Gov't subsidized lifeline electricity rate, to help the poor
Means- tested cold weather grant, again, to help the poor
Tax deduction related to energy purchases that exceed given share of income, AGAIN to help the poor.
Mandated lifeline electricty rate, AGAIN, to help the poor.
Export restriction on domestically produced coal - so they have to keep it within the country it's produced - sounds like a good thing
Under-pricing of a good, govt service or access to a natural resource - So that everyone in the country can get good energy cheaply - again, sounds like a good thing.
Tax credit for investing in mining equipment. Once again, the govt shows an interest in good cheap energy, and wants to keep it in the country, then you give a tax credit to those who help bring that about, again, sounds like a good thing.
You just don't get it, do you.
1. You've been raving about half a trillion dollars in 'subsidies and kickbacks'.
2. I've been asking for a list to PROVE that many if not MOST of those were bogus and hockey-sticked
3. YOU send me to a pdf
4. I then PROVE that what you mistakenly call 'subsidies and kickbacks' are actually mostly incentives to help poor people.
We're done here. The pdf you told me to look at proves it.
How like a Republican: what you're doing is called cherrypicking.
Here's the actual table. Why not admit what's really going on here?
Why did you forget the following?:-
Government limit on producer liability for mining accidents
Reduced rate of income tax on coal-mining companies
Monopoly concession to coal company
Per-tonnne subsidy for metallurgical coal
Government expenditure on coal buffer stock
Production tax credit for making liquid fuels from coal
Reduced royalty payments on access to coal deposits
Input subsidy for electricity used in mining
Security guarantee for coal trains
Reduction in excise tax on fuel used by mining machines
Under-pricing of a good, government service or access to a natural resource
Export restriction on domestically produced coal
Capital grant linked to acquisition of mining-related capital
Credit guarantee linked to acquisition of mining-related capital
Tax credit for investment in mining equipment
Under-pricing of access to government land used for storage of coal
Wage controls on mining labour
Yeah, that last one?
Wage controls? That's a REAL winner with the poor miners that have to go down unsafe coal pits in some developing nations where so many coal workers are killed. You're SUCH a friend of the poor omitting that one, aren't you hey there my honest little Republican?
As you said above, thanks for doing my job for me. I'm quite
happy to concede that a
minority of these rebates on the list might help the poor... a little. May they continue into a renewable and nuclear age! But I'm quite sure the poor are NOT glad that governments are making profitable fossil fuel corporations even wealthier so that their CEO's earn more than a climatologist does in a year in a single DAY, and that gives them the money to lobby for ridiculous advantages in the marketplace. I'm also pretty sure that they're not grateful for:-
Ambient (outdoor air pollution) in both cities and rural areas was estimated to cause 3.7 million premature deaths worldwide in 2012.
WHO | Ambient (outdoor) air quality and health
Specific to America, check this out:
U.S. Health Burden Caused by Particulate Pollution from Fossil-Fueled Power Plants
Illness Mean Number of Cases
Asthma (hospital admissions) 3,020
Pneumonia (hospital admissions) 4,040
Asthma (emergency room visits) 7,160
Cardiovascular ills (hospital admissions) 9,720
Chronic bronchitis 18,600
Premature deaths 30,100
Acute bronchitis 59,000
Asthma attacks 603,000
Lower respiratory ills 630,000
Upper respiratory ills 679,000
Lost workdays 5.13 million
Minor restricted-activity days 26.3 million
It goes on to show:
The NRC report, which did not account for the other toxins, still found that the damages average about 3.2 cents for every kilowatt-hour (kWh) of energy produced from the coal plants. The average coal power plant operating expenses for major investor-owned utilities was 3.18 cents per kWh in 2012 according to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
Did you get that? These guys are 'externalising' the health costs which equal their operating expenses! In other words, the true cost of coal is DOUBLE the wholesale cost to produce coal fired electricity! But you knew this already didn't you? You've been reading all my links so far?
The External Costs of Fossil Fuels; Environmental and Health Value of Solar - Energy and Policy Institute
It goes on.
A recent study from the Harvard Medical School’s Center for Health and the Global Environment estimated the economic, environmental, and health costs of coal. The Harvard University study found that coal’s cost on the economy is between $330 and $500 billion dollars each year, or 17-27 cents/kWh. Damages from mercury alone are $29 billion a year.
The External Costs of Fossil Fuels; Environmental and Health Value of Solar - Energy and Policy Institute
Woahoho! Woah! Dude, those lefty, greenie 'hippies' down at Harvard are saying that your country ALONE could be subsidising coal to to the tune of half a TRILLION dollars a year by letting coal externalise its nasty business! Dude, I knew it was bad, but wow.
So your country could SAVE a
third to
half a trillion dollars a year in health costs if you just gave up the foul black stuff, and moved to the dangerous, radioactive yellow stuff that GETS LOCKED UP BY LAW, not 'externalised'. Seriously, there's uranium and other rubbish in coal. Even at whatever low parts per million, when you burn billions of tons of the rubbish each year it gets out! We shouldn't let them burn it in the first place. A third to half a TRILLION dollars again? Dude, a hundred billion here, and a hundred billion there, and pretty soon you're talking about REAL MONEY!
That kind of money could buy all the super-safe AP1000 reactors you want. They turn the dangerous yellowcake into safe, wonderful, abundant, reliable electricity. Then as the AP1000's turn out nuclear waste, your country can put money into developing the Lifters (LFTR's) and Integral Fast Reactors right for your context to burn all that nuclear waste again and again (E=MC2 means there's a LOT of energy in uranium that is currently not being used. Like 99% of it!)
After all, half a trillion dollars a year nearly equals your military budget, doesn't it? As well as clean nuclear power over time, it's also enough to give everyone
subsidies on buying Tesla electric cars. You've already said you're not against subsidies for the poor, so we'll put up half the cost of a Tesla, and the more clean electricity we produce from waste eating
breeder reactors and solar and wind, the more electric cars you can charge as your population gets healthier and healthier.
It's win win win.
As long as you get rid of the dangerous, EXPENSIVE, climate changing, and half-a-trillion-dollar 'externalised' coal!
