scholarly journals Picking Our Environmental Battles: Removal of Harmful Subsidies or Carbon Taxation?

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. p1
Author(s):  
Alfredo M. Pereira ◽  
Rui M. Pereira

In this paper, we compare the effects of removing harmful fossil fuel subsidies with the replacement of the energy taxation by a carbon tax in Portugal. Since energy taxes focus on the energy content of the different energy products eliminating these provisions only brings their prices in line with their energy content. On the other hand, replacing the energy tax system with a tax on the emissions content of the energy products aligns the fossil fuel prices with their emissions content. We show that while replacing the energy with a carbon tax is a policy of a magnitude about eight times as large as the removal of the harmful subsidies, the effects of emissions are twenty times larger and the adverse economic and distributional effects only about twice as large. Accordingly, replacing the energy tax with a carbon tax is a much more cost-effective way of reducing emissions. This may suggest that focusing on the removal of harmful fossil fuel subsidies may be an environmental red herring.

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (S1) ◽  
pp. s1-s17
Author(s):  
Tom Moerenhout

AbstractThis article introduces the various trade impacts of fossil fuel subsidies. There are large direct and pass-through trade impacts. Direct trade impacts are found when producer subsidies affect the markets for crude energy products such as crude oil, natural gas, and coal. Direct trade impacts are also found when consumer subsidies decrease the input costs of various industries, whether they refine crude products into energy carriers (e.g. gasoline, electricity) or they use energy products to produce non-energy products (e.g. iron and steel, plastics). Pass-through trade impacts are found when upstream fossil fuel subsidies lead to a lower-cost product that is then used in downstream production processes. We find that markets for fossil fuels, refined energy products and energy-intensive products are enormous. In 2018, crude fossil fuel exports were worth at least US$1.3 trillion, petroleum product exports at least US$800 billion, and exports of energy-intensive goods at least US$1.3 trillion. Their trade volume and export value, as well as their competition density highlight that fossil fuel subsidies have a direct impact on who wins and who loses in terms of market share.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly de Bruin ◽  
◽  
Eoin Monaghan ◽  
Aykut Mert Yakut ◽  
◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (11) ◽  
pp. e675
Author(s):  
Vinay Gupta ◽  
Ranu Dhillon ◽  
Robert Yates

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuxi Zhao

<p>TheWeinefficientfossilfuelsubsidiesself-reportlistedexistingfossilfuelsubsidiesincluding subsidiesfor<br />theexploration,Development,Extractionoffossilfuels,subsidiesforfossilFuelsemployedintheresidentialSector(represented<br />bytheLow-incomeHome Energyassistanceprogram).Thispaperchooseslow-incomeHome<br />energyAssistanceprogram(liheap)asacasestudy.Theresultsshowso: ① discriminatorypricesTofossil<br />fuelsinliheapledtoexcessiveFossilfuelconsumption.Comparedwith 2013, thenumber<br />ofheatingSubsidiesbyrecipienthouseholdsreducedby2.89%0in 2014, whileTotalExpenditureroseby19.23%0; ②<br />DuringFY1993toFY1995,FY1999toFY2001,FY$ toFY2007,<br />andFY2008toFYno.,Weatherizationbenefitsandcrisisbenefitsshowed asynchronousgrowth; ③<br />liheaprecipienthouseholdstendedtoconsumeMorefossilFuelthanLow-incomeandOthertypesTohouseholds,particularlyin<br />theSouthArea.Finally,Thispaperanalyzes"ExternalinstitutionalsystemThenInternalEnergyStructureof,theUSinefficientfos<br />silFuelsubsidiesReform,thusprovidessomepolicyImplications</p>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document