US taxpayers subsidising world's biggest fossil fuel companies

[n2doc]

The world’s biggest and most profitable fossil fuel companies are receiving huge and rising subsidies from US taxpayers, a practice slammed as absurd by a presidential candidate given the threat of climate change.

A Guardian investigation of three specific projects, run by Shell, ExxonMobil and Marathon Petroleum, has revealed that the subsidises were all granted by politicians who received significant campaign contributions from the fossil fuel industry.

The Guardian has found that:

A proposed Shell petrochemical refinery in Pennsylvania is in line for $1.6bn (£1bn) in state subsidy, according to a deal struck in 2012 when the company made an annual profit of $26.8bn.

ExxonMobil’s upgrades to its Baton Rouge refinery in Louisiana are benefitting from $119m of state subsidy, with the support starting in 2011, when the company made a $41bn profit.

A jobs subsidy scheme worth $78m to Marathon Petroleum in Ohio began in 2011, when the company made $2.4bn in profit.

“At a time when scientists tell us we need to reduce carbon pollution to prevent catastrophic climate change, it is absurd to provide massive taxpayer subsidies that pad fossil-fuel companies’ already enormous profits,” said senator Bernie Sanders, who announced on 30 April he is running for president.

more

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/may/12/us-taxpayers-subsidising-worlds-biggest-fossil-fuel-companies

[RiverLover]

1. So, did we cut $8 billion in welfare for people to give welfare to BigOil, the industry killing

sustainable life on earth?

[1939]

2. Not necessarily big oil

States, counties, and municipalities across the US are competing for businesses to locate there. To get the business to choose their locality instead of another, they compete with enticements/subsidies/bribes usually in terms of free/cheap land, infrastructure (road/sewer) improvements, workforce training, and property/business tax rebates. Companies seek the best offer available. The rationale for offering these enticements/subsidies/bribes is the real or potential increase in jobs/taxes/satellite business start ups which contribute to the economy of the area. The localities are hopeful to get back in benefits more than they give up in subsidies. The risk in this analysis is lessened if the company receiving the subsidies is very profitable. Another factor is that a refinery is much less likely to just pack up and move to greener pastures.

[RT Atlanta]

3. Yuk!

Tired of this....

How 'bout some more subsidies to wind, solar, etc.?

[tclambert]

4. Oil companies say we should let the market decide the fate of alternative energy.

By "market," they may have meant the flea market where they buy Congress members.

[RT Atlanta]

6. That's a tired argument from that entrenched industry

All they're interested in is protecting their turf and infrastructure....

How will those companies perform if their subsidies are removed?

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

5. But they're the job creators