FRANKFORT, Ky. -- As Washington grapples with rebooting the nation's tax code, a new report makes a compelling argument for eliminating tax breaks for the fossil fuel industry.

Peter Erickson, senior scientist and the study's lead author, said market forces - like current oil prices - would prevent industry from tapping reserves that scientists warn need to stay in the ground to prevent the most catastrophic impacts of climate change. But taxpayer-funded subsidies are tilting the scale in favor of more drilling.

"Just these subsidies that we looked at would bring on about 6 (billion) or 7 billion tons of CO2,” Erickson said. "That's about 20 percent of all the oil that we could produce between now and 2050."

The study, by the Stockholm Environment Institute and Earth Track, found nearly half of all known U.S. oil reserves are dependent on subsidies.

Erickson explained pollution from those reserves would put a big dent in the nation's carbon budget, the total amount of fuel that can be burned while keeping global temperatures below dangerous levels. Industry groups have argued that tax breaks are necessary to keep and create jobs.

Researchers found that when oil prices are down, tax breaks prop up returns for investors. And Erickson said when prices go up, the subsidies flow directly into a company's overall profits.

"These dollars are not going to greater wages or to greater jobs,” Erickson said. "Most of the value of these subsidies goes directly to corporate profits, over and above what they already need in order to employ people on the ground."

He said tax breaks could be used to create jobs in industries with better long-term prospects. He pointed to last week's announcement by General Motors to switch to 100 percent electric vehicles, and China's decision to ban cars that use diesel.

"The way we structure our tax code really reflects our priorities as a country,” Erickson said. "Are we going to subsidize things that give us a better future, or are we going to subsidize the old industries that are creating lots of pollution?"

The prospect for cutting subsidies remains uncertain. A separate report by Oil Change International found that in the 2015-2016 election cycle, oil, gas and coal companies invested $354 million in campaign contributions and lobbying and got nearly $30 billion in federal subsidies - a return of more than 8,000 percent.


get more stories like this via email

The construction of more solar farms in the U.S. has been contentious but a new survey shows their size makes a difference in whether solar projects are favored by neighbors.

South Dakota's largest solar installation, the Wild Springs project in New Underwood, began operations in March and covers more than 1.5 square miles. The survey showed projects under 100 megawatts are generally favored by neighbors, while larger ones like Wild Springs are unpopular.

Kristi Pritzkau, finance officer for the City of New Underwood, said the construction traffic was tough on the town of just over 600 but the project's builder, National Grid Renewables, is giving back to the community.

"They had to use our well, so they paid for the water, and they paid for a new pump for it, too," Pritzkau pointed out. "They've been really great with the city."

Prtizkau noted the company donated to the town's pool and Lions Club and has created a school scholarship program, all part of the more than $500,000 of charitable giving it has promised in the project's first 20 years of operation. It is also expected to bring in $12 million of tax revenue to the county in the same time frame.

Sioux Falls-based Missouri River Energy Services has plans to build a new solar project near Brookings and build a transmission line from South Dakota into Minnesota.

Tim Blodgett, vice president of member services and communications for the company, said federal grant programs and tax credits provide incentives and South Dakota produces more energy than it can use.

"With the development of more wind, the development of solar, there's a lot planned right now to get these resources out of this area," Blodgett explained. "Into Minneapolis and other places where there's larger demand for the energy."

Currently, more than half the state's power generation comes from wind, followed by hydropower.


get more stories like this via email

Virginia officials support the Environmental Protection Agency's new emissions rule. The federal clean truck standards will reduce emissions by up to 60% in 2032 and prevent 1-billion metric tons of carbon pollution. Transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in Virginia and nationwide.

Phillip Jones, Newport News Mayor, said the new rule helps end the city's environmental disparities.

"We have a very large multiple coal company in downtown Newport News in the southeast part of our community," he said. "That's going to lead to higher rates of asthma for that community. There's a lot of air-quality issues in downtown Newport News."

Jones noted the city has taken steps to reduce emissions. The city's school district has been using propane-powered buses and Newport News is purchasing alternate energy-powered vehicles. He added any opposition to this work centers on larger upfront costs, but the long-term benefits are worthwhile. The EPA's rule goes into effect in 2027.

Transportation agencies are also working to cut emissions. Hampton Roads Transit has been working to cut emissions with cleaner buses.

Sibyl Pappas, chief engineering and facilities officer with Hampton Roads Transit, said the agency's upcoming bus maintenance facility furthers its emissions-reduction goals.

"It's very near where Dominion Energy is bringing offshore wind onshore. So, we've talked with Dominion about buying wind power. So, potentially, those buses are zero emissions at the tailpipe and zero emissions at the generation point," Pappas said.

The facility will open in 2029 and be net zero-ready upon completion. While HRT had some hiccups with electric buses, Pappas feels the EPA rule encourages climate-smart initiatives for all economic sectors.

As state budget negotiations continue, groups fighting climate change are asking California lawmakers to cut subsidies for oil and gas companies rather than slash programs designed to slow global warming.

Gov. Gavin Newsom's current proposal would cut oil and gas tax breaks by $22 million this year and $17 million the following year.

Barry Vesser, COO for The Climate Center, a nonprofit advocacy group, would like to see all subsidies eliminated.

"Oil and gas companies are one of the drivers of climate change, so we should not be making their profit margins bigger by providing public subsidies, and making it harder for renewables to compete against them," Vesser argued.

Gov. Newsom has also proposed to cut funding for climate-friendly programs helping lower-income families buy an electric vehicle or switch from gas to electric appliances.

Kevin Slagle, vice president of strategic communications for the Western States Petroleum Association, said in a statement, "California's already tough business climate is pushing companies to the brink. Removing incentives will drive California straight into the arms of more expensive foreign oil, ramping up costs for everyday Californians who can least afford it."

Vesser countered the threat of higher gas prices is a red herring.

"There's a lot that goes into calculating how much the cost of gas is, and this is not even pennies on the dollar," Vesser contended.

The state Senate's early action proposal estimated the budget deficit will be between $38 billion and $53 billion. The governor is expected to release new details on his budget priorities in mid-May. The Legislature must pass a balanced budget by June 15.