Economic vandalism of climate

Don’t be fooled, the shift to renewables is costing us big time

The research by the former head of the Australian Bureau of Agriculture and Resource Economics, Brian Fisher (“Our carbon cut apocalypse”, 21/2), exposes the mistruths perpetuated by both the major parties that renewable energy will only produce positive outcomes for everyone.

The research shows the ALP’s “climate change” policy would cost the economy $472 billion in the next 10 years and lower individual wages to the tune of $9000 a year, with the Coalition’s costing $70bn.

Yet, if we listen to the ALP, all we hear is climate alarmism to justify such economic vandalism while the Coalition is too gutless to change its energy policy because it is desperate to virtue-signal its “good global citizen” status in adherence to the Paris Agreement.

Compliance with Paris drives the billions of dollars in taxpayer-funded renewable subsidies, which means no new baseload power is being built. When unfavourable weather renders renewables powerless, our baseload power supply-demand shortfall sees us paying $14,500 per megawatt hour for electricity, as well as experiencing entirely preventable blackouts.

Electricity accounts for only 36 per cent of Australia’s CO2 emissions and we emit 1.2 per cent of global emissions. Even if one were to accept the unprovable — that CO2 emissions are changing the climate — if we ceased all coal-fired power it would make zero difference to the climate but plunge us into economic Armageddon. The antidote to this is a return to sensible energy policy. But are our politicians sensible?

Chris McCormack, Democratic Labour Party candidate, Victoria

Heartfelt thanks to Brian Fisher for calling out the patent dishonesty (or is it plain ignorance?) of the politicians who tell us that there will be no real pain in meeting emissions reduction targets (“Come clean on climate targets”, 21/2). It needed to be said; such a huge economic transformation must cost. But this doesn’t stop politicians, from the Left in particular, spinning it otherwise, and worse, for their constituency to believe them. Then when economic reality does bite, the same politicians will spin it that it is the fault of the “rich”, of business, miners, farmers, shareholders, retirees and so on, so that they then have scapegoats they can further fleece to help meet their ideological goals.

I acknowledge Fisher’s courage and sincerely wish him all strength to withstand the vitriol and abuse that can now be expected to be hurled in his direction.

A ndrew Lake, Edwardstown, SA

The progressives, typically ALP and Greens supporters, in our midst are quick to put labels on those who hold different views to their own, often calling such people “right-wing extremists”. Well, how many of us want to see our largest export industry, the coal industry, shut down with the direct and indirect loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs, many of them in regional Australia, and causing the decimation of state and federal budgets, for almost zero reduction in global emissions? How many of us want to worship at the questionable altar of human-induced climate change and see our power bills go through the roof?

Brian Barker, East Brisbane, Qld

What a madhouse we live in. Mining companies are hostage to “climate interests”, courts make decisions based on climate change propaganda rather than law and projects that are in our national interest are thwarted by rabid activists who reckon they should tell us how to live.

The energy supply has been destroyed by idiotic green energy schemes that don’t work and electricity is now a luxury item, not an essential service. As long as “tackling climate change” is the rationale for all decisions the situation is beyond fixing and the country is stuffed.

David Bidstrup, Plympton Park, SA

Until a year ago, I was a recipient of South Australia’s generous solar subsidy scheme which paid about 50c for every kilowatt fed into the grid (“Solar power must pay its way”, 21/2). My conscience got the better of me and I decided to pull out of that scheme, realising that non-solar households were heavily subsidising me. The scheme may have been a good idea initially, but with a 20-year lifespan it has become over-generous and unnecessary. If subsidies are to be given, they should be income tested. Renewable energy has to make sense economically.

Michael Schilling, Millswood, SA