Correct ... its pure deception to continue allowing governments to shoulder this military expense ... petrol conglomerates must pay the full cost to society of fighting these endless wars to permit continued resource extraction ... once this cost is factored into petrol at the pump then ALL green energy sources suddenly become the obvious low cost choice

From that report:

> The bulk of energy subsidies in most countries are due to undercharging for domestic environmental damage

I understand it's an accepted part of the word subsidy but it always feels dishonest when people treat "lost revenue" and actual money given to industries the same and then combine them into a huge number that is 95% theoretical losses that are difficult to quantify.

Saying, "read this giant report that contains a bunch of other irrelevant data" isn't the most helpful. The other comments so far in this thread are argumentative, non-specfic, or I still couldn't verify their existence by googling.

I take it as a given that we want to continue to have cheap energy as we transition to renewable resources. Our economy and much of our quality of life are dependent on the incredible abundance that cheap energy has provided, so I'm not in favor of throwing the baby out with the bath water! If we need to defend our cheap energy supplies sometimes, that's probably OK.

The kinds of subsidies I'm interested in hearing about are where oil or gas is getting special treatment compared to other businesses. I'm not in favor of special treatment for most businesses, but I'm especially disinclined to unlevel playing fields.

I'm in favor of the adoption of renewables and somewhat in favor of subsidies and breaks for renewables to encourage it. I'm not in favor of special privileges for oil and gas, over and above what's afforded other industries. However, instead of penalizing oil and gas with respect to other industries, I'd prefer subsidies and breaks for renewables. Cheap energy is critical to pretty much everything.