When you say miniscule, what would that be in the USA annually? A few hundred grand? A few million? A hundred million?
The Environmental and Energy Study Institute found that the US government alone spends $20 billion every year on direct fossil fuel subsidies. Of that figure, around $16 billion goes towards oil and gas, while the remaining $4 billion benefits the coal industry.
There is also data to suggest that the problem is getting worse rather than better. Between 2017 and 2019 production subsidies for fossil fuels grew by 28%.
Ok, I don’t know why I am burning so much of my time on this because anyone could look it up (but that’s so much harder than parroting nonsense headlines)
This link:
https://www.eia.gov/analysis/requests/subsidy/pdf/subsidy.pdf
shows the U.SDepartment of Energy report on energy subsidies. It’s from 2016 (I think they only do it every five years), but if anything has changed since then, it has become even more slanted towards renewables.
It shows (see Table 3) that Oil & Gas received 111 million dollars in “Direct Expenditures.” Renewables received 909 million. Honestly, both of these are tiny amounts compared to the scale of the energy market, which what politicians count on for people to not understand. But, anyway, renewables received 8.2 more in “direct expenditures” . The more important point is that the same report shows (see Table 1 in the same link) that the U.S. oil and gas produced 20 times more energy than wind and solar. So, renewables producers received 160 times more subsidy than oil and gas per unit energy furnished to the American consumer. The oil and gas subsidy is truly miniscule.
Wait….it gets even more ridiculous…
Oil and gas paid huge amounts of taxes into the system. Renewables paid (and still pay) little or none. So according to “Table 3. Quantified energy-specific subsidies and support by type, FY 2010, FY 2013, and FY 2016” in the above reference, renewables received a total of $6.68 billion, while “Natural gas and Petroleum Liquids” (oil & gas) PAID $773 million, i.e., a negative subsidy. There’s no really good way to compare a positive number to a negative number. Mathematically, it can only be said that renewable producers received infinitely more subsidy than oil and gas producers.
One more thing: Candidate Biden’s claimed that that “We Will End Fossil Fuels.” There’s a youtube video on it. Look it up yourself, I’m not providing the link. But Biden’s own Department of Energy shows forecasts out to 2050. And those forecasts show that we are consuming more fossil fuels in 2050 than we are in 2020. Calling his statements lying feels like an understatement. The bottom line is that climate change is a small problem to live with compared to banning fossil fuels which we cannot live without. The idea that renewables can replace them has become the Big Lie of the 21st century.