Energy, the U.S. Budget, and Climate Change

The document identifies that federal energy-related spending in 2010 ranged from $290 billion to $610 billion, with the vast majority supporting petroleum-based transportation and energy security rather than emissions reduction. Only $38 billion was spent on climate mitigation, a small fraction of the total budget, and much of this was temporary stimulus funding from the Recovery Act. The analysis highlights a reliance on tax expenditures for clean energy, which are described as less transparent than direct spending but more politically sustainable.

• Federal spending related to energy in 2010 totaled between $290 billion and $610 billion, depending on the estimate for energy-related security spending. This spending is dominated by public investment ($240-560 billion), which includes energy-related infrastructure ($104 billion), energy procured for government activities ($88 billion), and security spending ($46-368 billion).
• The majority of public energy investment is directed toward petroleum-based transportation, accounting for 70-90% of the total ($175-500 billion). This includes funding for airports, highway construction and repair, and jet fuel for military aircraft.
• Spending specifically aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions was limited to $38 billion in 2010, representing less than 2% of total federal spending. This total includes $21 billion in public investments and $17 billion in incentives, with approximately $13 billion of this amount consisting of temporary spending from the Recovery Act.
• Energy incentives totaled $46.7 billion, with the majority ($30.2 billion) provided as tax breaks. Only 35% of these incentives ($16.7 billion) supported low-emissions technologies, and $9 billion of the emissions-reducing tax breaks were temporary stimulus measures set to expire by the end of 2012.
• Energy-specific taxes generated $47.6 billion in 2010 revenues, which is 2% of government receipts. Because these taxes are levied exclusively on fossil fuels, they may contribute to emissions reductions and roughly offset the cost of energy incentive spending.
• Federal support for clean energy technology is a significant global driver; for example, the $5.5 billion in budget authority for climate change technology programs in 2010 was comparable to the $7.8 billion in global venture capital investments in clean energy that same year.

APA

Varadarajan, U., & Zuckerman, J. (2012). Energy, the U.S. Budget, and Climate Change. Climate Policy Initiative. https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Energy-US-Budget-and-Climate-Change.pdf

Chicago

Varadarajan, Uday, and Julia Zuckerman. Energy, the U.S. Budget, and Climate Change. Climate Policy Initiative, 2012. https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Energy-US-Budget-and-Climate-Change.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Varadarajan |first1=Uday |last2=Zuckerman |first2=Julia |title=Energy, the U.S. Budget, and Climate Change |publisher=Climate Policy Initiative |date=March 2012 |url=https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Energy-US-Budget-and-Climate-Change.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{varadarajan2012energy, author = {Varadarajan, Uday and Zuckerman, Julia}, title = {{Energy, the U.S. Budget, and Climate Change}}, institution = {Climate Policy Initiative}, year = {2012}, month = mar, url = {https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Energy-US-Budget-and-Climate-Change.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }