carbon credits, ESG ratings, and taxes on anything that moves by fossil fuel, are these accounted for? Making EVs and wind turbines also have an environmental footprint, does the IMF call these subsidies? Talking of which, both these and other green industries receive huge direct subsidies from the taxpayer. Finally, I am not a denier, but to get to a greener future requires fossil fuels, and plenty of them for a long time to come. The vast majority of the things that make the modern world are made from or have parts made from oil and it's byproducts. By demonising oil, or trying to stop further exploration, you would just make the transition harder and much more expensive. Oh, and before I'm shouted down with "if we had more renewable, 9 times cheaper," and other bumph, remember, for every GW of renewable, you need a GW of expensive (because on standby) backup. This will not be solved until we invent cheap enough storage solutions, and no, ATM batteries are not it!

[@anthonycarbone3826]

If there was no subsidy the fuel industry would decrease investment in new drilling and also reduce capital expenditures. The reason is simple as the oil companies do not see a favorable forecast going forward with governments producing more and more regulations and restrictions. Without incentives the oil industry would shut down as facilities break down. The oil industry has a forecast going forward of 30 to 50 years and nobody is going to invest for new resources or invest in existing facilities. Plus you are right the existing giants do reap past profits from past investments but every commodity is governed at the margin and the margin is produced by new ventures with high risk of costs and failures. The oil industry is littered with dry holes and projects that never became profitable.

[@paulweidenhammer5749]

The expansive efforts to keep Fossil fuels in the game are crazy and you have done you homework to explain it beautifully. Thank you very much.

[@paulroyle-grimes]

I will bet this does not include “force pooling”. That is what happened to me - oil company said “we want to frack under your house”. I said no and the Colorado government under Hickenlooper said “you can’t say no”. And proceeded to just give them permission. Every year I get a sub $100 check for the tens of thousands of dollars of gas that they pump without my permission.

[@jimhood1202]

Here in Panama the government is still giving discounts on fuel prices at the pumps that began when the global prices went up. It helps the transport sector say solvent but sadly people are getting less and less aware of the real costs that continuing with fossil fuels incur.

[@jasonriddell]

but what would happen if the subsidies were dropped - mass inflation and unemployment as energy prices spike not to mention social unrest as a LOT of peoples livelihoods is destroyed and many more get kicked into poverty there NEEDS to be a way to transition without a MASSIVE inflationary energy spike like subsidising electricity AND electric transit / transport subsidies

[@CA_preston]

so...92 percent of these subsidies at issue are largely from "undercharging for environmental costs", which is of course ill-defined nonsense, and just so happens to match the increase in costs required to hit their declared climate goals. Sure...this isn't sketchy at all. The real story: Governments intentionally drive up the cost of energy to discourage use, use subsidies to make sure the poor people don't entirely revolt, and then try to remove those subsidies when they interfere with their reduction goals. They pretend the subsidies are the problem, rather than the lack of energy.

[@dwaynejava]

We are so owned by big oil. We dont even how beholdened we are. I had a chuckle a few yeaes ago when Canadas Trudeau gave oil companies 2 Billion to cap their un capped wells. Can you imagine an oil company extracting oil out of the ground , then asking taxpayers to cap their wells?

[@mavigogun]

Here in Texas, they just walk away from the wells and dissolve the company- a common criminal practice.

[@Ryan-ff2db]

I've been telling people this for years that complain about EV subsidies, maybe now I'll just link this video.

[@LordZordid]

That "Why do we care about fossil fuel subsidiaries" statement. I don't think anyone on a personal level would disagree with that. And it's not like governments aren't well aware of the drawbacks of fossil fuels. That is one of the reasons why we have been subsidising green technology so heavily is to get a technological advantage and get out of the tar pit. But we NEED a constant flow of energy and a transition to sustainable energy takes a bloody long time.

[@Gcanno]

Not Really It Just Takes Will And Elimination Of Greedy Interest .

[@HaroldBrice]

Lord Zordid: There is a clear reason you have no comments to your comment. What is your elected position? You sound like a politician...................................................

[@jasonriddell]

@@Gcanno and bucket loads of MONEY and the "greedy interests" in this VID are actually "helping our cause by keeping fossil energy expensive offsetting the rise in ELECTRICITY

[@LordZordid]

@@HaroldBrice I am in particular thinking about Germany who closed their nuclear reactors BEFORE they had an alternative energy solution. And now they are one of the biggest CO2 emitters in the world because they have to supplement the energy needs by burning Lignite (brown coal). You people need to get it into your heads that we can't just transition based on wishful thinking and technology that doesn't exist otherwise we would get anarchy! I'm sure we all want the same end goal but it requires small increments, determination and hard work!

[@mikeaustin4138]

To put things in perspective, 4 Trillion dollars could fund: $25K worth of rooftop solar for 40 million homes = $1T 40 Million EVs at $25K each = $1T $25K of weatherization treatments for 40 Million homes = $1T 4 Million housing units @ $250,000 each = $1T You can make your own list, but the point is this is the *opportunity cost* of these subsidies, along with the concentration of wealth - and therefore power - in the hands of a very tiny minority: a minority that cares absolutely nothing for your freedom.

[@luminousfractal420]

Time cleanup costs are distributed amongst those causing damage. And i mean clean. Left it as you found it clean. For example plastic bottles could be biotagged. Then the tags measured chemically at trash and recycling plants and the costs applied to the companies directly. Estimates and distributed costs for the litter.

[@johndonovan7897]

We are driving BEVs, gasoline free yard tools and our natural gas bill was $8 last month, most of which was the service charge. Just because our natgas generator runs a test cycle once a week.

[@s.m.7018]

Thank you for being a voice of sanity in a world of self interest.

[@kadran3263]

How about this: Redefine all subsidies as government loans with a deadline for repayment and with interest. Banks have no duty of care to the state or citizens so they are barred from funding utilities. Companies which default on repayments, proof they are incompetent, are surrendered to government control: legitimate state ownership. As for renewables, gradually increase interest rates for non-renewable projects and have minimal interest on renewables. This ought to accelerate the transition of Fossil Fuel companies to Renewable Resources companies.

[@CplusO2]

Great work, thanks Dave.

[@lawrencetaylor4101]

I'm glad you discussed the closer to $6 Trillion amount, since that is closer to reality. Oh, but I think it's also very lowballed. Are they taking into account for the millions of tons of toxic chemicals needed for fracking and tar sands? Methinks not. We should be looking at the hidden costs since the first financial crisis was wrongly blamed on homeowner mortgagees, and instead is a direct result of financing frack sites. A frack site needs a 30 year ROI, but is worthless after 2 to 5 years. Industry did a major revolution in 2005 to move to those horrendous sources, and funny that banks went tits up in 2008. And the continued crisis is the result that a society cannot live with tar sands. The REPO crisis caused a FED subsidy of the system of a $1 Trillion/day injection, and then we stopped talking about it.

[@td_kdname5197]

"toxic chemicals needed for fracking and tar sands?" Not to mention the total destruction of the millions or acres of land that can never be fully restored.

[@wisenber]

"Are they taking into account for the millions of tons of toxic chemicals needed for fracking and tar sands? " Combined, they've paid close to a trillion dollars in income taxes in the last half decade. Maybe some of that could go to account for it? During the same period, US States collected about a quarter of that amount and they paid excises too. "We should be looking at the hidden costs " Indeed. One cost would have been a loss of $200B in federal taxes in 2022 and another $50B in state taxes and the $18B in lease fees. That's assuming no one did anything productive with any of their products of course.

[@stevehayward1854]

Governments can help to reduce the timeline but renewable energy will inevitably win through, it makes much more business sense to invest in renewables

[@jasonriddell]

this vid makes "fossil" energy LOOK very good investment and MOST "green" startups don't show PROFITS LIKE THESE and if we dont "put our hand on the scales" to adjust the outcome fossils will NOT "die out" due to market forces and "better" renewables and add in capital spend on renewable plants is GREATER then fuelling RUNNING FOSSIL plants and yes SOME sites are CLOSE but not enough are

[@OneDullMan]

Not a fan of fossil fuel companies. That being said I am on a pension from years of government work. And I know that the various pension funds here in Canada are invested in the fossil fuel industry. Tis a double edged sword, like most things are.

[@remkovdb]

We need to make them pay for the climatechange costs

[@brandenharder6378]

Wdym we? They're the ones in charge, we aren't doing anything to take charge, so there isn't a future

[@alanhat5252]

they're in it for the profits, they *will* pass that on to us unless the legislation is extremely carefully worded.

[@andyroid7339]

This isn't solely about money. 'Making them pay' doesn't sort it. This is about a sea change in the way EVERY human animal thinks about the environment, whether that person is ultra religious peasant in Nigeria or a footballer on stupid money in Manchester. When this change occurs, the problem will disappear. The only issue - this will happen far too late for us and most of the other living things on our planet.

[@wotireckon]

The fossil fuel companies would do well to bear in mind that this WILL happen in the coming years as the penny drops for the majority of the population. And simply washing their hands of collapsing stranded assets will not be tolerated.

[@mavigogun]

@@wotireckon 1)FFC's already see where things are heading, are building out their exit strategy, even as we type, and 2) foot stomping and declarations of lack of tolerance do nothing.

[@aliemariearjaans535]

Bless your corton socks. I just sit the phone on the table so everyone else van hear.

[@LivingProcess]

Brilliant as always thank you 💚

[@JustHaveaThink]

Glad you enjoyed it

[@danwylie-sears1134]

We should tax fossil fuels more than we do, because the taxes paid on the fuels are less than the external costs associated with their use. But a tax that's too low is still a tax, not a subsidy.

[@Eduard.Popa.]

Using solar panels, heat pumps and electric cars, we can stop paying greedy oil and gas companies !

[@waqasahmed939]

Nuclear is still needed imo. I say this as someone who's very much an advocate for personal solar and someone who's got shares in Ripple Energy I've got more than enough energy for myself in spring overnight if I had enough battery capacity, from solar alone on a sunny day like today But today isn't necessarily what I'll generate tomorrow . I wouldn't also have enough power for my house, and say a car too. The amount of panels I'd need for a car would be massive This is why I think that solar is absolutely amazing from a personal energy perspective, but for a national perspective, we do imo need nuclear for those days where we simply don't have enough renewable energy available. We do also tbf have wind farms but again, not enough power is necessarily generated at the same time. The Germans have a term called "dunkelflaute" and that's where nuclear really shines

[@litestuffllc7249]

Some actual examples and figures might make this more convincing. Don't forget 85% of electricity world wide is produced by fossil fuels; solar and wind are under 3%, they would be only 1% if all transport was moved immediately to the grid because 2/3rds of energy consumed is non electric and you'd have to move it to electric; in other words you'd have to increase the grid to 300% its current size. Pretty much impossible; and of course other sources of power are directly subsidised with similar low interst loans - dams, nuclear facilities, just about all power production. Wind and solar don't work; its taken 20 years to get to 3% of electrical production and 1% of overall production. The only real hope is bio fuels or maybe Thermonuclear.

[@leskuzyk2425]

The Ministry for the Future deals with this ... Kim Stanley Robinson

[@RandomGuy-nm6bm]

Reading it too

[@JackMott]

This is great information that people need to hear, I do have one bit of constructive criticism. Early on you say something along the lines of "These guys can charge whatever they want". This is not at all how it works of course, the oil gets bid on in markets, the CEOs don't decide a price. This is an important pedantic point if you are trying to sway pro capitalist pro industry people, as they understand this well, and may close the video before even hearing about the subsidies.

[@OurEden]

Great video, Dave! We're really glad that our video on Ørsted was a useful resource to you. Feel free to get in touch if you'd like to work on a collaboration on a topic like this in the future. 😊

[@frequentlycynical642]

If I understand it correctly, here in the USA oil well owners can take a "depletion allowance". The weird premise is that by removing oil form the well, the well is worth less. This would be like a store selling inventory and making money on the sale, and then getting a tax credit for reduced inventory, too! Another implicit subsidy is the use of the military to keep tanker shipping safe. At the height of the war in Iraq, it was estimated that gasoline could cost almost $10/gal if the cost of the military was included.

[@Richard_McDonald_Woods]

Good bit of analysis, Dave! Subsidies always mean later costs for us all, plus the interest charges levied.

[@neilmorgan7737]

My view is, subsidies are simply a way for the politicians to fill the pockets of their Old School Chums to thank them for all the bumming that went on.

[@rogerbarton1790]

Did you say "steer their corporate shit through stormy waters"

[@JustHaveaThink]

I may as well have done!

[@MrRocksoil]

Very interesting,have a nice week in the garden,make some compost,add charcoal and rock dust to it,I've been doing it for years and see the benefits daily.

[@JustHaveaThink]

Thanks for the tips!

[@rushja]

You're a great voice in the climate debate Dave! So glad you're doing Fully Charged. I'm even tempted to go

[@melb5996]

Pity you don’t listen to the other side of the debate ( or are you one that thinks the ‘science’ is settled?

[@genieb]

Having worked in the offshore side of O&G, I have seen cost increase dramatically over the 3 decades that I worked in it. Having been getting closer and closer to (offshore) renewable energy, I can see a massive spike in hydrocarbon prices coming, once the renewable energy sources (some of them already cheaper than hydrocarbons WITH subsidies) become much more readily available (and that is availability is increasing exponentially) and even cheaper (also exponentially). It is also becoming visible in battery electric vehicles, they are already reaching price parity and dropping below fossil fuel vehicles. In short we're in the middle of one of the most exiting times (not for the hydrocarbon and fossil fuel vehicle industry, for them it must be terrifying!). Once the expensive sources (offshore O&G being the lead here) can't compete, their invested cost is going to pull the O&G down at a frightening rate. They'll collapse (some of that collapse is already happening, the Russian lunatic just helped mask the collapse) and as they do, fewer of them remain alive (Saudi for example as their cost of operation is quite low, relatively speaking). There is likely to be a massive shortage, quickly escalating prices, making the renewable energy sources even more attractive. This will further accelerate the transition. The bit that hurts, is the transition, as a lot of people can't afford to pivot that quickly and are stuck with worthless fossil fuel vehicles and massive cost of fuel. This is the bit that worries me and that is why governments need to develop mitigation strategies, which they won't because elections cycles and "climate change sceptics" will do everything to kill that off or slow it down at least. Anyway, what I have to say will not persuade anyone, other than the converted. Thanks Dave, it was brilliant, as usual :).

[@neilmorgan7737]

Hi @Eugene Bajema, I really like what you have said but just want to counter your statement about renewables becoming even more attractive. I agree it should but given, at least here in there UK, energy pricing is governed by the gas price rather than a free market it is difficult to truly see how renewables become more attractive with such vigour that I think you are inferring. If the UK government could and I believe should step in and change the pricing system here in the UK and make the energy market a free market and allow prices for individual production sources to float freely on the open market we would then see renewable decimate the O&G energy industry. With the spike in energy prices felt most keenly here in the UK it is clear that despite the cost of renewables declining the wholesale energy price has rocketed purely because the gas price has risen so sharply. I buy from Octopus energy and in theory my electricity price should have remained fairly stable as the cost to produce using solar and wind has not really changed but due to the corrupt pricing mechanism which is in place to protect the O&G industry thanks to their chums who sit in the seats of power. I am sure one day this pricing mechanism will change but until then the transition will be slowed somewhat to help the O&G industry stay in business for as long as possible. I am sure they are doomed but their ultimate fate is being prolonged.

[@genieb]

@@neilmorgan7737 you are making a very good point here. The pricing system will either collapse by itself, when renewable energy adoption increases (and it seems to be accelerating) and/or policy changes (due to changes in government or forced onto the government). The decline of fossil derived energy is inevitable, the only uncertainty is the rate of decline. It is the point where fossil energy becomes very expensive for the suppliers and they will need to pass the cost on to consumers or go bust or pivot. Initially they'll try (they already are) to pass the cost on, increase government support etc. etc. but ultimately that will not be sustainable. That point is where the low income earners everywhere will start to hurt because they can't pivot yet and are forced to pay the high cost. Where that point is, is a guess for me, I'm sure that very smart people are looking at that already to make accurate forecasts. I don't drive an EV as I can't afford to buy one that meets my needs (Canoo would be a good option for me) and I'm not in the low income earner category (nor am I rich), so I'm hoping that access to good EVs becomes affordable soon for me and the large majority of people because then our cost of driving (and living) can also come down before the fossil fuel price crisis hits. At least I'm lucky that I live in New Zealand where around 80+% of our electricity is already renewable.

[@autohmae]

Any big transition will always require a government subsidy for the less well off. In some sense 11:15 made very clear: who do we want to subsidize ? The O&G or the renewables/consumers (homes and businesses in this case). Seems like a pretty clear case, especially if you want to be able to reach the Paris Agreement goals.

[@pinkelephants1421]

Unlikely to happen any time soon, mainly due to political dogma & argey-bargey, but if countries such as the USA or the UK for example, were to remove fossil fuel subsidies then the often bemoaned national deficits could be either largely removed or quickly deminished. Deficits in healthcare, social care and education might be able to be eradicated in addition to adequate funding for transitioning entire economies to sustainable models in order to reduce the likelihood of runaway climate change.

[@andrewgraziani4331]

Jeez oh man dude I think I could generate a couple of megawatts from my blood alone boiling in rage.

[@drabbit61]

Thanks again for a clear and insightful presentation of a disturbingly obvious wrong. It is a pity that amongst all the facts and figures, as usual, ethics and morality are forgotten.

[@peterbaxter8151]

Thanks for a very interesting article David.

[@JustHaveaThink]

My pleasure!

[@currawong2011]

As always, well researched, well constructed and well presented.

[@geofflewis8599]

Let's face it, Petroleum has provided a never-before opportunity to humanity, but it is a finite resource.

[@waqasahmed939]

We may well be in the oil age, but other ages come about. The oil age signalled the death of the steam age

[@HaroldBrice]

Geoff Lewis: I like your direction Geoff. To replace oil will require a combination of efforts.

[@lordgarion514]

When your government allows companies to make record setting profits during an economic downturn, while ALSO allowing its citizens to suffer, something needs to change. And as we've seen, both parties in America are responsible.

[@Mekuso8]

Is there any good argument for fossil fuels subsidies NOT qualifying as crimes against humanity?

[@incognitotorpedo42]

No excuse for giving money or resources to oil companies. Subsidies that make it possible for people to afford energy so they can work and live don't quite seem like crimes against humanity, but they might mean that you didn't set up your society correctly.

[@-LightningRod-]

CRIMINAL

[@williamtyndale1402]

Can we now do a presentation on "Green" energy subsidies??

[@ptahthothra]

Only way there will be real change is if the oil companies are taken off the stock market so people cannot invest in them. So long as people keep investing in it because they can make money the problem will never end. How many people have solar panels yet still have their money in the oil companies because they can make a profit?

[@jasonriddell]

Norway paid for there GREEN conversion with NORTH SEA OIL

[@nielsbeck7461]

What i would like to know is why are we so focused on getting rid of fossil fuels since in 1990 the co2 level of the earth was .35 of a percent and in 2022 the earth co2 level is at .41 of a percent, our earth needs .2 minimum for plant growth. The difference is so small it does not make sense. The difference over 32 years is an increase of .06 of a percent. Please explain if i am incorrect.

[@c-ccoates503]

700$ per person per year would buy a lot of alternative energy systems. I.e. solar panels ect.

[@HaroldBrice]

C-c Coates: It is e t c, not ect. The word is etcetera, and is abbreviated etc.

[@موسى_7]

Really doubt that. Buying solar panels for one house is expensive. But I hope I am wrong. I am no industry expert.

[@jasonriddell]

5 years for a heatpump install and 2 - 3 more for the electrical panel upgrade and 2 years for an EVSE car charger this is the issue HUGE numbers become SMALL numbers once spread across the whole population

[@puntuated]

I have , for many years, thought that the lawmakers (political parties) should be funded, on an equitable basis, from the public purse in order to prevent ‘donors’ - some of which are from big oil, from lobbying so effectively for subsidies for their industry.

[@OAK-808]

Excellent idea.

[@jasonriddell]

the US supreme court has ruled that NON campaign advertising money IS FREE SPEECH and is PROTECTED speech !!!!

[@thankyouforyourcompliance7386]

There is little hope that such enemies can be defeated. They will take everything down with themselves, using their wealth to secure their place in the boat

[@scottbeers2749]

I think the cost increase could be an easy way to curb emissions, but the issue I think many would have is this: In America, the low income people usually have the least efficient equipment to use, which could end up impacting them the most.

[@regellery6695]

Thank you. This is really important information. I would very much like to see the end of fuel subsidies and I would like to see that achieved in a way that has the least impact on poor and disadvantaged people. As for the CEO bonuses... disgusting, offensive and obscene. Also I worry about the stranded assets you mentioned. Who's going to clean those up once the fossil fuel industry is abandoned? I suspect it will be tax payers. Couldn't we withhold CEO bonuses and fuel subsidies for that purpose? One can dream.

[@wisenber]

"Couldn't we withhold CEO bonuses and fuel subsidies for that purpose?" You'd probably have to make a special law where CEO's of certain companies aren't allowed to make as much as other CEO's. "Who's going to clean those up once the fossil fuel industry is abandoned?" The same people that'll pay for retired windmills and solar panels I imagine. Of course those companies did pay over $200B in income taxes in the US in 2022 alone, so maybe some of the $200B they paid in taxes would help?

[@WJV9]

@@wisenber - Windmill blades do need replacing however the rest of the windmill will last as long as a coal/gas turbine generating plant. Solar panels do become less efficient with age but they can be recycled just as your laptop, tablet or cell phone circuit boards can be recycled. Overall I think wind/solar will still be less costly than fossil fuel plants.

[@wisenber]

@@WJV9 "however the rest of the windmill will last as long as a coal/gas turbine generating plant. " Yes. Many areas already have the empty concrete slabs on them. Most of the gas plants are less than 20 years old around here. The coal plants have been updated and maintained for over 70 years. "Solar panels do become less efficient with age but they can be recycled just as your laptop" So they send them to a Third World country for children to dismantle? "Overall I think wind/solar will still be less costly than fossil fuel plants." If land has no value. The coal plant near me generates 1.3GW on a 75 acre plot. It's been serving ORNL since the 1950s. The national lab is now trying to get a direct feed from the nuclear plant about 50 miles further away as the particle collider, nuclear experiments and super-computer centers require sustained reliable power. The dozens of windmills cluttering every hilltop around here take up about 5X that space while producing less than 1/10th of that power. We used to be able to hike on those ridges from the house and go to see stars at night. Now it's all blocked with security fences. Now it's a 40 mile drive for something similar.

[@WJV9]

@@wisenber - Do you like having your family get lung related diseases by breathing coal dust, exhaust fumes, etc. The CDC has proven that lung cancer is higher near pollution sources such as power plants, engine exhaust and even natural gas stoves in homes. Even if you can see pollution it is still there. We could probably survive burning oil, coal, etc. if there were only 1 billion or so people on the planet but, there are 8 billion and climbing and we are on the path to destroying our livable planet. Last time I looked there is no 'Planet B'.

[@edopronk1303]

I almost got too depressed about the subsidies, that I rage quit the video. Glad I stayed to hear that there are good alternatives for fuel subsidies and they are in place for about half a billion people. I hope Europe and the USA will learn this.

[@tonyhowes7339]

Shining a light on all these subsidies is exactly what is required. Thank you. May your touch burn bright

[@stanleytolle416]

I like to compare if the oil exploration investment were put into developing newer nuclear then none of that oil would be needed.

[@malcolmfowler8972]

Looking forward to seeing you at 'Fully Charged Live' in a few weeks

[@JustHaveaThink]

Thanks Malcolm. See you there :-)

[@davepennington3573]

Add the cost of the military which "defends our interests" and you might have a true number

[@Kevin_Street]

First off, thank you for a great video! I like your current focus on the social and economic aspects of climate change. It's certainly something to think about. From the video it sounds like the answer to your question "When will fuel become unaffordable?" is right now. It already is unaffordable to a great many people around the world without those explicit subsidies paid by governments. We've got ourselves in a pickle where, as a society, we need to keep paying the subsidies to avoid catastrophic inflation and instability - but those same subsidies are making fossil fuels artificially competitive against renewable alternatives. And of course the whole implicit subsidy thing is the nub of the problem: we burn fossil fuels without paying attention to the damage they're doing to the environment, so those costs aren't properly factored into the price of the fuels. Carbon taxes are an attempt to take those costs into consideration, but taxes are imposed from outside and are subject to the whims of local politics. It would be a lot more effective if the true costs of fossil fuels were simply included in their prices so the market could work the way it's supposed to, without being distorted by subsidies. That IMF calculation really shows how effectively the market could work to facilitate the energy transition if fuel prices were at "fully efficient levels." But if we did that and raised fuel prices by 36%, inflation would go through the roof and we'd all end up broke. In poorer countries there'd be revolutions and upheavals. It's something that needs to be done gradually over a period of years, while resisting the wails and screams and bribes of the fossil fuel industry all the way.

[@oswaldjh]

Remember recently gas price in the US inflated to 5.00/gal and all hell broke loose? Government subsidies are necessary for governments to stay in power. Follow the money.

[@jasonriddell]

and to keep the economy "stable" to raise the money from TAXES and INVESTMENT for a no carbon build out

[@maxvaessen]

Enjoy your time off!

[@JustHaveaThink]

Thank you :-)

[@grahammewburn]

Oil is sold in markets that sets the price. The discovery of oil peaked in 1964. Since then, oil discoveries have declined each decade. Currently, discoveries are below 10 billion barrels PA. Mankind consumes 36 billion barrels PA. Unsustainable. When demand exceeds supply, prices will escalate.

[@zatar123]

If a company is making record profits, you are going to have a very hard time convincing me that they need any subsidies at all. And that's before you factor in the minor detail of our ongoing need to switch to other types of energy. So, if we've got elected officials who are subsidizing stuff that we need to be getting rid of...Maybe they are one of the things that we, as voters, should be working to get rid of. 🤔 Just a thought.

[@HaroldBrice]

Zatar 123: No "maybe" about it. It is your relatives, friends, and neighbors who are electing the ignorant, unprincipled, dishonest blokes who are allowinig all this BS to occur. Term limits. Prison sentences for corruption. Why are Hillary and Bill Clinton still free? The USA is close to the political corruption level of Russia, Ukraine, and a large part of the world. The ruling class needs to be taken down several notches. First of all is our vote. If LBJ and the CIA has not murdered JFK we would not have gone to Vietnam. And it was happening before that and it continues to happen all over the world and here at home. Jack Kennedy fired Allen Dulles and then LBJ appointed Dulles to the Warren Commission. Biggest middle finger move in US history. What is wrong with the USA is us. We are unwilling to take the time to get informed and then we are afraid of making waves. Job and family and friends who need educating cause too much fear that we will lose our comfortable place. No maybe about it. Democrat, Independent, or Republican. If they are crooks, then throw them out of office, or into jail.

[@steffengustavsen9678]

This is actually very wrong. Here in Norway the people who work in oil industry earn twice as much as everyone else. Then they pay 78% tax on production and they still break even with 20-30 USD oil price. After that consumers pay 60% tax on gas. Yes there is a 78% tax debduction on loss but that is only a fraction of all the income the goverment gets from the oil industry. I know countries like Iran and SA can produce oil making a profit from a oil price of just 2 USD. Oil price is actually artificially high because oil producing countries restrict production. Oil importers should impose a oil import tax to make renewables more competitive and to punish oil exporters that keep oil prices too high.

[@toyotaprius79]

​​​​​@@steffengustavsen9678 _that would be an ecumenical matter_ alas if only the global oil market was as regulated and planned as Norway's. We know what happened to other countries (in the global south) when they tried to nationalise their natural resources...

[@freesk8]

No corporation should get any subsidy. Even wind and solar companies. The free market should determine energy prices, not some politically-connected elite group of insiders.

[@zatar123]

@freesk8 I'd be willing to see the clean energy groups get some help short term to get them to a competitive level; after that, government should get out of the way and let the free market sort things out.

[@LewisLudwig]

A couple of problems with the points stated here. One, there is no transition to renewable energy. The total amount of energy produced by wind/solar is a whopping 2%, barely more than a rounding error. And the percentage of energy created by fossil fuels was 84% 20 years ago, and is still 82% today. The amount of energy created by fossil fuels has actually increased in the last 20 years! As far as subsidies go, let's get rid of all subsidies and see what happens.

[@patrick247two]

The people who float to the top of the CEO lake have more empathy for a dollar bill than for a person.

[@fellsmoke]

National energy resources are public necessities...private ownership isn't reasonable

[@djbrettell]

Dave, interesting that you focused on oil this week, given what I commented on your previous video “It doesn't help much either, that all the oil is going to be gone in 50 years’ time, which means in 20-30 years, if we are still wandering about, the price of an airline ticket will cost a fortune. Get your travelling days in now!”. This morning the shock announcement that oil production by OPEC+ is being reduced by a million barrels per day, why? The consequences are that the prices will go up. It seems blindingly obvious to me that 1) Climate disasters will cost governments 2) Fighting for fresh water and food resources will cost governments 3) Subsidies for oil will go down due to lack of funds 4) Oil will be gone in 50 years (Read the free book - “Energy and Human Ambitions on a Finite Planet”). The price of oil and everything connected to, and produced by, oil (e.g., travel, food production, energy, products) will increase to a point that non-CEOs, aka you and me, current lifestyles are going to be severely impacted. Oh, and there will be a lot of starvation and migration across the planet.

[@danshillabeer9523]

Dave, the quality of your vids gets better and better. Quality source documents and graphics, and you have such a feel for restrained yet unhesitating conclusions. I have watched only a handful of YT vids more than once. This is one of them.