Essay by Eric Worrall
“… productivity … has deluded far too many of the economics profession’s conventional thinkers.”
Ross Garnaut: Prophet with a sunny vision of our glorious future
Ross Gittins
Economics Editor
May 12, 2025 — 12.15amEconomist Paul Krugman’s endlessly repeated maxim that “productivity isn’t everything but, in the long run, it’s almost everything” has deluded far too many of the economics profession’s conventional thinkers.
It’s a throwaway line that should be thrown away.
…
Fortunately, among the profession’s abundance of unproductive thinkers is a lone prophetic, and so productive, thinker, Professor Ross Garnaut, who sees not only how we can minimise the economic cost of the transition to clean energy, but also what we can do for an encore. What we can do to fill the vacuum left by the looming collapse of our fossil fuel export business (which, by chance, happens to be our highest-productivity industry).
…
It was Garnaut who first had the vision of transforming Australia into a “Superpower” in a world of ubiquitous renewable energy. And it was he who uncovered the facts that made this goal plausible.…
This would “generate export income for Australians vastly in excess of that provided by the gas and coal industries that will decline as the world moves to net zero emissions over the next few decades”.
Garnaut concludes: “The new industries are large enough to drive restoration of growth in Australian productivity and living standards after the dozen years of stagnation that began in 2013.”
Read more: https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/ross-garnaut-prophet-with-a-sunny-vision-of-our-glorious-future-20250511-p5ly7n.html
…
Funny how renewables, the allegedly cheapest form of energy, always seems to require accepting a lower standard of living during the transition.
The reality is expensive green products produced by renewables are never going to “generate export income for Australians vastly in excess of that provided by the gas and coal industries“, nor will they “drive restoration of growth in Australian productivity and living standards“.
The reason is, unlike Australia, the rest of the world accepts nuclear power as a zero carbon energy source.
Even renewable obsessed nations like Germany are happy to receive nuclear power from France when their fake German renewable energy system stops producing.
Given this acceptance of nuclear, goods which are more expensive than what can be produced by French zero carbon nuclear power, which in France sells wholesale for between €0.07 – €0.11 / kWH, simply won’t be competitive – especially when you add the cost of shipping goods all the way from Australia to the sale price.
Hydrogen fuel, if it ever becomes a serious option, will never be economical to export from Australia. It will always be cheaper to manufacture hydrogen using nuclear powered hydrolysis in-situ in the Northern Hemisphere, than producing hydrogen using Australian solar energy then transporting the hydrogen to Europe.
Even farfetched plans to run an undersea electricity cable from Australian solar plants to Singapore are dubious. Why would Singaporeans bother to buy intermittent Australian solar energy supplied via a 2300 mile undersea cable, when they can purchase endless 24 hour reliable zero carbon nuclear power from next door in Indonesia?
Singapore is a truly 24 hour city, they use a lot of energy at night, because many people run Aircon 24 hours, and it is too hot in daytime to do a lot of important economic activities.
Given the evidence renewables are a flat bust in terms of export and domestic manufacturing potential for Australia, in my opinion claims that renewables could form the basis of a future made in Australia manufacturing renaissance are nothing more than a cruel political fantasy.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
‘Funny how renewables, the allegedly cheapest form of energy, always seems to require accepting a lower standard of living during the transition.’
Well, that’s just socialism for you.
”…two of Marx’s great historical swindles. First, commerce and all human action can be scientifically engineered by a central authority to produce desired ends. Second, that the nobility of those ends in the indeterminate future justifies any and all means, potentially limitless suffering, in the present.”
https://mises.org/mises-wire/socialists-it-doesnt-matter-if-socialism-works-what-matters-power
As I remind people here occasionally, people who want to lower your standard of living are not your friends.
Here’s a concept that has been thrown away too many times:
Liberty.
Here’s some more:
Freedom. Competition. Skin in the game. Markets.
There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.
Mind Your Own Business.
Liberty , Freedom.
Do you not pay Direct Taxation where you live? How can you be Free if those in power know everything about you? Control 24/7 . Just try not to pay your Direct Taxes and find out how long you stay ‘Free’.
Your plastic money telling them when, where and what you are buying. Your mobile phone telling them where you are 24/7 . Most new cars tell where they are 24/7 and even tell them how fast you go. Smart Meters telling them if someone is at home and what devises you are using. Etc etc.
Those in power know more about you than you yourself.
Unfortunately, it’s not just Australia that has this ridiculous belief. . Its little cousin New Zealand is in lock step going backwards with Australia in rejecting nuclear.
“If you’re a climate change denier at the moment or even a minimalist, I just don’t understand how you can hold that position to be honest.” – The words of “conservative” New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon in 2023.
This nut case has spent his whole life coddled in the Government web of the Canberra bubble. He has never made anything. This foolish thinking is the reason productivity in Australia is in free-fall.
There’s a difference between accepting the technology and embracing it. Australia has banned nuclear energy, the rest of the world is ignoring it with a few exceptions notably China and to a lesser extent India. There are few countries actually building any nuclear power plants.
It doesn’t matter whether everyone is building nukes, what matters is whether they can pipe nuclear power from someone else. Access to nuclear energy is what is what will set the acceptable price for zero carbon energy.
Germany can ban nuclear power, because their grid is connected to France, which is a nuclear enthusiast. Ditto Britain, which receives substantial power from French nuclear plants lining the English Channel.
All of them might pretend renewables are a good idea, but so long as their green hypocrisy is backstopped by a real energy supply, there is no motivation for them to purchase goods produced by zero carbon energy which is more expensive than what they themselves can produce or purchase.
Real consumer purchasing decisions are made by ordinary people who have bills to pay. Australia can’t survive on the occasional purchase of a “pure solar” product by rich green dilettantes.
But only currently building one reactor.
Does Frances have a need to build more?
Google has just signed contracts for 3 SMRs.
Eric suggests
And Germany could use more support. So could Spain. Building only one suggests they’re not planning to increase their export capability.
That’s your opinion. Why do you think anyone should value it?
People can make up their own minds given the argument made. That’s how forums work.
Tim I get downvoted occasionally, it’s not a big deal – more an indication the audience doesn’t agree with your line of argument.
Returning to my original point, do you disagree with my argument that nuclear power is a cap on the acceptable price of zero carbon energy? If not why not?
I don’t think it matters one way or the other. What matters first and foremost is whether the public is prepared to support nuclear energy in their own backyards.
I’d support a close by nuclear plant way before I’d support a close by wind farm that will disturb my ability to sleep, raise my electric rates, and contribute nothing useful.
Only for Australia Tim – everyone else accepts nuclear next door if not at home.
Exactly. Arguments are admired by those who have no facts.
Does France need to build more reactors?
Google has just executed contracts for 3 SMRs.
With 6 at the proposal stage
Germany, Britain and Spain all Net Zero nuts depending on French nuclear. Shutting down their nuclear power plants. How hypocrite can you get.
Why the downvotes? He’s mostly right. While much of the rest of the world accepts nuclear power, few embrace it to the point of building new plants.
Like I said, what matters is if nations have access to nuclear power, even if the power plant is in another country. Access to affordable nuclear is a total showstopper for Australia’s dreams of becoming a renewable superpower exporter.
Good question. Voting here is about popularity, not being factual. If you are historically unpopular you get downvoted like Nick. If you say something people dont want to hear you get downvoted. Voting has nearly nothing to do with reality and says more about the downvoter than it does about the post.
Don’t expect everybody to agree with you. It’s not a popularity contest.
Well its certainly not based on factual statements. So what do you think drives voting if not popularity or facts?
You forgot to mention the 429 planned and proposed around the world to go along with the 65 or 66 currently under construction..
Plans For New Reactors Worldwide – World Nuclear Association
That’s a quote from your link. Where do you get 429 from?
Scroll down a bit or click on the link at the side that says “planned and proposed”
Even you should be able to do a simple addition…. 85 planned, 344 proposed.
That obviously cheers me up immensely. Thanks for the support.
Only joking.
One thing about down votes. It reveals someone read what was posted.
It’s true that not many countries are building new nuclear power plants, but that’s mainly because of intense green opposition. That green opposition is now withering under (long overdue) scrutiny, and more nuclear power plants are starting to be built. Hopefully the trend will continue.
And Jane Fonda (The China Syndrome).
Despite the fact that said movie ironically showed how SAFE nuclear power is, as opposed to it being the hypothetical advertised disaster.
There are currently 429 planned or proposed Nuclear Reactors around the world as well as 65 currently under construction.
Plans For New Reactors Worldwide – World Nuclear Association
Quote that number from your link.
Never mind. I see you’ve added in the massive number of proposed reactors from China and India from the second table.
The reference to the link did say “planned OR PROPOSED.” Nothing was “added in,” rather you *deducted* the “proposed” thereby understanding the interest in nuclear power.
Seems your enthusiasm for “facts” is selective.
Aka how to earn “downvotes.”
“Proposed” is next to worthless. Planned is better, but still not guaranteed. If nuclear energy increases drastically then great…but lets see it actually happen first. Right now its not.
And all the other proposed plants in other countries..
Nuclear looks like making a large surge. .
Nobody would be “embracing” worse-than-useless wind and solar absent the government’s Godzilla-sized foot on the scale.
No country with idiotic wind and solar “prioritization” by government fiat is attractive to build *ANY* type of dispatchable generation in, because it will simply be underused and not as profitable as it should be.
Story tip – Detroit showcases final 2 designs for solar arrays in neighborhoods
Excerpt – City of Detroit unveiled landscape designs Wednesday to convert a total of 61 acres in two eastside neighborhoods into solar “arrays,” or blocks of panels that generate electricity.
It’s part of the city’s plan to convert an estimated 165 acres in five communities into fields of solar panels. The panels eventually will produce enough clean energy to offset the electrical power used by 127 Detroit municipal buildings. The buildings will not be run on the solar energy, but rather the solar arrays are expected to equal the amount of electrical energy used by the buildings. The energy produced by the solar arrays will be fed into to the state’s power grid.
About 42 degrees North with high cloud cover throughout the year – should work great!
/s
Don’t be too harsh, the local street artists will be happy with receiving a new spray paint surface to decorate.
Yeah but it might “offset” the municipal building power consumption sometime before its operating life ends. Maybe. Once…or maybe in the aggregate. 🙄
Where will the panels be made !
Only in places with huge taxpayer and ratepayer subsidies and Leftist mandates or those with slave-like labor.
And most of the energy necessary for the production will be from coal.
They sure won’t be “imported from Detroit.” 😆😅🤣😂
165 acres is peanuts, just window dressing.
More like an eyesore.
I think someone was confused. I think they meant
… the solar arrays are expected to equal the amount of energy that is used to produce, transport, set up, connect to grid, maintain, and properly dispose of them in twenty-two years.
Of course the buildings will not be “run on the solar energy.”
NOTHING is – it’s always run by fossil fuels, nuclear, waste-to-energy or hydro in some combination with a solar “contribution” that can neither be counted on nor used independently without frequency modulation from the dispatchable sources.
In other words, it is a grid parasite that will “contribute” just *TWO THINGS* for sure.
REDUCED RELIABILITY AND HIGHER COSTS.
Gar-nought, is not a prophet.. he is profit-taker, from the Australia taxpayer.
Renewable superpower? Yeah. a superpower that depends on China for all its manufacturing.
The heart of the fantasy is building renewables will cause the manufacturing to shift back to Australia.
Except that manufacturing is basically impossible without access to fossil fuels . !
Gar-nought has always been an economic moron. !!
Including manufacturing of…
Windmills, solar panels, and batteries.
Which is a shock only to leftist Eco-Nazi idiots.
Yeah that’ll be right after it makes electric prices cheaper. Which it has never done. In any country, anywhere.
I don’t understand what is meant by this term ‘renewable super power’.
Superman could fly.
The Flash was very fast.
Aquaman can talk to fish and sharks.
Is ‘Renewable’ then analogous to being able to take a nap, at any time, and then feeling a little refreshed?
What good is being a super power, without true power (literal or figurative)?
It is a fantasy that Australia will come to dominate the global economy because with our vast deserts we’ll be able to produce more renewable energy than anyone else.
I think it boils down to a combination of “building useless crap” and the delusion that the useless crap will allow manufacturing to be performed without the necessary energy or materials.
Thus being a “leader” in running (as in “off a cliff”) a “renewable energy superpower.”
I wonder, what’s the opposite of “superpower”? Because that’s what you get when you go all-in with renewables.
Blackout?
If you don’t have a real super power then you are relegated to being a sidekick.
Sidekicks can be important too though, and the arch-evil types also have sidekicks, so they could be one of those. Like the Grinch’s dog, Renfield, or the 6 fingured swordsman (Count somebody).
Useful idiocy … not a super power, but maybe sidekick worthy.
Excusable. Super Power versus Super Hero.
what’s the opposite of “superpower”?
Unpowered?
A guy can lie all day long it won’t change the fact that wind and solar don’t work. Fossil fuel, hydro and nuclear do work. We have allowed these monsters to lie to us long enough, time to make them stop lying.
I’ll get the thumbscrews, you get the duct tape.
Maybe when the Aussies and the Kiwis are really starving we’ll be able to send modular nuke plants across the Pacific in containter ships that can be started up and connected to the grid in days.
Was this an Onion headline?
This kind of “newthink” is like claiming that businesses should stop using profits as a measure of success because that is such antiquated logic. “Who cares if a business ever makes any money for its investors?”
Ross Garnaut? 😆 when did he ever get a correct prediction?
One thing that Ross Garnaud clearly understands very well is that you can create jobs and increase GDP by breaking windows, and the more windows you break the more jobs you create and the more you increase GDP. Unfortunately, what Ross Garnaud clearly does not understand is that the number of windows is limited, whereas the amount of fuel available for energy is virtually unlimited and fuel-based energy can create much better jobs than repairing windows.
The rot with nuclear electricity is immense because ignorant people think that they are required to take part in the choice of electricity generation.
The consensus of the people is not required. For comparison, did the people have to agree to an aviation industry? Did they have to agree to coal mining, or to making electricity from coal?
No, no, no.
Technology advances from the input of people with sound, detailed knowledge and experience. New technology also faces economic barriers.
But, the general public has no useful knowledge of the technology and has nothing to contribute. The public is used by other unhappy, ignorant people named activists who are on a mission to stop peaceful nuclear use. They could not be used in this illegitimate manner if they simply said “Leave me out, thank you, the experts know best.”
There is a current hitch because ignorant, inexperienced folk named politicians also want to insert themselves in the approval process. They do this with laughable laws and regulations saying the political approval is required, by saying that it is illegal for people to embrace and commence a nuclear project without permission. Again, would aviation technology now exist if political permission was deemed to be required at its start?
Factually, so many countries have had working nuclear generators for decades that the technology is proven to work and to work economically. There is no more left to argue unless you have a mental deficiency. Yet politicians and folk on a mission continue to argue. Maybe they need a hard work challenge.
(I am experienced and knowledgeable about some aspects of nuclear. I once owned a private fast neutron generator, a tiny reactor in its own right, bought and operated legally without approval by politicians or the public. No humans were harmed by my nuclear actions).
I also did other nuclear stuff, by being involved in the management of the Ranger uranium resource, which was the biggest and richest uranium deposit then known to the world. To me, the routine adoption of nuclear electricity is a no-brainer because of its eminently successful history. So butt out, you trendy nothings with time on your hands to be stupid activists. Go pick on banning small white puppies, or whatever suits your twisted ideas for harming other people. Geoff S
The missing link: politicians & mental deficiency.
It would be far more accurate to say:
“… the Paris Agreement… has deluded far too many of the climate advocacy profession’s conventional thinkers.”
I wonder if Prof. Garneau realizes there used to be an automotive industry in Australia 10 years ago. Or that China has come to dominate automotive exports using cheap, reliable energy.
Fantasies are cheap – for the promoters, costly for victims of irresponsible politicians.
No doubt zero carbon is incredibly important to zero-carbon life forms.
What is the reason for this “zero carbon obsession”? Nobody seems to be prepared to say, explicitly.
Very strange.
Carbon was chosen over CO2 because it is easier to spoon feed to the masses.
Magical thinking, the same thing that got Carney elected here.
This is the kind of thinking that got Carney elected,
“Atavistic , visceral meme….what happened to a reasoned conversation, definition of terms, logic, and analytics?…Here’s one..Mark Carney has a solid career track record. Accomplishments academically and career wise….He evinced a deft control of diplomacy without appearing a servile flatterer or some sycophantic panderer to power. He showed everything you want in a leader. In earlier days he would be lauded. Now in the government by conspiracy theorists where there are no experts (internet scrolling killed that), and the death of truth eroded by the likes of Foucault is ironically embraced by people who were formerly mostly sane – in this topsy-turvy alternative reality, formerly reasonable people send out simplistic memes of a level of stupidity that their pre conspiracy selves would find incomprehensible…..”
This was the response to a meme ” Trump knows a Mark when he sees one”
Good God. What a bunch of utter crap Ross Gittins spews.
Now for some cheery climate change as the desert blooms-
Spectacular footage showcases outback tourism potential after floods | Watch
around Birdsville way and all the water heading for the inland sea of salt Lake Eyre –
Shire of Diamantina – Wikipedia
The land of drought and flooding rains finally finds Lake Eyre-
‘Amazing event’: Pilot describes floodwaters pouring into Lake Eyre
The Liberals had the opportunity today to elect a leader that would take them down the path of abandoning net zero and possibly continuing the nuclear progression, but instead they chose not to. So now at the next election we will essentially have two parties still heading down the same path to net zero and no real option for change. Pity, because I think offering the dumping of net zero, with sensibly explained economic reasons as to why, might have got them up in the next election. Anyway, the company I work for makes mobile concrete batching plants and we’re selling quite a few for wind farm applications..
Both Ross Garnaut and Ross Gittins are World-Class Morons whose time is past. Their type of non-thinking is why Australia is on the ropes.
It is amazing just how expensive ‘free energy’ can be.
Yes, the wind and the Sun are “free.”
The cost of collecting the low density energy from either is, to use typical British understatement, GIGANTIC.