AT THE risk of becoming tiresome on the subject of fracking and the supposed evils of the fossil fuel industry in general, I feel I must respond to Ol’ Blind Joe’s latest dispatch ‘Gas bandits get trillions’.
There is much to question in his column but in particular the headline notion that the fossil fuel industry is hugely and unreasonably subsidised by the general public must be challenged.
Read more
Joe’s claim of $28 billion benefit to industry is one regularly aired, though the oil and gas component (as relevant to fracking) of some $10 billion, is of most relevance.
The vast majority of funding in this supposed bounty for the oil and gas industry is composed of fuel tax credit schemes, in other words a reduction of the taxes owed to the government by fuel suppliers.
The intent of these programs is not to shovel money into the coffers of oil companies; the concessional rates for aviation fuel excise, for instance, makes air travel cheaper for everyday Australians.
So the subsidy actually goes to airlines, tourism and a host of related enterprises.
Our farmers and many other businesses similarly benefit from diesel fuel rebates.
To cut such supports would immediately raise energy prices to these operations – flowing through to increases in many other commodities – without necessarily having any financial impact on oil and gas suppliers.
I readily acknowledge that targeted fuel excise discounts may be seen as encouraging continued reliance on fossil fuels but to claim that they represent windfall benefit to oil companies at huge cost to the taxpayer is surely a stretch.
And ‘Gas bandits get trillions’?
Seriously?
As something of an aside, the hostility towards fracking by community groups such as the CWA and local primary industry organisations can hardly be considered convincing for Joe’s case given their exposure to relentless and alarmist polemic opposing fossil fuels.
Perhaps also, they have not considered that alternative renewable energy sources must themselves be heavily subsidised to compete, as well as having environmental impacts which are yet to be fully appreciated.
No thinking person opposes the development of renewable energy technology and its progressive introduction as the foundation of our future developmental needs.
The country’s level of reliance on fossil fuels in its energy planning is a complex yet serious matter and our national decisions should be based on a balanced and responsible review of the situation.
I can’t see that Joe’s analysis has helped in this regard.
Peter Edwards
(Retired petroleum geologist)
Toodyay
