Approximately every third country can achieve its climatic goals without any additional measures, such as prices, including China, India and Indonesia. Industrial countries, such as Germany, the USA, Japan and the United Kingdom, can also create about a third of their climatic purposes. This means that economic, financial and climatic goals can be better agreed on than previously expected.
The states will have significant financial funds available from the saved subsidies and income at the price of external costs for the use of fossil energy – for example, for health. On average, they can receive tax revenues of 4.9 percent of the total consumption. Estimates vary from 1.8 to 16.2 percent, depending on the region.
In addition, countries will have to pay for fewer damage to the environment and health. Significant additional economic costs from the development of climate change can also be prevented. This can compensate for the economic consequences of higher energy prices.
Great influence on emissions
“Many states still help to guarantee that fossil fuel remained favorable for the consumer,” said Sebastian Raush, head of the Zew Research Research for Environmental and Climate Economics and Co-author of the study. “Explicit subsidies cover parts of the cost of proposal or through implicit subsidies, the external health care costs associated with the use of fossil fuel are not included in the price.”
To date, subsidies for fossil fuel have been one of the most commonly used energy indicators. The authors of the study refer to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), according to which global direct subsidies are about 1.3 percent of the gross stick. Indirect subsidies – they arise because the external costs of the use of fossil fuel are not estimated – even 5.8 percent. In total, according to Zue, this is almost six trillions of dollars around the world.
“For the abolition of obvious subsidies, such as tax benefits for kerosene or gas price cover, a limited effect on CO emissions will have,” said the scientist Zew Zew Tim Kalmey. “It is extremely important that the external costs of fossil fuel, that is, the harmful effects on health through local air pollution, are also evaluated.” According to Zew, this will reduce the global Co₂ emissions by 32 percent.
