Fossil Fuel Subsidies

There has been a lot of excitement around everything going on here in Paris. After the weekend, some have given up hope of an agreement, but many remain optimistic and are fighting to make it happen. I have attended a few events about the importance of phasing out fossil fuels, and I believe they are worth sharing. Many things stand in the way of us turning from fossil fuels to low carbon and renewable sources of energy. The biggest challenge is fossil fuel subsidies.

The first problem is that the funding that fossil fuel companies receive is not doing what it is intended for. The money is intended to help increase production, create jobs and make energy more affordable. Analysis shows that only 3% of the subsidies actually accomplish those goals. Instead, the money is put directly into the pockets of the fossil fuel companies. 

The second problem is that renewable energy cannot increase if we continue to give fossil fuel subsides. Subsidizing fossil fuels is giving them a head start over renewable energy, making them more affordable from the start and giving people the wrong impression. Renewable energy is going to play a large role in the future. Starting the transition from fossil fuels to less carbon intensive energy sources is going to be a challenge. However, without subsidization, fossil fuels and renewables are put on a level playing field. With this modification, renewable energy would quickly become more affordable than alternate sources of energy.

Commitments to increase energy from renewable sources are found in many countries' INDCs. This is not going to be possible if they continue to subsidize fossil fuels. Fossil fuel subsidies prevent the growth renewable energy. The countries' commitments and actions contradict each other. We would be weakening our own efforts of promoting renewable energy by continuing to subsidize fossil fuels. A few countries have indicated in their INDC's that eliminating fossil fuel subsidies is how they intend to increase renewable energy, as Sweden and Norway have successfully done. This needs to be done in all INDCs if they are really going to make a difference; otherwise, we are simply undermining our own efforts. 

Worldwide, billions of dollars are issued in fossil fuel subsidies annually. This number is many times more than the funds being given to developing countries for adaptation. There is no sense in putting so much money into something we no longer should be funding. The good news is that eliminating fossil fuel subsidies would free up a lot of funds. This money can go to many other things, like funding education, health care, and promoting sustainable development in the future. 

This can be a step in the right direction, but this issue will most likely not be addressed in the Paris Agreement. Each nation will need to take this into consideration in the process of meeting their emissions goals. Although this seems like a logical decision because of its economic and environmental benefits, it will not be easy to abandon fossil fuel subsidies.