Is this an answer to the fossil fuel (i.e. global warming) crisis?

[koltin]

Lets get this straight. We have two companies A and B. We give company A a production subsidy of $1 million and company B a production subsidy of $1. Next we say that we will end all subsidies to create a level playing field. A level playing field is only created when the benefit received as a result of the subsidies is equalized. As a result of the initial subsidy, company A was able to invest and acquire $10 million in assets whereas company B was not able to make capital investments. For a level playing field, company A should be required to repay half of the capital value gained as a consequence of the subsidy. The repaid amount can then be given to company B, which will then have a subsidy benefit equal to company A. The taxpayer does not need to put any more money on the table and a level playing field is created.

As the largest shareholder in a small company in the energy business, I do not favor subsidies in general because larger companies tend to be better at buying government officials that small companies. I do think that government should undo the market distortion that it caused by providing subsidies in the first place.

[christie42]

as much as we all complain about gas prices the fact is fossil fuel is the cheapest, most efficient form of energy there is. out of all these alternatives that we've seen presented over the years, they either dont produce as much power as burning gasoline or are waaaay more expensive or both. heres and example, ethanol has been pushed alot as a replacement for gasoline but the fact is it does not produce the same amount of power as gasoline AND in order to produce enough ethanol to fuel all the cars in the united states, 95 precent of the land in the usa would have to be covered in corn crops. (and no im not making that up) so obviously thats not gonna happen. if there was a good alternative to fossil fuel that was out there, the market would jump on it and we would be using it right now. the fact is fossil fuel is the best power source we have right now, and until some new technology is created which is just as efficient and affordable as it, then we will continue using it. and as far as global warming goes, there is no such thing. global warming has already been proven a hoax. its something else for the governmant to hang over our head as an excuse to tax us more and more all in the name of saving the environment. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS GLOBAL WARMING.

[newyddilyn60]

No.

1. There are vastly more poor people in the world than rich people. And when you're poor, cost is the only factor that matters.

2. The market does not set prices for energy correctly, because the market fails to include external costs in energy prices. Thus some forms of energy (fossil fuels for example) are unfairly advantaged in a free market situation. Ideally, external costs should be included in energy costs, which would level the playing field in a really fair way. That's one of the reasons we need a carbon tax.

[warton26]

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but my understanding is that if subsidies were removed from fossil fuels, all subsidies that is, tax breaks, direct spending, and other indirect support, the cost of individual automobile transportation and space heating would be such that people would be compelled to find alternatives.

Suddenly there would be a big market for super high mileage cars and trucks, alternative fuels, building energy retrofits, ground source heat pumps, solar and all the rest of it, just on a cost basis, not even counting externalities.

But correct me if I'm wrong.