Those petroleum and gas industry pays massive taxes in all these countries the article discusses. Some of the so called subsidies, particularly the ones in the US, are normal tax practices assigned to all business, but called subsidies only for the oil/gas industry.
Let us look at a specific example:
Domestic Manufacturers Deduction
-Allows taxpayers to claim a deduction equal to a percentage of US production
-Every US industry that qualifies receives a 9% deduction today – except the oil and gas industry – which was capped in 2008 at 6%.
So this “subsidy”, a tax deduction applied to all industries that “make something” get this tax deduction, except the oil/gas industry get less. For them we want to call it a subsidy and for everyone else we will call the larger tax break a incentive to keep their work here in the US.
Now consider the massive taxes paid by this industry, taxes paid are often 2~3 times larger than the profits they get to keep.
If we tripled you taxes, then allowed you deduct 6% of it for not leaving the country, would that also be a subsidy?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2765392/posts
I'd say the OECD and IEA are full of shiite.
The "green energy" scam, from our own lovable DoE:
http://www.eia.gov/energy_in_brief/renewable_energy.cfm
Note the quasi-deceptive arrangement of graphs -- wind and solar are 9% and 1% (respectively) of only 8% of the energy total. In other words, the two "green energy" sources getting these subsidies in toto generate much less than 1% of U.S. energy needs.
h/t to Cincinatus