Why do people complain about "oil" subsidies when other forms much more subsidized?

Question

Everyone complains about the subsidies to oil and coal producers, but, the real sources getting all the subsidies are the "renewable" forms. It seems fairly obvious the reason we use oil/coal/ and nuclear power are they are by far the most efficient. I am all for alternative energy sources, but only if they can compete with current sources. As far as I can see, they are far from being legitimate sources for years to come.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121055427930584069.html

Answer 1

Remove all the subsidies. Why should the government express favor to one industry over another. Why should the government dictate to the American consumers which source of fuel we want to consume. Anytime the government is able to give subsidies, they are favoring oil or they are favoring renewable. Let the market decide according to the true cost and determine which source is the most efficient. The reason we are dependent on oil is due to government subsidies to that industry. The government isn't very good at spending money in areas that are in the true interest of the people. It's only fair.

Answer 2

The article forgot to mention the amount of money (and sadly lives) used by our military to attempt to stabilize regions that are oil rich.  It also failed to mention the past 100 years of subsidies given to the petroleum industry to make it so extremely profitable.  And how much tax money (not to mention insurance premiums and human suffering) go for medical treatment of those involved in dirty coal power generation?

This analysis is just as "credible" as your link and gives a much different picture:

http://www.progress.org/2003/energy22.ht...

Answer 3

They do so because the oil companies are the "BIG EVIL" companies that purposely raise prices to hurt the working man and to line their pockets with money so they can sit on their yahts. Thats why. In reality the oil companies are making "record" profits since they are selling MORE oil, that mean quantity, since theyre producing more and selling more. They're not gouging and raising the prices because if they were their profit margin would be increasing which it hasnt. And if the oil companies could raise the price whenever why wouldnt they have done so 6 yrs ago when it was 1.30/gal. Some people want to beleive what they want no matter what. I find its best to ignore them, life goes on and oil will remain dominant in term sof our fuel for transportation. I included anouther good article on our own oil supply.

And Nickel, it's not the oil companies fault that we have to protect oil supplies in the volatile middle east. We have plenty of oil here yet deont allow our oil companies to touch basically any of it. And the fact is the world economy runs on oil. So if some nut decides to blow up the main oil shipping center is saudi arabia since we decide not to guard it, suddenly we have a world economic collapse due to a shortage of oil. Gas at $4 haha itll be $8 plus lines. Mass inflation --> loss of homes --> mass layoffs--> basically a massive worldwide depression. That's why our military guards this stuff. If our government would wake up and allow them to use our own maybe we wouldnt have to worry so much about the middle east which would be nice, but til then we do. And that's not the oil companies fault that its volatile over there.

Answer 4

I am sorry but you seem to have all your information backwards. Oil and fossil fuels receive much more subsidies than renewable does.  Have you ever wondered why gas prices are so low, why they haven't changed much in proportion in inflation since the 1970's? It is because without subsidies, gas would be in the double digits by now and the government can't afford to not have affordable gas.  

THE REASON RENEWABLE SOURCES CANNOT COMPETE IS BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF SUBSIDIES. They don't have enough funding to put it into large scale production. And they are MUCH more efficient because they are often sustainable and have far less damaging effects to the environment.

Answer 5

There is absolutely no reason to subsidize oil.  It has many negative impacts (global warming, other polluting byproducts, wars, etc.).

Renewables on the other hand have no negative impacts.  It benefits our society to use them, thus they get subsidized.

Wind and solar are already legitimate sources.  Thin film solar is already cost competetive with coal.

Answer 6

You look at who receives which subsidies this week...

===>WHY NOT LOOK AT ALL THE SUBSIDIES WITH A TIMESCALE INSTEAD???

For the US:

1950-1970: 50 billion in R&D for nucler

Each year: 20 to 45 billion for oil (this does not include the 60 billion military spending on normal non war periods dedicated to ensuring Middle Eastern Oil).

SUM of all years for the renewables in the US: 27 billion

-----------------------

On the top of that, you take the PRICE for the fossil fuels, not the COST.

The cost also contains elements such as the pollution related to the combustion.

Without subsidies there would not have been such a thing as nuclear power.

New forms of energies need subsidies in the power sector. We are not speaking about microwaves but about a very capital intensive sector.