In May 2019, Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk declared she was “sick of” the Adani Carmichael coal project’s assessment process and set a time line for its completion.
There has been much discussion of fossil fuel subsidies as both an inefficient use of public tax dollars and a barrier to the scaling up of low- and no-carbon energy sources. As "green" incentives are reduced, the phase-out of fossil fuel subsidies becomes even more urgent in order to reduce market distortions and ensure a level playing field in energy markets. Developing-world subsidies to fossil fuel consumption have attracted the most attention to date. However, fossil fuels also benefit from production subsidies in both developed and developing countries.
Governments across the G20 countries are estimated to be spending $88 billion every year subsidising exploration for fossil fuels. Their exploration subsidies marry bad economics with potentially disastrous consequences for climate change. In effect, governments are propping up the development of oil, gas and coal reserves that cannot be exploited if the world is to avoid dangerous climate change.
The Inventory Of Estimated Budgetary Support and Tax Expenditure for Fossil Fuels 2013 collects details on more than 550 fossil fuel support measures in the 34 OECD member countries, including many provided by state and provincial governments. The report also highlights progress made and the benefits identified by a number of OECD countries in reforming support to fossil fuels in recent years. It updates an earlier report released in 2011.
For the first time ever, the OECD has compiled an inventory of over 250 measures that support fossil-fuel production or use in 24 industrialised countries, which together account for 95% of energy supply in OECD countries. Those measures had an overall value of about USD 45-75 billion a year between 2005 and 2010. In absolute terms, nearly half of this amount benefitted petroleum products (i.e.
The Tasmanian forestry industries has received more than A$630 million in direct and indirect subsidies from 1997 to 2008. The study also found that despite the huge taxpayer funded subsides, which were intended to create jobs, that there have been steady job losses over the same period. The authors advocate a commercially-based industry, and that Forestry Tasmania deliver a commercial rate of return.
Matthew Saunders and Karen Schneider. Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics. June 2000. Australia is only one case in this international overview of problems with subsidies. AUSTRALIA, CANADA, UNITED STATES, JAPAN, EUROPEAN UNION, FORMER SOVIET UNION, EASTERN EUROPE, CHINA, INDONESIA, KOREA, THAILAND, INDIA, SOUTH AFRICA, MIDDLE EAST, MEXICO, ARGENTINA.
Christopher Riedy, Institute for Sustainable Futures, January 2003. Overview of Australian subsidies includes fossil fuel production and consumption, electricity and road transportation subsidies.