An IPA media release today advises that massive increases in Net Zero spending are making us all poorer. We know that. And even the Australian political class is not stupid enough not to know it too. They just lie about it.

The costs to Australians have risen “15 fold” over a decade, and more than 400% in the last term of the Albanese government.

While the combined uniparty is a guilty as hell, the Albanese government - the one we could be stuck with for a very long time since the collapse of the Liberals - the Albanese government has
accelerated annual funding of the doomed scheme from $1.7 billion in 2022, to just over $9 billion annually in its most recent budget.

These massive costs pale into insignificance compared with the “multitrillion” costs to households and businesses.

The report reminds us that ‘net zero’ was mentioned only 3 times during the recent election campaign; but it is mentioned 92 times in Labor’s 2024/25 budget. And, the “embarrassing talk of Australia becoming a ‘renewable energy super power’ vanished entirely …”.

There is no mention of Minister for Stupid Pronouncements, Bowen, being tied to his kennel for the duration of the campaign.

The most productive sectors of our economy (what's left of them) are being crushed because of “flawed and misleading advice and ideology”.

Elsewhere, the question of how Albanese's “noone left behind” brag will be possible with rising energy prices, whacking families in the suburbs, but not touching rich people - like Albanese himself.

ttbn,

Thanks for another IPA press release, dutifully delivered like it’s gospel. Yet, not a single claim is even remotely accurate.

Let’s break it down:

//...massive increases in Net Zero spending are making us all poorer.//

That’s quite the claim - and yet, real-world data doesn’t back it up. The CSIRO’s GenCost report consistently shows renewables are the cheapest form of new generation. Infrastructure investment isn’t making us poorer, it’s laying the foundation for future stability. You don’t build bridges and then complain about the cost before anyone crosses them.

//The costs to Australians have risen “15 fold” over a decade...//

Only if you cherry-pick the lowest year during a period of neglect and compare it to current scaling. Of course the number is bigger now - we’re finally doing what should’ve been done decades ago.

//The most productive sectors of our economy ... are being crushed...//

What, like manufacturing? Which is being supported precisely because renewable energy reduces input costs long-term? Or agriculture, which is under constant threat from climate volatility?

//Net zero was mentioned only 3 times during the election campaign.//

As if that’s evidence of conspiracy. Budgets are about policy detail; campaigns are about messaging. The policies were public. No one was blindsided. You might’ve even seen them if you looked beyond IPA newsletters.

//And, the “embarrassing talk of Australia becoming a ‘renewable energy super power’ vanished entirely …”.//

Hardly. Australia is still the #1 destination for renewable investment per capita. And the ambition remains - the only thing that’s “vanished” is your ability to see past a talking point.

//Elsewhere, the question of how Albanese's “noone left behind” brag will be possible with rising energy prices...//

So… you’re angry that Labor didn’t hit high earners hard enough? That’s new.

Let’s be honest: This isn’t economic outrage. It’s ideological frustration dressed up as concern. The world is moving forward - investment is flowing, technology is advancing, and denialism is losing steam.

You can keep repeating “it’s doomed,” but it’s starting to sound like you’re just trying to convince yourself.

Texan Robert Bryce, author of ‘Pulling The Plug On Net Zero’, was asked for his comments on Australia's ‘energy transition’ - not by the MSM of course.

His first remark was, “I don't see any transition”.

He expressed, as many people do, including Australians suffering from Net Zero, that it was “incredible” that we export our energy resources, but don’t want to use them ourselves.

He described the situation as “totally bonkers”, “regressive”.

Net Zero is impossible. It is “never going to work”. “Sober up and be realistic”.

Australia is “hollowing out its economy” with destructive policies that “effectively have no impact on climate change”.

Bryce intends to visit Australia. I wonder if they will try to block his visa application

Ah yes, ttbn, Robert Bryce - the fossil fuel advocate whose job is literally to oppose clean energy.

Of course he doesn't see a transition. When your entire worldview is built around oil and gas, a wind turbine probably looks like a hallucination.

//His first remark was, “I don't see any transition”.//

Odd. The IEA, CSIRO, BloombergNEF, and AEMO do. So do the tens of billions being invested annually. Maybe he just needs to open his eyes - or Google.

//...we export our energy resources but don’t want to use them ourselves.//

Because global LNG prices pay more than domestic consumption, and Australia’s power stations weren’t built to burn all of our export coal or gas. It’s not ideology - it’s economics.

//Net zero is impossible. It is never going to work.//

Funny, coming from someone who said the same thing about solar and wind viability back when they cost 10 times as much as they do now. He’s been wrong before. He’s just louder about it now.

//...destructive policies that “effectively have no impact on climate change”.//

Yes, the classic denialist contradiction: it’s all meaningless and it’s destroying the economy! Pick one.

You’d think someone supposedly so dangerous to the “mainstream” narrative wouldn’t have a book on Amazon, a Substack, and regular invites to U.S. media. But sure - let’s pretend he’s being silenced. Maybe ASIO will ban his visa for bad takes.

If your strongest case against net zero is that Robert Bryce thinks it’s “bonkers,” then maybe the real hollowing-out happening here is in your argument.

"As for France’s nuclear build-out, it actually proves the opposite of what you're trying to argue."

No John, what it proves is that it doesn't matter what people think if the technology delivers. What ultimately stopped the nuclear build was oversupply of electricity and a lack of international customers. What is holding wind and solar back are fundamental limitations of the technology, with predictable implications such as collapsing the spot price when it's sunny and windy.

https://www.afr.com/companies/energy/wild-winds-blow-up-solar-farm-profits-20240902-p5k73w

"Thanks for another IPA press release, dutifully delivered like it’s gospel. Yet, not a single claim is even remotely accurate."

I notice that you made no mention of the $9 billion in annual subsidies for the wind and solar con.