news
From Common Dreams
Summary
U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna is reintroducing legislation to eliminate taxpayer subsidies for the fossil fuel industry, particularly targeting the $20.5 billion given annually for enhanced oil recovery using captured carbon dioxide. Critics argue these subsidies contribute to climate change and benefit oil companies at taxpayers’ expense. Khanna’s bill aims to redirect funds towards clean energy solutions, and it has garnered support from various organizations and lawmakers.
Highlights -🌍
- Legislation Reintroduced: Khanna’s bill targets taxpayer subsidies for fossil fuels.
- Environmental Impact: Subsidies contribute to climate change and oil extraction.
- Economic Concerns: Taxpayers pay billions while oil companies profit.
- Broad Support: The bill is backed by multiple organizations and lawmakers.
- Call for Clean Energy: Advocates emphasize the need to invest in sustainable solutions.
- Public Awareness: The issue is gaining traction as elections approach.
- Historical Context: The legislation follows record heat and climate urgency.
As fossil fuel giants continue to rake in billions of dollars in profits, U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna on Thursday is reintroducing legislation to end giving billions in taxpayer dollars to companies that inject captured carbon dioxide into wells to extract more climate-wrecking oil.
“The fossil fuel industry receives over $20.5 billion in taxpayer dollars every year while fleecing American consumers and driving a global climate crisis,” Khanna (D-Calif.) told Common Dreams. “The End Polluter Welfare for Enhanced Oil Recovery Act will eliminate the subsidy for captured carbon used for enhanced oil recovery, which only leads to more fossil fuel extraction and does nothing to mitigate climate change.”
While advocates of carbon capture utilization and storage claim that it’s necessary to address the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency, most CO2 captured in the United States is used to extract more planet-heating oil and gas, leading many scientists and green groups to argue that it is a “false climate solution.”
[...]
Read the full post at Common Dreams.
