By Vijay Jayaraj
Australia’s green energy experiment has left millions of its citizens with an unstable power grid and serves as a case study in how blind allegiance to climate dogma leads to economic and social unrest.
The once-sacred “net zero” promise has been exposed as a curse, sparking public anger, stark warnings from industry and a rethinking of national energy policy. The cracks in the so-called consensus on human-caused global warming are widening.
Last week the National Party of Australia finally broke the ban. By voting unanimously to abandon the 2050 net zero target, party members fired the first shot in a rebellion against the “green” agenda, declaring that cheap and reliable energy must take precedence over climate ideology. Facing a struggling power grid, shuttered industries and a disgruntled electorate, the party stated the obvious: “We must prioritize cheaper energy.”
On November 13, the Liberal Party followed in the Nationals’ footsteps and revised its commitment to net zero by 2050. “Our emissions reduction targets will never come at the expense of Australian families, and this is the principle that will guide every decision we make,” said Sussan Ley, leader of the Liberals, the main opposition party.
These decisions were not made in a vacuum. It is a natural reaction to years of recklessness that have destroyed a stable energy system and replaced it with wishful thinking. Wind and solar technologies have not delivered the affordability or reliability that their proponents promised.
Household electricity prices in Australia are currently 45% higher than in the US. Electricity bills have increased by up to $526 per household. Why endure this when reliable coal and natural gas power plants once kept the lights on at affordable prices?
Governments have ignored these sources, labeling them obsolete, while wind turbines have operated less than half the time and solar panels less than a quarter of the time of traditional sources. These numbers reveal the truth: intermittent wind and solar power cannot sustain a modern economy.
Battery storage – touted as a backup savior to wind and solar energy – does not live up to its claim. Flagship mega-projects such as the Snowy 2.0 pumped storage power plant have experienced cost shortfalls, delays and technical hurdles. What began as a $2 billion project has grown to more than $12 billion, with tunnel disasters and technical setbacks making completion uncertain.
The Australian Capital Territory’s Page Research Center (PRC) says the net zero commitment no longer serves the interests of Australians. It notes that electricity and gas prices have increased by around 40% since Australia committed to the “decarbonisation target”. “Lower-income households already spend nearly four times their income on energy compared to higher-income households, making affordability not only a matter of economics but also of equity,” the PRC says.
A review in the People’s Republic of China also shows that the fiscal burden of green policies is significant: “Together with the Capacity Investment Scheme, Rewiring the Nation, hydrogen subsidies and government SuperGrid programs, the combined public burden of net zero-focused spending exceeds $120-$140 billion.”
Industries are suffering the most from this chaos. The Tomago Aluminum Smelter, Australia’s largest smelter, is warning of closure without a viable energy deal as current contracts expire due to unaffordable prices. Tomago employs thousands, but high network costs make operations unsustainable.
BlueScope Steel reported a 90% drop in profits in 2025 and attributed this to energy costs three to four times higher than in the United States. Manufacturers like these once lived on cheap coal, but now they demand subsidies or face closures, accelerating deindustrialization.
Farmers’ associations and business councils have sounded the alarm that current energy policy is endangering national competitiveness. Entrepreneur Dick Smith – described by some as Australia’s national treasure – recently condemned the “lies” that demonize fossil fuels and stoke fears about climate change.
Australia can regain its energy sovereignty by investing in what works: coal, natural gas and nuclear power. Modern coal-fired power plants with high-efficiency, low-emission technology produce a fraction of the emissions of older units while delivering a stable baseload power supply. Gas remains essential for balancing supply and demand.
Nuclear power, long demonized by green lobbies, offers reliability that no solar system can match. However, regulatory obstacles still remain. Since 1998, successive governments have banned nuclear power even as allies such as the United States, France and Japan are expanding their fleets. The ban seems more absurd than ever.
The National Party’s abandonment of net zero signals a broader rebellion. State associations in Queensland, Western Australia and South Australia had already rejected the target and put pressure on federal politicians. Even mainstream media that once promoted “green” narratives are now questioning their validity.
The discussion has shifted from the question of how quickly decarbonization should occur to the question of whether it even makes sense.
This commentary was first published on December 4, 2025 by Real Clear Markets.
Vijay Jayaraj is a science and research associate at the CO2 Coalition, Fairfax, Virginia. He holds a master’s degree in environmental science from the University of East Anglia and a postgraduate degree in energy management from Robert Gordon University, both in the United Kingdom, and a bachelor’s degree in engineering from Anna University, India.
Like this:
Load…
Explore more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to receive the latest posts by email.
Comments are closed.