The world spends an astounding US$423 billion annually
to subsidize fossil fuels for consumers – oil, electricity that’s
generated by the burning of other fossil fuels, gas, and coal.
This is 4X the amount being called for to help poor countries
tackle the climate crisis… Don’t Choose Extinction!
Right. Kosci feral horses have got to go. Submissions close 2 November
https://reclaimkosci.org.au/submission-guide/?
Speedy said:
Right. Kosci feral horses have got to go. Submissions close 2 Novemberhttps://reclaimkosci.org.au/submission-guide/?
which has nothing to do with TOT
.
European Investment Bank to phase out fossil fuel financing
EU’s lending arm to become first ‘climate bank’ by ending financing of oil, gas and coal projects after 2021
.
European Investment Bank to end all loans to oil and gas firms
The bank will stop lending to polluting companies that want to finance low-carbon projects
Ogmog said:
Speedy said:
Right. Kosci feral horses have got to go. Submissions close 2 Novemberhttps://reclaimkosci.org.au/submission-guide/?
which has nothing to do with TOT
Yes, clearly.
I should have preceded my post with “Sorry for the hijack, but here’s something you can do today to stop extinction”.
https://reclaimkosci.org.au/submission-guide/?
So, sorry for the hijack, and Don’t Choose Extinction! :)
Speedy said:
Ogmog said:
Speedy said:
Right. Kosci feral horses have got to go. Submissions close 2 Novemberhttps://reclaimkosci.org.au/submission-guide/?
which has nothing to do with TOT
Yes, clearly.
I should have preceded my post with “Sorry for the hijack, but here’s something you can do today to stop extinction”.
https://reclaimkosci.org.au/submission-guide/?
So, sorry for the hijack, and Don’t Choose Extinction! :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaTgTiUhEJg/
Ogmog said:
yeah,
while i got the parallel
i just got pissy over peeps missing the amusing video linkhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaTgTiUhEJg/
> The world spends an astounding US$423 billion annually to subsidize fossil fuels for consumers – oil, electricity that’s generated by the burning of other fossil fuels, gas, and coal.
I strongly suspect that that’s total and absolute bullshit. The tax that the governments around the world gain from taxing fossil fuels is enormous, and that’s the exact opposite of a subsidy. Even in Australia that’s in excess of 7.5 billion dollars per year.
You’re confusing “subsidy” with “tax”. They’re exact opposites.
mollwollfumble said:
> The world spends an astounding US$423 billion annually to subsidize fossil fuels for consumers – oil, electricity that’s generated by the burning of other fossil fuels, gas, and coal.I strongly suspect that that’s total and absolute bullshit. The tax that the governments around the world gain from taxing fossil fuels is enormous, and that’s the exact opposite of a subsidy. Even in Australia that’s in excess of 7.5 billion dollars per year.
You’re confusing “subsidy” with “tax”. They’re exact opposites.
Taxes forgone:
https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/australian-fossil-fuel-subsidies-hit-10-3-billion-in-2020-21/
Witty Rejoinder said:
mollwollfumble said:
> The world spends an astounding US$423 billion annually to subsidize fossil fuels for consumers – oil, electricity that’s generated by the burning of other fossil fuels, gas, and coal.I strongly suspect that that’s total and absolute bullshit. The tax that the governments around the world gain from taxing fossil fuels is enormous, and that’s the exact opposite of a subsidy. Even in Australia that’s in excess of 7.5 billion dollars per year.
You’re confusing “subsidy” with “tax”. They’re exact opposites.
Taxes forgone:
https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/australian-fossil-fuel-subsidies-hit-10-3-billion-in-2020-21/
Isn’t this a bit of a pisstake. From what I can gather, for the article doesn’t spell it out, I suspect that it’s about subsidies to the agriculture sector that doesn’t pay the full amount of tax on fuel. I can’t see how this is a subsidy to the the actual fuel companies.
sibeen said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
mollwollfumble said:
> The world spends an astounding US$423 billion annually to subsidize fossil fuels for consumers – oil, electricity that’s generated by the burning of other fossil fuels, gas, and coal.I strongly suspect that that’s total and absolute bullshit. The tax that the governments around the world gain from taxing fossil fuels is enormous, and that’s the exact opposite of a subsidy. Even in Australia that’s in excess of 7.5 billion dollars per year.
You’re confusing “subsidy” with “tax”. They’re exact opposites.
Taxes forgone:
https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/australian-fossil-fuel-subsidies-hit-10-3-billion-in-2020-21/
Isn’t this a bit of a pisstake. From what I can gather, for the article doesn’t spell it out, I suspect that it’s about subsidies to the agriculture sector that doesn’t pay the full amount of tax on fuel. I can’t see how this is a subsidy to the the actual fuel companies.
I think the mining sector would be far greater than agriculture.
Witty Rejoinder said:
sibeen said:
Witty Rejoinder said:Taxes forgone:
https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/australian-fossil-fuel-subsidies-hit-10-3-billion-in-2020-21/
Isn’t this a bit of a pisstake. From what I can gather, for the article doesn’t spell it out, I suspect that it’s about subsidies to the agriculture sector that doesn’t pay the full amount of tax on fuel. I can’t see how this is a subsidy to the the actual fuel companies.
I think the mining sector would be far greater than agriculture.
OK, but I still don’t see how it is a subsidy to the fuel companies.
sibeen said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
sibeen said:Isn’t this a bit of a pisstake. From what I can gather, for the article doesn’t spell it out, I suspect that it’s about subsidies to the agriculture sector that doesn’t pay the full amount of tax on fuel. I can’t see how this is a subsidy to the the actual fuel companies.
I think the mining sector would be far greater than agriculture.
OK, but I still don’t see how it is a subsidy to the fuel companies.
if they had to pay full price they probably drive around willy-nilly!!!
sibeen said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
sibeen said:Isn’t this a bit of a pisstake. From what I can gather, for the article doesn’t spell it out, I suspect that it’s about subsidies to the agriculture sector that doesn’t pay the full amount of tax on fuel. I can’t see how this is a subsidy to the the actual fuel companies.
I think the mining sector would be far greater than agriculture.
OK, but I still don’t see how it is a subsidy to the fuel companies.
I expect they’re making an easy target of the evil FF companies but nonetheless taxes forgone are a subsidy to the use of FFs in general.
Witty Rejoinder said:
sibeen said:
Witty Rejoinder said:I think the mining sector would be far greater than agriculture.
OK, but I still don’t see how it is a subsidy to the fuel companies.
I expect they’re making an easy target of the evil FF companies but nonetheless taxes forgone are a subsidy to the use of FFs in general.
This article in the Gran claims that 43% of the rebate goes to mining. As to it being a subsidy to the FF industry, I can’t really agree with that. Heavy machinery just hasn’t transitioned across to electric and i suspect it will be a long time before it is able to. FF just has the energy density that other options don’t.
sibeen said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
sibeen said:OK, but I still don’t see how it is a subsidy to the fuel companies.
I expect they’re making an easy target of the evil FF companies but nonetheless taxes forgone are a subsidy to the use of FFs in general.
This article in the Gran claims that 43% of the rebate goes to mining. As to it being a subsidy to the FF industry, I can’t really agree with that. Heavy machinery just hasn’t transitioned across to electric and i suspect it will be a long time before it is able to. FF just has the energy density that other options don’t.
And the article:
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/may/09/taxpayers-could-save-78bn-a-year-if-diesel-fuel-rebates-scheme-was-wound-back
sibeen said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
sibeen said:OK, but I still don’t see how it is a subsidy to the fuel companies.
I expect they’re making an easy target of the evil FF companies but nonetheless taxes forgone are a subsidy to the use of FFs in general.
This article in the Gran claims that 43% of the rebate goes to mining. As to it being a subsidy to the FF industry, I can’t really agree with that. Heavy machinery just hasn’t transitioned across to electric and i suspect it will be a long time before it is able to. FF just has the energy density that other options don’t.
Taxing diesel fully would encourage a quicker transition to greener alternatives.
Imagine using renewable energy to renew portable fuel sources, impossible.
Witty Rejoinder said:
sibeen said:
Witty Rejoinder said:I expect they’re making an easy target of the evil FF companies but nonetheless taxes forgone are a subsidy to the use of FFs in general.
This article in the Gran claims that 43% of the rebate goes to mining. As to it being a subsidy to the FF industry, I can’t really agree with that. Heavy machinery just hasn’t transitioned across to electric and i suspect it will be a long time before it is able to. FF just has the energy density that other options don’t.
Taxing diesel fully would encourage a quicker transition to greener alternatives.
But that’s my point, you cannot run a fishing boat or a combine harvester or a mining rig on renewable energy. At the moment it’s an engineering impossibility.
Apparently this computer can only operate if the electrons it feeds on are shoved by combustion of 100000000 year old dead trees, guess we’ll be having a nap real soon.
sibeen said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
sibeen said:This article in the Gran claims that 43% of the rebate goes to mining. As to it being a subsidy to the FF industry, I can’t really agree with that. Heavy machinery just hasn’t transitioned across to electric and i suspect it will be a long time before it is able to. FF just has the energy density that other options don’t.
Taxing diesel fully would encourage a quicker transition to greener alternatives.
But that’s my point, you cannot run a fishing boat or a combine harvester or a mining rig on renewable energy. At the moment it’s an engineering impossibility.
Okay but what do you reccomend? That diesel be fully subsidised until adequate batteries appear out of the ether?
Witty Rejoinder said:
sibeen said:
Witty Rejoinder said:Taxing diesel fully would encourage a quicker transition to greener alternatives.
But that’s my point, you cannot run a fishing boat or a combine harvester or a mining rig on renewable energy. At the moment it’s an engineering impossibility.
Okay but what do you reccomend? That diesel be fully subsidised until adequate batteries appear out of the ether?
It’s a real shame biofuels, hydrogen, and carbon neutral fuels don’t exist.
Witty Rejoinder said:
sibeen said:
Witty Rejoinder said:Taxing diesel fully would encourage a quicker transition to greener alternatives.
But that’s my point, you cannot run a fishing boat or a combine harvester or a mining rig on renewable energy. At the moment it’s an engineering impossibility.
Okay but what do you reccomend? That diesel be fully subsidised until adequate batteries appear out of the ether?
I really don’t care whether the fuel gets subsidised or not, the end cost is going to end up costing the taxpayer whether it is indirectly in higher food costs or directly because of the loss of taxation dollars. The fuel is going to be consumed in either scenario. Lying about it as a subsidy to the FF companies just annoys me.
dv said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
sibeen said:But that’s my point, you cannot run a fishing boat or a combine harvester or a mining rig on renewable energy. At the moment it’s an engineering impossibility.
Okay but what do you reccomend? That diesel be fully subsidised until adequate batteries appear out of the ether?
It’s a real shame biofuels, hydrogen, and carbon neutral fuels don’t exist.
Sure, and we can certainly move towards those, absolutely no issue with that but it is a long term process. Fishing boats, combine harvesters and mining rigs are not something that anyone is just going to throw away. The transition timelines are in the decades.
But the headline says “to subsidize fossil fuels for consumers”
It doesn’t say or imply the money is going to fossil fuel companies.
sibeen said:
dv said:
Witty Rejoinder said:Okay but what do you reccomend? That diesel be fully subsidised until adequate batteries appear out of the ether?
It’s a real shame biofuels, hydrogen, and carbon neutral fuels don’t exist.
Sure, and we can certainly move towards those, absolutely no issue with that but it is a long term process. Fishing boats, combine harvesters and mining rigs are not something that anyone is just going to throw away. The transition timelines are in the decades.
Yes.
Witty Rejoinder said:
mollwollfumble said:
> The world spends an astounding US$423 billion annually to subsidize fossil fuels for consumers – oil, electricity that’s generated by the burning of other fossil fuels, gas, and coal.I strongly suspect that that’s total and absolute bullshit. The tax that the governments around the world gain from taxing fossil fuels is enormous, and that’s the exact opposite of a subsidy. Even in Australia that’s in excess of 7.5 billion dollars per year.
You’re confusing “subsidy” with “tax”. They’re exact opposites.
Taxes forgone:
https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/australian-fossil-fuel-subsidies-hit-10-3-billion-in-2020-21/
Some of these articles confuse the diesel fuel rebate for a subsidy. It’s hard to tell if that article does, because it’s a bit vague.
Kingy said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
mollwollfumble said:
> The world spends an astounding US$423 billion annually to subsidize fossil fuels for consumers – oil, electricity that’s generated by the burning of other fossil fuels, gas, and coal.I strongly suspect that that’s total and absolute bullshit. The tax that the governments around the world gain from taxing fossil fuels is enormous, and that’s the exact opposite of a subsidy. Even in Australia that’s in excess of 7.5 billion dollars per year.
You’re confusing “subsidy” with “tax”. They’re exact opposites.
Taxes forgone:
https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/australian-fossil-fuel-subsidies-hit-10-3-billion-in-2020-21/
Some of these articles confuse the diesel fuel rebate for a subsidy. It’s hard to tell if that article does, because it’s a bit vague.
I think it is being deliberately vague and obfuscating the issue. That annoys me.
sibeen said:
Kingy said:
Witty Rejoinder said:Taxes forgone:
https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/australian-fossil-fuel-subsidies-hit-10-3-billion-in-2020-21/
Some of these articles confuse the diesel fuel rebate for a subsidy. It’s hard to tell if that article does, because it’s a bit vague.
I think it is being deliberately vague and obfuscating the issue. That annoys me.
I guess
sibeen said:
Kingy said:
Witty Rejoinder said:Taxes forgone:
https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/australian-fossil-fuel-subsidies-hit-10-3-billion-in-2020-21/
Some of these articles confuse the diesel fuel rebate for a subsidy. It’s hard to tell if that article does, because it’s a bit vague.
I think it is being deliberately vague and obfuscating the issue. That annoys me.
Yep. The tax on fuel was brought in to fund the road infrastructure. A lot of businesses use fuel, but not roads. The tax was dead in the water unless there was a rebate to refund the tax for those businesses.
So it’s not a fossil fuel subsidy, it’s a refund on a tax already paid that shouldn’t have been.
sibeen said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
sibeen said:This article in the Gran claims that 43% of the rebate goes to mining. As to it being a subsidy to the FF industry, I can’t really agree with that. Heavy machinery just hasn’t transitioned across to electric and i suspect it will be a long time before it is able to. FF just has the energy density that other options don’t.
Taxing diesel fully would encourage a quicker transition to greener alternatives.
But that’s my point, you cannot run a fishing boat or a combine harvester or a mining rig on renewable energy. At the moment it’s an engineering impossibility.
You couldn’t fuel those things with hydrogen?
Or batteries for that matter, especially for the mining trucks.
The Rev Dodgson said:
sibeen said:
Witty Rejoinder said:Taxing diesel fully would encourage a quicker transition to greener alternatives.
But that’s my point, you cannot run a fishing boat or a combine harvester or a mining rig on renewable energy. At the moment it’s an engineering impossibility.
You couldn’t fuel those things with hydrogen?
Or batteries for that matter, especially for the mining trucks.
Hydrogen, maybe. I don’t know, can an engine be converted?
Batteries…not a chance.
sibeen said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
sibeen said:But that’s my point, you cannot run a fishing boat or a combine harvester or a mining rig on renewable energy. At the moment it’s an engineering impossibility.
You couldn’t fuel those things with hydrogen?
Or batteries for that matter, especially for the mining trucks.
Hydrogen, maybe. I don’t know, can an engine be converted?
Batteries…not a chance.
Sure there is. Mining trucks are very heavy to start with, and short haul. You just need an efficient battery swap mechanism, and Bob’s your aunt’s husband.
This new process is rather interesting. Being able to create ammonia relatively easily may not seem to be too useful, but when combined with the CSIRO, it could be a viable way of creating hydrogen on-demand.
The CSIRO came up with a very clever gadget, you force ammonia through a special mesh and it separates the nitrogen from the hydrogen.
https://www.csiro.au/…/Membrane-for-hydrogen-fuel-cells
phys.org/news/2021-10-photocatalyst-ammonia-atmospheric-nitrogen-room.html
(Can’t make the 2nd link work sorry)
sibeen said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
sibeen said:But that’s my point, you cannot run a fishing boat or a combine harvester or a mining rig on renewable energy. At the moment it’s an engineering impossibility.
You couldn’t fuel those things with hydrogen?
Or batteries for that matter, especially for the mining trucks.
Hydrogen, maybe. I don’t know, can an engine be converted?
Batteries…not a chance.
I think draglines are electrically driven but no doubt generated on site by diesel generators.
Peak Warming Man said:
sibeen said:
The Rev Dodgson said:You couldn’t fuel those things with hydrogen?
Or batteries for that matter, especially for the mining trucks.
Hydrogen, maybe. I don’t know, can an engine be converted?
Batteries…not a chance.
I think draglines are electrically driven but no doubt generated on site by diesel generators.
No doubt, but there is no good reason why they should be.
There is a bad reason of course. Diesel is subsidised because the users don’t have to pay the future costs incurred by the CO2 emissions.
The Rev Dodgson said:
Peak Warming Man said:
sibeen said:Hydrogen, maybe. I don’t know, can an engine be converted?
Batteries…not a chance.
I think draglines are electrically driven but no doubt generated on site by diesel generators.
No doubt, but there is no good reason why they should be.
There is a bad reason of course. Diesel is subsidised because the users don’t have to pay the future costs incurred by the CO2 emissions.
Oh and the other bad reason – industrial inertia.
The Rev Dodgson said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
Peak Warming Man said:I think draglines are electrically driven but no doubt generated on site by diesel generators.
No doubt, but there is no good reason why they should be.
There is a bad reason of course. Diesel is subsidised because the users don’t have to pay the future costs incurred by the CO2 emissions.
Oh and the other bad reason – industrial inertia.
Having said that:
The importance of solar energy in the mining industry.
Arent haul trucks mostly diesel electric?
furious said:
Arent haul trucks mostly diesel electric?
Dunno but from memory I think electric motors have heaps of torque compared with just a diesel.
>You couldn’t fuel those things with hydrogen?
thing about diesel is it’s quite a good lubricant, engine top-end lubricant, lends to longevity, fuel system too like injector pumps are self lubricated
and combustion products aren’t substantially corrosive
mollwollfumble said:
> The world spends an astounding US$423 billion annually to subsidize fossil fuels for consumers – oil, electricity that’s generated by the burning of other fossil fuels, gas, and coal.I strongly suspect that that’s total and absolute bullshit. The tax that the governments around the world gain from taxing fossil fuels is enormous, and that’s the exact opposite of a subsidy. Even in Australia that’s in excess of 7.5 billion dollars per year.
You’re confusing “subsidy” with “tax”. They’re exact opposites.
The govmint ain’t subsidizing the fuel…
it’s subsidizing the energy companies for the cost of exploration mining pumping and equipment and
they’re using tax dollars with which to do so. In effect, we’re paying them to “Drive Us to Extinction”.