Washington, D.C., August 22, 2012
- Total subsidies for renewable energy stood at $66
billion in 2010, but are still dwarfed by the total value of global
fossil fuel subsidies estimated at between $775 billion and more
than $1 trillion in 2012, according to new research conducted by
the Worldwatch Institute (www.worldwatch.org) for
its Vital Signs Online service.
Although the total subsidies for renewable energy are
significantly lower than those for fossil fuels, they are higher
per kilowatt-hour if externalities are not included in the
calculations, write report authors from Worldwatch's Climate and
Energy team.
Estimates based on 2009 energy production numbers placed renewable
energy subsidies between 1.7¢ and 15¢ per kilowatt-hour (kWh),
while subsidies for fossil fuels were estimated at around 0.1-0.7¢
per kWh. Unit subsidy costs for renewables are expected to decrease
as technologies become more efficient and the prices of wholesale
electricity and transport fuels rise.
The production and consumption of fossil fuels add costs to society
in the form of detrimental impacts on resource availability, the
environment, and human health. The U.S. National Academy of
Sciences estimates that fossil fuel subsidies cost the United
States $120 billion in pollution and related health care costs
every year. But these costs are not reflected in fossil fuel
prices.
"These so-called hidden costs, or externalities, are in fact very
real costs to our societies that are not picked up by the polluter
and beneficiary of production but by all taxpayers," said
Alexander Ochs, Director of Worldwatch's Climate and Energy
program and report co-author. "Local pollutants from the burning of
fossil fuels kill thousands in the U.S. alone each year, and
society makes them cheaper to continue down their destructive
path."
Shifting official support from fossil fuels to renewables is
essential for decarbonizing the global energy system. Such a shift
could help create a triple win for national economies by reducing
global greenhouse gas emissions, generating long term economic
growth, and reducing dependence on energy imports.
According to projections by the International Energy Agency (IEA),
if fossil fuel subsidies were phased out by 2020, global energy
consumption would be reduced by 3.9 percent that year compared with
having subsidy rates unchanged. Oil demand would be reduced by 3.7
million barrels per day, natural gas demand would be cut by 330
billion cubic meters, and coal demand would drop by 230 million
tons of coal.
And the effects of the subsidy removal would extend beyond the end
of the phaseout period. By 2035, oil demand would decrease by 4
percent, natural gas by 9.9 percent, and coal demand by 5.3
percent, compared with the baseline projection.
Overall, carbon dioxide emissions would be reduced by 4.7 percent
in 2020 and 5.8 percent in 2035. The IEA's chief economist recently
estimated that eliminating all subsidies in 2012 for coal,
gas, and oil could save as much as Germany's annual greenhouse gas
emissions each year by 2015, while the emission savings over the
next decade might be enough to cover half of the carbon savings
needed to stop dangerous levels of climate change.

"At the same time, a phase-out of fossil fuel subsidies would level
the playing field for renewables and allow us to reduce support for
clean energy sources as well," said Ochs. "After all, fossil fuels
have benefited from massive governmental backing worldwide for
hundreds of years."
Progress toward a complete phaseout, however, has been minimal. The
2009 pledge by the Group of 20 major economies to reduce
"inefficient fossil fuel subsidies" has been left vague and
unfulfilled. The lack of a definition has left countries to make
their own determination if their subsidies are inefficient.
As of August 2012, G20 countries had not taken any substantial
action in response to the pledge----six members opted
out of reporting altogether (an increase from two in 2010), and no
country has yet initiated a subsidy reform in response to the
pledge. Furthermore, there continues to be a large gap between
self-reported statistics and independent estimates in some
countries.
Some argue that reducing subsidies would disproportionately affect
the poor. An IEA survey of 11 developing and emerging countries,
however, found that only 2-11 percent of subsidies went to the
poorest 20 percent of the population, showing that subsidies tend
to be regressive.
Fossil fuel subsidies continue to far outweigh support for
renewable energy. Although independent reporting on these subsidies
has increased, global efforts to move forward with subsidy reform
have been hindered by a variety of causes, leaving international
pledges unfulfilled.
Further highlights from the report:
- Global production subsidies total an estimated $100 billion per
year, and consumption subsidies add to roughly $675 billion.
- In 2010, developing countries spent roughly $193 billion, or 47
percent of all fossil fuel consumption subsidies, on oil, while
industrial countries spent roughly $28 billion.
- Since 2007, roughly 80 percent of spending on consumption
subsidies occurred in countries that are net exporters of fossil
fuels.