Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Reply to: Why fossil fuel producer subsidies matter

  • Matters Arising
  • Published:

From Nature

View current issue Submit your manuscript

The Original Article was published on 05 February 2020

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Data availability

The authors declare that the data supporting the calculations are available in the Methods or from publicly available sources cited in the Methods.

Code availability

No custom code or algorithms were developed for the discounted cash flow results reported in this paper.

References

  1. Joint Report By IEA, OPEC, OECD And World Bank On Fossil-fuel And Other Energy Subsidies: An Update Of The G20 Pittsburgh And Toronto Commitments https://www.oecd.org/env/49090716.pdf (IEA, OPEC, OECD and World Bank, 2011).

  2. Jewell, J. et al. Limited emission reductions from fuel subsidy removal except in energy-exporting regions. Nature 554, 229–233 (2018).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Erickson, P. et al. Why fossil fuel producer subsidies matter. Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1920-x (2020).

  4. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Technical Summary. In Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of climate change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds Edenhofer, O. et al.) 33–107 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014).

  5. Friends of Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform. Briefing Note July 2015: Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform and the Communiqué. http://fffsr.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/ffrs-communique-briefing-note.pdf (Friends of Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform, 2015).

  6. OECD OECD Companion to the Inventory of Support Measures for Fossil Fuels 2015. https://www.oecd.org/publications/oecd-companion-to-the-inventory-of-support-measures-for-fossil-fuels-2015-9789264239616-en.htm (OECD, 2015).

  7. IEA World Energy Outlook 2016 https://webstore.iea.org/world-energy-outlook-2016 (International Energy Agency, 2016).

  8. IEA World Energy Outlook 2014 https://webstore.iea.org/world-energy-outlook-2014 (International Energy Agency, 2014).

  9. Bast, E., Doukas, A., Pickard, S., Burg, L. Van Der & Whitley, S. Empty Promises: G20 Subsidies to Oil, Gas And Coal Production. https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/9957.pdf (Overseas Development Institute and Oil Change International, 2015).

  10. Gerasimchuk, I. et al. Zombie energy: climate benefits of ending subsidies to fossil fuel production. Working paper. https://www.iisd.org/sites/default/files/publications/zombie-energy-climate-benefits-ending-subsidies-fossil-fuel-production.pdf (International Institute for Sustainable Development, Global Subsidies Initiative, and Overseas Development Institute, 2017).

  11. Erickson, P., Down, A., Lazarus, M. & Koplow, D. Effect of subsidies to fossil fuel companies on United States crude oil production. Nat. Energy 2, 891–898 (2017).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  12. Erickson, P. & Lazarus, M. Impact of the Keystone XL pipeline on global oil markets and greenhouse gas emissions. Nat. Clim. Chang. 4, 778–781 (2014).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Damodaran, A. Cost Of Equity And Capital (Updateable) http://people.stern.nyu.edu/adamodar/New_Home_Page/datafile/wacc.htm (2019).

  14. Johnson, N. et al. Stranded on a low-carbon planet: implications of climate policy for the phase-out of coal-based power plants. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 90, 89–102 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Compernolle, T., Welkenhuysen, K., Huisman, K., Piessens, K. & Kort, P. Off-shore enhanced oil recovery in the North Sea: the impact of price uncertainty on the investment decisions. Energy Policy 101, 123–137 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Ansari, E. & Kaufmann, R. K. The effect of oil and gas price and price volatility on rig activity in tight formations and OPEC strategy. Nat. Energy 4, 321–328 (2019).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  17. Victor, D. G. The Politics of Fossil-Fuel Subsidies https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1520984 (Global Subsidies Initiative and International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2009).

  18. Inchauste, G. & Victor, D. G. The Political Economy of Energy Subsidy Reform Public Sector Governance (World Bank, 2017).

  19. Sovacool, B. K. Reviewing, reforming, and rethinking global energy subsidies: towards a political economy research agenda. Ecol. Econ. 135, 150–163 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Lockwood, M. Fossil fuel subsidy reform, rent management and political fragmentation in developing countries. New Polit. Econ. 20, 475–494 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Research Council Norway under the Contractions project (“Analyzing past and future energy industry contractions: towards a better understanding of the flip-side of energy transitions”) under grant agreement number 267528/E10. We thank A. Cherp for discussions on the discounted cash flow model.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Physical Resource Theory, Department of Space, Earth and Environment, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Jessica Jewell

  2. Centre for Climate and Energy Transformations, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway

    Jessica Jewell & Vadim Vinichenko

  3. Department of Geography, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway

    Jessica Jewell & Vadim Vinichenko

  4. Risk and Resilience Program, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria

    Jessica Jewell

  5. RFF-CMCC European Institute on Economics and the Environment, Milan, Italy

    Johannes Emmerling, Loïc Berger & Massimo Tavoni

  6. Fondazione Centro Euromediterraneo sui Cambiamenti Climatici, Lecce, Italy

    Johannes Emmerling, Loïc Berger & Massimo Tavoni

  7. Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Member of the Leibniz Association, Potsdam, Germany

    Christoph Bertram

  8. IESEG School of Management, CNRS, Université Lille, UMR 9221–LEM, Lille, France

    Loïc Berger

  9. MaREI, the SFI Research Centre for Energy, Climate and Marine, Environmental Research Institute, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland

    Hannah E. Daly

  10. UCL Energy Institute, University College London, London, UK

    Ilkka Keppo

  11. Energy Program, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria

    Volker Krey & Keywan Riahi

  12. Industrial Ecology and Energy Transitions Programmes, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway

    Volker Krey

  13. Copernicus Institute for Sustainable Development, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    David E. H. J. Gernaat & Detlef van Vuuren

  14. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, The Hague, The Netherlands

    David E. H. J. Gernaat & Detlef van Vuuren

  15. National Technical University of Athens, Athens, Greece

    Kostas Fragkiadakis & Leonidas Paroussas

  16. Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, USA

    David McCollum

  17. Institute of Thermal Engineering, Graz University of Technology, Graz, Austria

    Keywan Riahi

  18. Department of Management, Economics and Industrial Engineering, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy

    Massimo Tavoni

Authors
  1. Jessica Jewell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Johannes Emmerling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Vadim Vinichenko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Christoph Bertram
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Loïc Berger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Hannah E. Daly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Ilkka Keppo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Volker Krey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. David E. H. J. Gernaat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Kostas Fragkiadakis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. David McCollum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Leonidas Paroussas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Keywan Riahi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Massimo Tavoni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Detlef van Vuuren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

The change in composition (removal of Nawfal Saadi and addition of Hannah Daly) and order of the author list in this Matters Arising compared to the original Letter reflects the contributions to the Matters Arising Reply, which relied on a discounted cash flow model and additional empirical research in order to validate the assumptions and sensitivity analysis from the original article. J.J., J.E., V.V. and C.B. wrote the Reply with contributions from L.B., H.D., I.K., V.K., D.E.H.J.G., K.F., D.M, L.P., K.R., M.T. and D.V. The numerical model was conceived and designed by J.J. and V.V. and implemented by V.V. The results were analysed by J.J. and V.V.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jessica Jewell.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Methods

This file contains Supplementary Methods, including Methods Table 1-4, and Supplementary References.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jewell, J., Emmerling, J., Vinichenko, V. et al. Reply to: Why fossil fuel producer subsidies matter. Nature 578, E5–E7 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1921-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1921-9

  • Springer Nature Limited

This article is cited by

Search

Navigation