Hurricane Beryl

[CajunVic]

The estimated total subsidies provided to the oil and gas industry in the United States over the past 20 years vary widely depending on the source and methodology used for calculation. However, to provide a general figure based on various analyses and reports:

According to a report by Oil Change International, federal subsidies to the fossil fuel industry, which includes oil and gas, averaged approximately $20 billion per year from 2015 to 2019 in the US.

Another analysis by the Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI) estimates that direct federal subsidies to the oil and gas industry have totaled around $15 billion annually in recent years.

Thus, over a 20-year period, these subsidies could range from $300 billion to $400 billion, considering fluctuations in annual subsidy amounts and adjusting for inflation and other factors over time.

I was not talking about subsidies to the energy source which makes the world go . . . I was talking about the "clean energy sources" which for the most part make only the entrepreneur involved grow . . .

https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamand.ture-proposal/

[fpc4life99]

To be clear I think maintaining a balanced approach in energy use is crucial. Oil and gas are integral to various industries beyond just energy production, including manufacturing, transportation, and petrochemicals for essential products like lubricants. Transitioning to renewable energy sources while optimizing efficiency and reducing environmental impacts in the oil and gas sector can help achieve a sustainable energy future. Striking this balance ensures that we meet current energy needs while responsibly planning for the future.

[CrazyCajun]

Efforts are underway to address these through recycling and responsible disposal. Companies like Tesla have made strides in battery recycling, aiming to reduce toxic waste and recover valuable materials (Tesla's Battery Recycling Initiative).

Studies show that solar panels and wind turbines can help mitigate climate change impacts over their lifetimes, despite initial environmental costs (Environmental Benefits of Renewable Energy).

Renewable energy technologies are becoming increasingly practical and cost-effective. Advances in technology and economies of scale are driving down costs, making renewable energy a competitive option (Cost Trends for Renewable Energy).

Companies across various industries are investing in recycling initiatives to manage the environmental impact of their products. For example, companies like First Solar have established comprehensive recycling programs for solar panels, aiming to recover up to 90% of materials for reuse (First Solar's Recycling Program).

I tried to attach the links but it doesn't look like it worked. You should be able to google the articles if you want to know more.

Recycling hasn’t worked anywhere else, it won’t work here, it’s not cost effective or energy efficient. It’s another feel good story.

[fpc4life99]

I was not talking about subsidies to the energy source which makes the world go . . . I was talking about the "clean energy sources" which for the most part make only the entrepreneur involved grow . . .

https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamand.ture-proposal/

Whether it's through subsidies or investments, both can end up costing taxpayers. Consider these examples from the oil and gas industry that have had significant financial impacts on US taxpayers:

The Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill in 2010, where BP's Gulf of Mexico spill led to massive cleanup costs and compensation payouts.
The Petrobras Corruption Scandal in 2014, involving billions in bribes and inflated contracts at Brazil's state-owned oil company.
Venezuela's Oil Industry Decline due to mismanagement and political instability, impacting its production and global supply.
The Enron Collapse in 2001, which involved major energy trading operations and resulted in one of the largest bankruptcies in corporate history.
North Sea Oil Rig Disasters like Piper Alpha in 1988, which caused fatalities and environmental damage.
The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill in 1989, where an Exxon tanker spill in Alaska caused extensive ecological harm.
Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster in 1986, highlighting catastrophic industrial failures and long-term environmental impacts.
The Keystone XL Pipeline Cancellation in 2021, after facing regulatory and environmental challenges.
OPEC Price Wars destabilizing global oil markets periodically.
Shell's Arctic Drilling Halt in 2015 due to regulatory hurdles, costs, and environmental concerns.
These incidents show the complexities and costs involved in the oil and gas industry, impacting both finances and the environment. Understanding these examples helps us evaluate the broader discussion around government support for different energy sectors.

[fpc4life99]

Recycling hasn’t worked anywhere else, it won’t work here, it’s not cost effective or energy efficient. It’s another feel good story.

Ok

[CajunVic]

Whether it's through subsidies or investments, both can end up costing taxpayers. Consider these examples from the oil and gas industry that have had significant financial impacts on US taxpayers:

The Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill in 2010, where BP's Gulf of Mexico spill led to massive cleanup costs and compensation payouts.
The Petrobras Corruption Scandal in 2014, involving billions in bribes and inflated contracts at Brazil's state-owned oil company.
Venezuela's Oil Industry Decline due to mismanagement and political instability, impacting its production and global supply.
The Enron Collapse in 2001, which involved major energy trading operations and resulted in one of the largest bankruptcies in corporate history.
North Sea Oil Rig Disasters like Piper Alpha in 1988, which caused fatalities and environmental damage.
The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill in 1989, where an Exxon tanker spill in Alaska caused extensive ecological harm.
Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster in 1986, highlighting catastrophic industrial failures and long-term environmental impacts.
The Keystone XL Pipeline Cancellation in 2021, after facing regulatory and environmental challenges.
OPEC Price Wars destabilizing global oil markets periodically.
Shell's Arctic Drilling Halt in 2015 due to regulatory hurdles, costs, and environmental concerns.
These incidents show the complexities and costs involved in the oil and gas industry, impacting both finances and the environment. Understanding these examples helps us evaluate the broader discussion around government support for different energy sectors.

every sector of the economy will have bad actors . . . from what I have seen, scam artists are over abundant in the clean energy sector . . . just how I see it . . .

[CrazyCajun]

The estimated total subsidies provided to the oil and gas industry in the United States over the past 20 years vary widely depending on the source and methodology used for calculation. However, to provide a general figure based on various analyses and reports:

According to a report by Oil Change International, federal subsidies to the fossil fuel industry, which includes oil and gas, averaged approximately $20 billion per year from 2015 to 2019 in the US.

Another analysis by the Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI) estimates that direct federal subsidies to the oil and gas industry have totaled around $15 billion annually in recent years.

Thus, over a 20-year period, these subsidies could range from $300 billion to $400 billion, considering fluctuations in annual subsidy amounts and adjusting for inflation and other factors over time.

Meanwhile the top 9 individuals of the top oil and gas companies make:

Darren Woods - CEO of ExxonMobil: $15 million to $20 million, including bonuses and other incentives.

Michael Wirth - CEO of Chevron: $15 million to $20 million, including bonuses and other incentives.

Ryan Lance - CEO of ConocoPhillips: $10 million to $15 million, including bonuses and other incentives.

Bernard Looney - CEO of BP: $10 million to $15 million, including bonuses and other incentives.

Ben van Beurden - CEO of Shell: $10 million to $15 million, including bonuses and other incentives.

Vicki Hollub - CEO of Occidental Petroleum: $10 million to $15 million, including bonuses and other incentives.

Lorenzo Simonelli - CEO of Baker Hughes: $10 million to $15 million, including bonuses and other incentives.

Jeff Miller - CEO of Halliburton: $10 million to $15 million, including bonuses and other incentives.

Anders Opedal - CEO of Equinor (successor to Eldar Sætre): $10 million to $15 million, including bonuses and other incentives.

Oil and gas gets between 5%~7% of total subsidies yearly and supplies 99% of the country with energy and petroleum products, pretty damn good ROI. Renewable energy is a bunch of people getting filthy rich who have lobbyist in Washington getting contracts secured on a scam.

[JamesTheJeweler]

It’s not an environmental catastrophe if it’s natural clown. Nature IS the environment. Crude oil and natural gas in the ocean isn’t it disaster, it’s very natural and happens constantly on an unmeasurable scale. It’s not progress, very far from it actually and it’s anything but “green” or “clean”, that’s the scam part.

Some people like to live in fear. Remember in the 70's we were gonna experience another ice age? From global cooling to global warming to generic climate change. They just keep moving the goalpost of fear. Remember, our beloved climate czar, Al Gore, said we would be underwater by 2015. Just another control mechanism. Nothing more.

[Big Tyme]

I was not talking about subsidies to the energy source which makes the world go . . . I was talking about the "clean energy sources" which for the most part make only the entrepreneur involved grow . . .

https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamand.ture-proposal/

That is the sound of moving goalposts!! No not THOSE subsidies! Typical

[Big Tyme]

Oil and gas gets between 5%~7% of total subsidies yearly and supplies 99% of the country with energy and petroleum products, pretty damn good ROI. Renewable energy is a bunch of people getting filthy rich who have lobbyist in Washington getting contracts secured on a scam.

LOL You didn't read the post, did you?

[Big Tyme]

Yes 5 million gallons of crude oil in the ocean is perfectly okay. How about all these toxic batteries, solar panels and windmill graveyards? You know tainting our water system? Or what about all the birds they kill? The animal habitat they are destroying? On top of all of that it’s not even practical. At what cost should we all pay to make you feel better about yourself?

Now you're worried about the whales and birds?!? Since you did not attach numbers to your claims, I will just ignore those.

[Big Tyme]

Some people like to live in fear. Remember in the 70's we were gonna experience another ice age? From global cooling to global warming to generic climate change. They just keep moving the goalpost of fear. Remember, our beloved climate czar, Al Gore, said we would be underwater by 2015. Just another control mechanism. Nothing more.

Sea levels are rising. I am not sure what point you are attempting to make

[CajunVic]

That is the sound of moving goalposts!! No not THOSE subsidies! Typical

. . .

[CrazyCajun]

Now you're worried about the whales and birds?!? Since you did not attach numbers to your claims, I will just ignore those.

No, Im not the one claiming to be an environmental savior. I’d be a lot more willing to listen if they would cut the bullsht and just admit they want to get rich, like oil rich than trying to tell me this is about saving the environment. Again, not sure what part of this bring a scam you don’t understand. I worked on a windmill project off the east coast that was shutdown by environmentalists bc of the impact on the sea life. It was very clear, very early on the project that the goal was to get as much of the money allotted by the government as possible. That was it, how much of this pie can we get. When bringing up ideas, concerns or more efficient ways to do things they didn’t want to hear it, how do we get the money.

[CajunNation]

It's understandable to have concerns about terms like "consensus," "reputable," and "anthropogenic" in discussions about complex topics like climate change. These terms can be viewed as deniable because they represent scientific conclusions that may challenge preconceived beliefs or ideologies. Can you expand here on your thoughts?

"Consensus" can be wrong and can change too often to warrant civilization ending governmental policies.

"Reputable" is in the eye of the beholder. 51 National Security "experts" wrote a consensus that was a lie not too long ago that changed History, but they were deemed reputable. Many entities cashed government checks to do research that was based on the Hockey Stick graph lie, but they were reputable.

Aside from Global Thermonuclear War, anthropogenic climate change is at worst a lie and at best amounts to nothing compared to the Earth's natural processes or the Sun cycles.