Australia’s ‘Renewable’ Obsession Decimates Industry

Guest essay By Vijay Jayaraj

Australia’s “green energy” experiment has turned one of the most energy-rich countries into a high‑cost outlier that guts businesses that once anchored its prosperity. The claim that “renewables are cheaper” is a slogan for the propaganda of politicians and the marketing of green grifters who betray families and employers burdened by the bills.


Fall from Economic Stardom

Australia once held a competitive advantage that was the envy of the world, with power prices consistently below the average of OECD countries, which comprise 38 mostly successful economies. That advantage fueled its mines, factories and the standard of living. But is now gone.

But since the mid-2000s, while other nations managed their grids with varying degrees of competence, Australia’s electricity prices rose to being around 30% above the OECD average. This is a massive swing in competitiveness that no government spin can hide.

Driving Australia’s current trajectory is the mythical claim that so-called renewables – mainly wind and solar energy – are inherently cheap and that any short‑term pain will give way to lasting price declines.

However, long‑term data, both domestic and international, contradict that fable. The direct cost of wind and solar hardware has fallen, but the full system cost – including backup power, transmission and financial guarantees – has increased as their share in the mix grows. Politicians rarely highlight this distinction when they promise that “the sun and wind are free.” Although photons and breezes may cost nothing, converting them to electricity is difficult, land-intensive and expensive.

By 2020, Australia had recorded the largest residential price increase among the countries studied: 32% between 2010 and 2020 versus an 8% rise for the OECD. Over the same period, the generation mix shifted away from coal and towards weather‑dependent wind and solar.

Devastating Effect of High Power Prices
The effect on the economy has been a gradual die-off of Australian manufacturing. Energy inputs – both electricity and natural gas – are often the largest variable costs for heavy industry. Australia’s manufacturing share of the economy plunged to a record low of 5% of gross domestic product in 2025.

Smelters have announced closures as rising electricity costs render heavy industry unviable. BlueScope Steel warns that energy costs in Australia are now three to four times higher than in the U.S., undermining the country’s vision of a “Future Made in Australia.”

Large industrial players are weighing exit strategies. Orica, the world’s biggest manufacturer of mining explosives and agricultural fertilizers, and BlueScope Steel have both signaled that the current environment is untenable. They have threatened to relocate Australian facilities to the United States.

Local cafes, metal fabricators and family-owned grocers are besieged by unmanageable costs. In the Northern Territory, 43% of surveyed businesses listed energy prices as a major challenge. The pain spans the nation, with energy being listed as a critical hurdle by a third of businesses in New South Wales, Australian Capital Territory and Victoria and by more than a quarter in Queensland.

This pattern of destruction is not unique to Australia. In Germany – poster child for the “green” transition – 55% of electricity is generated from wind and solar, producing the highest power prices in the world and, according to some, “the worst industrial crisis since World War II.”

Denmark, with around 70% wind and solar in the power mix, made it to the top five on 2023 price charts. Defenders of the green agenda point to countries like Norway or Paraguay as proof that 100% renewables is possible. However, these claims rely heavily on generous hydro endowments that few locales enjoy.

The fact is no modern economy has achieved wind and solar shares of more than 40% without substantial price hikes. Yet the Australian government has a target of 82% by 2030. This is economically suicidal, a guarantee for blackouts and a death blow to what remains of manufacturing.

Australia has lost its way, captured by a false narrative that treats carbon dioxide as planetary threat and dismisses affordability as an afterthought. Without a change, the country will continue to pay unnecessarily high electricity prices, as economic wreckage accumulates – one factory, one small business and one household at a time.

Vijay Jayaraj is a Science and Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Fairfax, Virginia. He holds an M.S. in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia and a postgraduate degree in energy management from Robert Gordon University, both in the U.K., and a bachelor’s in engineering from Anna University, India. He served as a research associate with the Changing Oceans Research Unit at University of British Columbia, Canada.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
5 5 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
16 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Ronald Stein
April 16, 2026 10:07 am

American and European “green” leaders remain oblivious to reality that wind turbines and solar panels ONLY generate electricity.
 
They remain ignorant of the fact that wind and solar are incapable of making any of the more than 6,000 products made from the oil derivatives from crude oil, nor can wind or solar make any of the transportation fuels made from raw crude oil demanded by:
·       The world’s more than 400,000 military, private, and general aviation planes, with about 100,000 total flights occurring on an average day.
·       The world’s more than 100,000 merchant vessels.
·       More than 1.5 billion vehicles (including trucks/SUVs), representing roughly one vehicle for every five to six people, 

Denis
Reply to  Ronald Stein
April 16, 2026 12:39 pm

They only generate DC electricity erratically which must be converted to AC at the correct constant frequency and constant voltage to be useful to the grid. The “correct” and “constant” parts are both hard and expensive.

Reply to  Ronald Stein
April 16, 2026 1:15 pm

They also remain willfully ignorant about how a grid CANNOT be run on intermittent sources, and the worse-than-useless wind and solar equipment CANNOT be endlessly manufactured (required due to its pathetically short lifespan) without coal, oil and gas.

April 16, 2026 10:43 am

Norway also has woody biomass for energy – making up 5% of its total energy according to Google AI. Norway considers woody biomass to be a renewable energy and carbon neutral. Probably because it is. I don’t think it’s getting subsidies, but I’m not sure of that. Wood debris is sufficiently abundant that I suspect it’ll continue in use regardless of that nation’s carbon policies.

Yes, Norway has woody biomass power plants, though they represent a small portion (about 5%) of the country’s total energy production, which is dominated by hydropower. Woody biomass, including bark, wood chips, and forestry residues, is used primarily for district heating and combined heat & power (CHP) plants. 

Key aspects of woody biomass in Norway:

Use in Energy: Wood-based bioenergy supplies approximately 20% of heating in buildings and industry, with a significant amount of woody biomass used in combined heat and power plants.

Infrastructure: Major energy players like Statkraft utilize biomass for heating and power. Other examples include smaller, localized plants and companies like Norsk Biobrensel that convert biomass to energy.

Resources: The country has a high potential for increased bioenergy production from forest resources, with substantial unused logging residues like branches and twigs.

Export and Production: While some wood waste is exported to Sweden, Norway has pellet production capacity, and companies like Arbaflame are developing technology to replace coal with woody biomass pellets. 

John Hultquist
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
April 16, 2026 11:03 am

In the 1960s, in western Pennsylvania, I remember encountering piles of sawdust and other wood waste in places where sawmills had been for a number of years — and then moved to a new site. Then the industry consolidated and technology changed. The sawdust, bark, and limbs became “resouurces”. What a time to be alive.

Reply to  John Hultquist
April 16, 2026 12:58 pm

A saying of the Society of American Foresters is “wood is good”.

ResourceGuy
April 16, 2026 11:52 am

Maybe they saw Obama throwing money at all the loser renewable startups and well connected donors and the massive Paris Agreement promotion and thought that was really industrial/energy policy. When in fact it was just political party overreach on a massive waste of money scale. Next time ask the rational people before you leap.

April 16, 2026 1:06 pm

All part of the plan to undermine, discredit, and eventually replace capitalism.

mleskovarsocalrrcom
Reply to  Shoki
April 16, 2026 1:16 pm

Correct, climate has nothing to do with it.

Nick Stokes
April 16, 2026 1:19 pm

“But since the mid-2000s, while other nations managed their grids with varying degrees of competence, Australia’s electricity prices rose to being around 30% above the OECD average.”

Well, maybe. But you can’t blame renewables. From the cited report, the OECD makes less use of fossil fuels than Australia:

comment image

Reply to  Nick Stokes
April 16, 2026 1:57 pm

The NEM system is such that the price is set by the most expensive bid.

Batteries set the highest price, then gas peakers.

If Australia had built new coal rather than erratic wind and solar, then batteries and peakers would not be needed, nor would all the very expensive and complex grid infrastructure needed to cope with the vagaries of unreliable wind and solar.

When Australia had just good reliable coal and gas, with plenty of headroom, prices were stable and a lot cheaper.

It is the absolute idiocy of wind and solar that has pushed out reliable coal, and has sent Australia to the state where there is barely enough dispatchable electricity when it is most needed.

The cost to the grid and electricity supplies, is obvious.

YallaYPoora Kid
Reply to  Nick Stokes
April 16, 2026 2:58 pm

Renewables have their place just not in grid generation. The blame goes to lying scientists and ignorant politicians.

Chris Hanley
Reply to  Nick Stokes
April 16, 2026 3:40 pm

OECD share of electricity generation by source 2020:
Nuclear 17%, Fossil Fuels 52%, Solar 4%, Wind 9%, Hydro 15%, Combustible Renewables 3%.

Bob
April 16, 2026 2:06 pm

Australia’s government did all of this. Government should not be involved in energy production or transmission, Australia is proof.

Tony Tea
April 16, 2026 3:26 pm

Our manufacturing was on thin ice regardless of energy costs, but at 1% of global CO2 emissions we started out virtue signalling then finished ourselves off with virtue suicide.

Harry Durham
April 16, 2026 3:27 pm

Vijay’s optimism shows. When he noted that “…the Australian government has a target of 82% by 2030” he left out the ultimate “…goal is to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.”

In other words, the best worst is yet to come!