Self proclaimed experts here might like to debate Dr Adi Paterson who throws out a challenge to debate Jim Chalmers or any "experts" he can produce on Bolt last night:
https://www.skynews.com.au/opinion/andrew-bolt/very-detailed-energy-model-shines-light-on-how-blackouts-occur-under-renewables/video/c30753608734daeafd0c37730d2ee797

I certainly wouldn't, Mikko2.

//...I'd sooner trust the 50 signatories to an open letter ... including expert[s] such as Dr Adi Paterson...//

At least not after seeing the letter, which reads less like a serious energy proposal and more like a tantrum in bullet points.

* "Australia’s energy transition is proceeding without sufficient scientific rigour, transparency, or cost accountability.”
No, planning is based on detailed reports from CSIRO and AEMO - all public, peer-reviewed, and transparent. Disagreeing with conclusions doesn’t mean the process isn’t rigorous.

* “Full renewable transition costs are projected between $7 trillion and $9 trillion...”
There’s no credible source for this. It’s a fantasy figure with no disclosed assumptions, and it contradicts every serious cost analysis from GenCost and the ISP, which project costs in the hundreds of billions, not trillions.

* “Renewable-only plans pose a severe threat to grid stability, affordability, and sovereignty.”
The challenges are already being addressed through storage, demand response, and infrastructure upgrades. Countries with far higher renewable penetration than Australia aren’t collapsing, either.

* “Nuclear could be delivered for $120 billion.”
Sure, provided there's no legal obstacles, industry start-up costs, waste handling, or insurance burden. GenCost still shows nuclear as at least twice the cost of renewables and more than a decade away from delivering power.

* “Billions in subsidies are flowing offshore to foreign renewable companies.”
Foreign investment has always been part of Australia’s energy sector. If we’re suddenly pretending foreign capital is a dealbreaker, we’d better nationalise half the mining industry while we’re at it.

* “Environmental damage from large-scale wind and solar is being overlooked.”
It’s not. Impact studies and planning disputes are routine. All energy sources have downsides - the point is that wind and solar have far fewer than what they’re replacing.

For every hand-picked “expert” on that list, there's an Australian economist who signed a different letter calling nuclear slow, expensive, and the wrong fit for Australia. The one you trust reads like a polemic sales pitch - the other reads like a detailed policy briefing.

I know which one I'd sooner trust.

Thanks for re-posting the informed views of numerous science and industry experts John Daysh. The facts are obvious and will become more so if Labor gets back in and the lights go out while our power bills continue to soar and huge areas of native forest and productive farmlands are destroyed "to save the environment". Simon and Garfunkel revisited with "Hello Darkness my old friend...."

Oh, well this is awkward, Mikko2!

You see, I had only quoted the points you posted from the letter in order to debunk each one of them. Sorry.

//"...the lights go out while our power bills continue to soar and huge areas of native forest and productive farmlands are destroyed "to save the environment".//

There’s no evidence that Labor’s policies will cause blackouts - AEMO’s grid planning accounts for renewables, storage, and firming. If the lights go out, it’ll be because of ageing coal and gas assets, not solar panels.

Power bills soared during a global fossil fuel crisis - not because of renewables. In fact, increased wind and solar helped push prices down last year.

And no, wind farms aren’t bulldozing forests. Farmland is often dual-used, and all developments go through environmental approval - unlike coal mines, which actually clear forests and dig craters.

If the facts were truly obvious, you wouldn’t need the predictions, the panic, or the poetry.

The Noaltion are running for cover with their pants on fire. It has been exposed that Trumps number one campaign manager Chris LaCivita, came to Australia in late March to give the Liberal party and Dud Dutton advice on how to run their election campaign, Trump style. Seems, vote Noaltion and all we'll get is a bunch of Trump puppets with Trump style policies. If you want Trump, just vote Noalition.

"AEMO’s grid planning accounts for renewables, storage, and firming. If the lights go out, it’ll be because of ageing coal and gas assets, not solar panels."

Yes, very similar to all the expert advice and planning in other nations pursuing net zero, and then the lights go out in Spain and no one in the government there can shed any light on it. Plenty of warnings going back at least five years, but spruikers and zealots have no time for technical nuances. And the reason we have all those ageing power stations is because the renewable energy zealots said they wouldn't be needed and so they weren't properly maintained.

"Cascade failure" might become the fist thing people think of when they hear renewable energy.