New Legislation Would End More Than $110 Billion in Fossil Fuel Subsidies
Today Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) announced legislation that is by far the most comprehensive attempt to end subsidies for the fossil fuels industry in the U.S. Sen. Sanders and Rep. Ellison’s bill would save taxpayers more than $10 billion a year and more than $110 billion over ten years. Friends of the Earth’s Tax Analyst Ben Schreiber issued the following statement about the bill:
“Bold leadership, like that which Sen. Sanders and Rep. Ellison have exhibited today, will be necessary if we are to have any hope of avoiding climate catastrophe. We simply must stop paying corporations to cause asthma, lung disease and cancer.
"Sen. Sanders and Rep. Ellison have gone far beyond anyone before them with their proposal to eliminate subsidies to the fossil fuel industry. Conservatively we are giving more than $110 billion to fossil fuels, and the final tally is surely much higher.
"It is unconscionable that anyone is talking about cutting programs that make up the core of our social safety net, like Social Security and Medicaid, while we continue to give out billions of dollars each year to some of the world’s largest and most profitable corporations.
"Ending these subsidies is just common sense. The first step in responsible budgeting is ending incentives for pollution and instead making polluters pay for their pollution.”
For more information, click here.
By Robin Scher
Beyond the questions surrounding the availability, effectiveness and safety of a vaccine, the COVID-19 pandemic has led us to question where our food is coming from and whether we will have enough.
- Can Urban Farms Prevent Hunger in 54 Million People in the U.S. ... ›
- New Report Finds Malnutrition World's Top Killer Amid Pandemic ... ›
- Oxfam Warns 12,000 Could Die Per Day From Hunger Due to ... ›
- Three Ways to Support a Healthy Food System During the COVID ... ›
- Trump USDA Resumes Effort to Cut Food Stamp Benefits - EcoWatch ›
- Pandemic Threatens Food Security for Many College Students ... ›
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
Tearing through the crowded streets of Philadelphia, an electric car and a gas-powered car sought to win a heated race. One that mimicked how cars are actually used. The cars had to stop at stoplights, wait for pedestrians to cross the street, and swerve in and out of the hundreds of horse-drawn buggies. That's right, horse-drawn buggies. Because this race took place in 1908. It wanted to settle once and for all which car was the superior urban vehicle. Although the gas-powered car was more powerful, the electric car was more versatile. As the cars passed over the finish line, the defeat was stunning. The 1908 Studebaker electric car won by 10 minutes. If in 1908, the electric car was clearly the better form of transportation, why don't we drive them now? Today, I'm going to answer that question by diving into the history of electric cars and what I discovered may surprise you.
As bitcoin's fortunes and prominence rise, so do concerns about its environmental impact.
- 15 Top Conservation Issues of 2021 Include Big Threats, Potential ... ›
- How Blockchain Could Boost Clean Energy - EcoWatch ›
By David Drake and Jeffrey York
The Research Brief is a short take about interesting academic work.
The Big Idea
People often point to plunging natural gas prices as the reason U.S. coal-fired power plants have been shutting down at a faster pace in recent years. However, new research shows two other forces had a much larger effect: federal regulation and a well-funded activist campaign that launched in 2011 with the goal of ending coal power.
- Major Milestone: More than 100,000 MW Worth of Coal-Fired Power ... ›
- Coal Will Not Bring Appalachia Back to Life, But Tech and ... ›
- Renewables Beat Coal in the U.S. for the First Time This April ... ›