This article in Nature explains how subsidies affect fossil fuel investment and why they deserve greater attention in global modelling analyses.
It responds to a 2018 study in Nature that used the results of integrated assessment models to infer that eliminating subsidies would yield “limited emission reductions…except in energy-exporting regions”, and described the emission reduction benefits as “small”.
This working paper identifies some of the major gaps in Harvard’s existing reporting on the climate impacts of its endowment; potential leverage points to address these gaps; and some next steps to develop solutions that protect investment flexibility for Harvard Management Company while greatly and rapidly improving transparency. These improvements a
These are the supporting slides to a presentation given in May 2019 in the Synapse Energy Economics webinar series. The presentation provides an overview of the scope and magnitude of energy subsidies around the world, and discusses common issues that arise with regards to measurement and value differences across sources.
The vast majority of federal subsidies for fossil fuels and renewable energy supported energy sources that emit high levels of greenhouse gases when used as fuel.
This report is one of a series of analyses of public incentives directed toward energy resources. The purpose of the series is to gain insights into the kinds and amounts of public incentives that could be required to induce 20% of the nation's energy budget from renewable resources by the year 2000. The initial analysis focused on federal incentives used to stimulate traditional energy production.
In its proposed tariffs to remove potential distortions caused by subsidies in capacity markets, PJM includes a number of limitations and exclusions that appear to result in unequal evaluation of subsidies across different fuel cycles. This will likely impede PJM’s core objective of ensuring competitive, nondiscriminatory auctions in the wholesale capacity market.
This review assesses the House and Senate tax reform proposals as they relate to the energy sector. Three main areas are examined: cross-cutting changes to tax rates or baselines and whether some of them will have disproportionate or distortionary impacts on particular fuels; specific energy tax expenditures that are modified or repealed in the proposals; and baseline subsidies that remain untouched.
Countries in the G20 have committed to phase out ‘inefficient’ fossil fuel subsidies. However, there remains a limited understanding of how subsidy removal would affect fossil fuel investment returns and production, particularly for subsidies to producers. Here, we assess the impact of major federal and state subsidies on US crude oil producers.
Presentation at the NPEC Public Policy Fellowship Retreat in March 2017. The meeting was convened and hosted by the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center. The slides evaluates many of the arguments people make to support increased subsidies to nuclear and finds them wanting.
All 14 current rationales for mandating or subsidizing uncompetitive coal and nuclear plants lack technical merit or would favor competitors instead. Subsidizing distressed nuclear plants typically saves less carbon than closing them and reinvesting their saved operating cost into severalfold-cheaper efficiency. Carbon prices, not plant subsidies, best recognize decarbonizing attributes.