The U.S. spent $502 billion subsidizing fossil fuels in 2011.
Unresolvable The public record could not settle it.
Factual: Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?
The second judge said resolved true; the verdict shown is the first judge's.
What would count as true or false
Judge as of 2014-01-14. True: a credible source estimates US fossil-fuel subsidies in 2011 at about $502 billion (within about ±5%), and the claim does not misstate what the figure measures. Mostly true: the figure matches a published estimate, but that estimate uses a broad definition (e.g., IMF post-tax subsidies that include unpriced externalities) that the claim does not mention. Mixed: credible estimates differ widely, and the $502 billion figure matches only the broadest one. Mostly false: the figure is attributable to a real estimate, but it covers a different scope (e.g., global or G20 subsidies) or a different year, or it is externality-inclusive while presented as direct spending. False: no credible estimate near $502 billion exists for US fossil-fuel subsidies in 2011, and direct US subsidies were an order of magnitude lower, with nothing underlying the figure.
Set before the research began.
Evidence (3)
-
E1 How much of your tax money goes to oil and gas? The Christian Science Monitor · 1 November 2013
“In 2011, developing and industrialized countries spent $1.9 trillion to subsidize fossil fuels, according to the International Monetary Fund, with the US spending $502 billion.”
-
E2 Fossil Fuel Subsidies International Monetary Fund · 1 October 2026
“Implicit subsidies: occur when the retail price fails to include external costs, inclusive of the standard consumption tax.”
-
E3 How Much Does the Federal Government Support the Development and Production of Fuels and Energy Technologies? Congressional Budget Office · 6 March 2012
“In 2011, federal support totaled an estimated $24 billion, which was provided in the following ways:”
Reasoning
E1 confirms that the IMF estimated US fossil-fuel subsidies in 2011 at $502 billion, but it does not say which IMF measure this is, and E3 covers only direct federal energy support. The verdict depended on the claim not mentioning a broad, externality-inclusive definition, but the subject's surrounding text does mention externalities, so the evidence does not settle which category under the criteria applies.
Cite this claim
Vinod Khosla, “The U.S. spent $502 billion subsidizing fossil fuels in 2011.” (said 14 January 2014). Verdict: unresolvable. Reliability API, claim c_c05e717d769f, method 0.1.0+c876030c, dataset release v1.1.2. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_c05e717d769f
This claim is in dataset release v1.1.2, with the same verdict.
Reply to this claim
More factual claims by Vinod Khosla
-
Mostly true
“And massive outcomes for @khoslaventures and others but more importantly a big change in the devops landscape.”
GitLab's outcome produced massive financial returns for Khosla Ventures and other investors.
-
Resolved true
“AMZN price declined 90% next few years!”
Amazon's stock price declined 90% over the few years following the dot-com era.
-
Resolved true
“What it is today wasn't part of the plan when we originally invested.”
-
Mostly true
“misses many compelling ones like Rubrik which is younger and growing much faster than Cohesity!”
Rubrik is younger than Cohesity and is growing much faster than Cohesity.
-
Mostly false
“Weeks before your program aired, View secured an additional $100 million in private funding to ramp production at its Mississippi-based manufacturing facility, which is creating scores of new…”
Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts are made.