"In contrast, estimates from the International Energy Agency (IEA) released in June showed that $557bn was spent by governments during 2008 to subsidise the fossil fuel industry."
...citing a document behind a paywall. So once again, I have no idea what the nature of these "subsidies" are.
From the 3rd:
"But over the course of the parliament, the department has given financial support worth just £3.6m to green energy projects around the world, data released to the Guardian under freedom of information rules shows.
By comparison, UKEF allocated £1.13bn to help fossil fuel energy operations in the same period, 314 times more. The support was in the form of loans, loan guarantees and other export credit support."
Referencing the cited link, one example is: "A US$367 million loan provided to JSC Gazprom to finance an export contract won by Rolls-Royce Power Engineering for the supply and installation of natural gas pumping units for the completion of a new compressor station near Vyborg, Northwestern Russia".
So unless I am mistaken, the entire value of a loan is claimed to be a subsidy. That is beyond intellectually dishonest, and that is just one example of why I do not trust the left, environmentalists, etc - very often, advocates on that side simply do not have a background for critical thought, mathematics, etc; they simply do not have the skills to properly assess the actual nature of many if not most of the things they are criticizing, and in my experience they are most definitely not interested in discussion in order to come to some agreement of what the truth is.
"The vast sum is largely due to polluters not paying the costs imposed on governments by the burning of coal, oil and gas. These include the harm caused to local populations by air pollution as well as to people across the globe affected by the floods, droughts and storms being driven by climate change."
It's not that there isn't something important to be discussed there, but if that's the type of subsidy you're referring to when you say "oil is subsidized", it's going to be a messy, inconclusive argument, at least in part because your argument is based on (necessarily) made up numbers.
> When the government stops subsidizing fossil fuels 10x more than renewables, look what happens
No, that's what happens when renewables technology becomes economically competitive, this has nothing at all to do with the subsidy noted above.