Current:Home > InvestHigh Oil Subsidies Ensure Profit for Nearly Half New U.S. Investments, Study Shows -FinanceAcademy
High Oil Subsidies Ensure Profit for Nearly Half New U.S. Investments, Study Shows
View
Date:2025-04-17 14:35:12
Government subsidies to American energy companies are generous enough to ensure that almost half of new investments in untapped domestic oil projects would be profitable, creating incentives to keep pumping fossil fuels despite climate concerns, according to a new study.
The result would seriously undermine the 2015 Paris climate agreement, whose goals of reining in global warming can only be met if much of the world’s oil reserves are left in the ground.
The study, in Nature Energy, examined the impact of federal and state subsidies at recent oil prices that hover around $50 a barrel and estimated that the support could increase domestic oil production by a total of 17 billion barrels “over the next few decades.”
Using that oil would put the equivalent of 6 billion tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere, the authors calculated.
Taxpayers give fossil fuel companies in the U.S. more than $20 billion annually in federal and state subsidies, according to a separate report released today by the environmental advocacy group Oil Change International. During the Obama administration, the U.S. and other major greenhouse gas emitters pledged to phase out fossil fuel supports. But the future of such policies is in jeopardy given the enthusiastic backing President Donald Trump has given the fossil fuel sector.
The study in Nature Energy focused on the U.S. because it is the world’s largest producer of fossil fuels and offers hefty subsidies. The authors said they looked at the oil industry specifically because it gets double the amount of government support that coal does, in the aggregate.
Written by scientists and economists from the Stockholm Environment Institute and Earth Track, which monitors energy subsidies, the study “suggests that oil resources may be more dependent on subsidies than previously thought.”
The authors looked at all U.S. oil fields that had been identified but not yet developed by mid-2016, a total of more than 800. They were then divided into four groups: the big oil reservoirs of North Dakota, Texas and the Gulf of Mexico, and the fourth, a catch-all for smaller onshore deposits around the country. The subsidies fell into three groups: revenue that the government decides to forgo, such as taxes; the government’s assumption of accident and environmental liability for industry’s own actions, and the state’s below-market rate provision of certain services.
The authors then assumed a minimum rate of return of 10 percent for a project to move forward. The question then becomes “whether the subsidies tip the project from being uneconomic to economic,” clearing that 10 percent rate-of-return threshold.
The authors discovered that many of the not-yet-developed projects in the country’s largest oil fields would only be economically feasible if they received subsidies. In Texas’s Permian Basin, 40 percent of those projects would be subsidy-dependent, and in North Dakota’s Williston Basin, 59 percent would be, according to the study.
Subsidies “distort markets to increase fossil fuel production,” the authors concluded.
“Our findings suggest an expanded case for fossil fuel subsidy reform,” the authors wrote. “Not only would removing federal and state support provide a fiscal benefit” to taxpayers and the budget, “but it could also result in substantial climate benefits” by keeping carbon the ground rather than sending it into a rapidly warming atmosphere.
veryGood! (5737)
Related
- Cincinnati Bengals quarterback Joe Burrow owns a $3 million Batmobile Tumbler
- 13 Refineries Emit Dangerous Benzene Emissions That Exceed the EPA’s ‘Action Level,’ a Study Finds
- Trump asks 2 more courts to quash Georgia special grand jury report
- With layoffs, NPR becomes latest media outlet to cut jobs
- Kylie Jenner Shows Off Sweet Notes From Nieces Dream Kardashian & Chicago West
- Indian authorities accuse the BBC of tax evasion after raiding their offices
- The Home Depot says it is spending $1 billion to raise its starting wage to $15
- The 'wackadoodle' foundation of Fox News' election-fraud claims
- At site of suspected mass killings, Syrians recall horrors, hope for answers
- Titanic Director James Cameron Breaks Silence on Submersible Catastrophe
Ranking
- Military service academies see drop in reported sexual assaults after alarming surge
- Dawn Goodwin and 300 Environmental Groups Consider the new Line 3 Pipeline a Danger to All Forms of Life
- Dylan Lyons, a 24-year-old TV journalist, was killed while reporting on a shooting
- A Chinese Chemical Company Captures and Reuses 6,000 Tons of a Super-Polluting Greenhouse Gas
- Off the Grid: Sally breaks down USA TODAY's daily crossword puzzle, Hi Hi!
- Missing Titanic Submersible: Former Passenger Details What Really Happens During Expedition
- The IRS now says most state relief checks last year are not subject to federal taxes
- Inside Clean Energy: A Steel Giant Joins a Growing List of Companies Aiming for Net-Zero by 2050
Recommendation
'We're reborn!' Gazans express joy at returning home to north
Soccer Star Neymar Pens Public Apology to Pregnant Girlfriend Bruna Biancardi for His “Mistakes
Airbus Hopes to Be Flying Hydrogen-Powered Jetliners With Zero Carbon Emissions by 2035
In a New Policy Statement, the Nation’s Physicists Toughen Their Stance on Climate Change, Stressing Its Reality and Urgency
Current, future North Carolina governor’s challenge of power
When an Oil Company Profits From a Pipeline Running Beneath Tribal Land Without Consent, What’s Fair Compensation?
Biden Could Reduce the Nation’s Production of Oil and Gas, but Probably Not as Much as Many Hope
When an Oil Company Profits From a Pipeline Running Beneath Tribal Land Without Consent, What’s Fair Compensation?