While stating that fossil fuels get a bigger share of the subsidies the article fails to mention a single example. Why don't they give examples? My guess is that almost all of what they are calling subsidies are investment tax credit type subsidies that any business gets. Given that oil and gas are much larger industries, and have much higher capital expenditures, they get more money. What these people really want is to penalize fossil fuels and give subsidies to other forms of energy. Ethanol gets a 50 cent a gallon subsidy, which is huge, the government mandates that it be put into gasoline, and yet ethanol plants go broke. There is no cheap and reliable alternative to fossil fuels. If people want clean energy they better be prepared to pay dearly for it.

If this article said phasing out gasoline but keeping diesel powered cars I could believe it. Biofuels can't do it and the only way electricity makes sense is if it is nuclear. Everybody needs to take a tour of a large refinery and look at the huge storage tanks of crude oil that get processed in just a few days and then ponder the number of refineries there are in this world to realize how difficult it will be to replace gasoline and diesel. I bet we are still using gasoline in 2050 if not much later.