With the boom and bust oil industry showing signs of yet another severe contraction, it’s time to rethink the long-standing policy of propping up the fossil fuel sector with public funds.
Money that could be used to develop alternative energy is being diverted to initiatives that the oil industry could, and should, be funding itself.
The plight of unemployed oil field workers could be answered, in part, by retraining in the skills needed for reclaiming abandoned extraction sites. There is no good reason to use public money to do so.
Orphan oil wells in the tens of thousands litter this country.
The resources needed to remediate the environmental hazards they pose are being advanced from federal and provincial coffers. The reasoning behind this strategy to stimulate the economy is flawed in the extreme and will set us on the wrong course, as we struggle to begin the long process of recovering from the devastations of the coronavirus and the economic downturn.
The shape the future takes will be determined by decisions made today. In many ways, the world has paused for a moment.
The COVID-19 crisis has given us an opportunity to make significant changes. There is an opening to move towards a society with a broader benefit for a wider segment of humanity. Demanding more environmental responsibility from extraction industries would signal a new direction.
Public funds invested in private corporations often do not have the desired trickle-down effect. We have seen stimulus dollars directed toward investor and executive benefits, away from employee and societal considerations. Â
The fossil fuel industry has a long history of activity that runs counter to environmental interests. We should not forget its role in the overarching crisis of our times – that of global warming. Big oil should not be placed in a position of oversight for environmental cleanup. That role belongs to government regulatory bodies.
Beyond the recognized proclivities of the extraction industry, there are ethical and legal reasons for the funding of training and reclamation by those responsible for creating the problem.
Canadians, in general, feel that corporations need to develop a social conscience. Public funding of these projects, like any other subsidy, would amount to paying twice for the product.
The very existence of several funds that have been established for the remediation of depleted or abandoned oil wells is proof of an acknowledgment by governments and industry of an obligation. If, as has been argued, these funds are insufficient, then the problem becomes one of insufficient levies. The obvious solution is to increase levies.
The fact is, government funding to clean up orphan oil wells is already in place. The appropriate response, given this fact and the desire to create jobs, is that this moment in time should be a benchmark: there will be no future subsidies for the fossil fuel industry.
Continuing subsidies would amount to compounding the error in reasoning. If pubic money is to be used to initiate the training and deployment of unemployed oil field workers quickly and with independent oversight, then there should be the condition that public money is repaid before profits are taken.
After many decades of acquiring increasing amounts of political and economic influence in the conduct of global interactions, the corporate world should recognize the emergence of a desire to open the door to new assertions of public interest over private profit.
