Essay by Eric Worrall
$52 million of wasted taxpayer’s money which could have been used to improve hospitals or roads.
Energy Minister Chris Bowen’s green hydrogen plan unravels as taxpayers left out of pocket over failed hubs
The Albanese government’s green hydrogen dream has collapsed as three regional hubs have been abandoned after more than $52 million in grants were awarded to the failed projects.
Oscar Godsell Political Reporter
August 13, 2026 – 5:00AMThe Albanese government’s green hydrogen plan has suffered another major blow, as three flagship regional hydrogen hubs have been abandoned.
Information provided to News24.com.au in response to Senate Estimates Questions on Notice reveals the government paid $52 million to three failed hydrogen hubs.
According to the Department of Climate Change’s response – Kwinana, Gladstone and Townsville hydrogen hubs have been abandoned, despite receiving $52 million in grants.
The hubs were mutually terminated but the amount taxpayers will recover from the collapsed projects remains unclear.
The figures show $31.7 million was paid to the Kwinana hub, $19.3 million to Gladstone and $1.06 million to Townsville before the projects were abandoned.
…
[The Kwinana hub in Western Australia] It was supposed to produce more than 14,000 tonnes of green hydrogen a year and create 150 jobs.
Read more: https://www.news24.com.au/politics/australian-politics/energy-minister-chris-bowens-green-hydrogen-plan-unravels-as-taxpayers-left-out-of-pocket-over-failed-hubs/news-story/b70bd4371708f196a6f1a9ae22ed909c
…
I think our federal energy and climate change minister Chris Bowen genuinely expected these schemes to succeed, I mean if you’re going to pump money into a scheme you expect it to at least last beyond the next electoral cycle.
But green hydrogen was always a non starter – take ridiculously expensive renewable energy which already needs subsidies then put it through a process which through conversion losses eliminates half the energy content, effectively doubling the price of the already unaffordable final product. And that’s assuming the process works smoothly at scale, which it clearly doesn’t.
With scientifically illiterate true believers who think you can store energy like water in charge of the nation’s finances, such haemorrhages of taxpayer capital are inevitable. I suppose we should be grateful that in this case the loss of taxpayer capital wasn’t even worse.
And hydrogen sucks to work with in general.
Doesn’t really “suck” – it Blows thru any microscopic path it can possibly take. On top of that, read about “hydrogen embrittlement” and how much fun that creates for distribution as well….
Natural Gas Is FOUR Hydrogen atoms combined with ONE Carbon atom – to make it much more stable and vastly easier to transport.
Commercial hydrogen gas is primarily produced using thermal processes like steam-methane reforming (SMR) of natural gas, which accounts for roughly 95% of global production.
SOURCE
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
So why not just use natural gas in the first place?
That question has been asked many times but never answered.
This was meant to be green hydrogen. Some of those promised 150 jobs were involved in the painting of each molecule.
Apparently, the first 149 in the line were responsible for holding it still whilst the last one actually held the brush.
Reminds me of the Anderson’s Pea Soup cartoon characters lovingly splitting each pea with a hammer and chisel.
Hydrogen is used for many purposes, that natural gas cannot be used for.
The intention of green hydrogen is to use it as an energy carrier, and use it for say, transport or firing a furnace. Fundamentally different to the normal use of hydrogen in industry.
Not actually as an energy carrier (we have plenty of ways to do that) but as energy STORAGE, to store energy from wind turbines and solar when it exceeds the demand. Please see comments below on technological difficulties with this.
Green hydrogen was never green. And now it isn’t even hydrogen. Germany failed. Uk failed. And now Australia has failed. That is what usually happens to bad ideas—in this case, sooner better than later because less money got wasted.
How many different countries have tried to make socialism work?
The UK is trying very hard; this time it will work
Redge,
I trust that is tongue in cheek?
Of course, although some seem think I’m serious
Many many wealthy countries have mixed social-private economic system, including the US
socialism is everywhere in US throught out the food chain, the power system, the education , including higher education, and roading networks
What didnt work was pure communism, so the Bolsheviks invented Leninist- party-state system which thrives in Asia with government-capitalism and single party governments ( Mostly) in places like Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan, Malaysia, Singpaore. China is a single party government -private system
And all of those things are failing or bloated with fraud and bureaucracy, so how well are they really working?
Hydrogen gas is very difficult to deal with. To make it with electricity requires, as the article says, about half of the electrical energy put into the hydrolysis (hydrogen making) process. To compress the product more energy is required, much more than is required to compress comparable amounts of natural gas or other gasses. Pumping it to where you want it with hydrogen compressors is equally energy intensive. Containing it is also difficult because it is a tiny molecule that sneaks through some metals, most any minute gap such as gaskets, and embrittles others. When burned for some use, it provides much less energy than an equal volume of natural gas. All of these properties have been known for a hundred years or more yet some scammers proclaim their wondrous idea to politicians and other ignorant funders, collect lots of money, build some stuff while paying themselves very high salaries — and that is all you get. That is all you will ever get from hydrogen-as-energy scams. If simple ignorance and stupidity was a crime, lots of politicians would be in jail.
Don’t forget the huge energy lost in compression. The gas gets hot due to those damned physical laws. That heat is lost to the environment.
And then when you want to use the gas, you have to expand it, which cools the gas down. So you need to run the gas through a heating process just to allow it to be used.
There is a lot of energy lost in both sides of this compression cycle, for Hydrogen, it’s just not worth the effort. Much better to make methanol or ethanol, biology worked that out long ago.
You wrote: If simple ignorance and stupidity was a crime, lots of politicians would be in jail.
These scams are not based on simple ignorance and stupidity, those people are not that ignorance and stupid, look at how their personal wealth grows as they promote these scams. Subsidies for Green Energy are tools for rich and powerful people to become more rich and powerful, for those, the best interests of the citizens and the country are not worthy of serious considerations.
My observations & conclusions exactly as well, Herman.
+100
As is so often the case Sir Pterry got there first.
An exchange from “The Last Continent” (*) when the wizard Rincewind ends up in Fourecks (capital city Bugarup) :
.
(*) An obvious “parody / caricature” of the “Roundworld” island continent of Australia, first published back in 1998.
I am based near the antipode of Oz (western Europe), and don’t follow your “local” politics very closely. Maybe some of the locals can assure me (/ us) that in the intervening 28 years Australian politicians — excluding the “outlier” case of Chris Bowen, obviously — have evolved to being completely undeserving of such comic treatment …
When the flow of bullshit about alternative energy sources from Bowen et al is just a constant, a few $millions, even $billions here & there just get lost in the avalanche.
I’m with you Eric. Bowen must actually really believe the abject nonsense he spouts about “clean energy”.
The thought that anyone with a scintilla of basic human values would deliberately inflict the kind of financial pain on his fellow citizens is almost too dark to contemplate.
But I guess were seeing these kinds of outcomes from ingrained ideologies all too often these days 🙁
Poor fella my country, indeed.
“The thought that anyone with a scintilla of basic human values would deliberately inflict the kind of financial pain on his fellow citizens is almost too dark to contemplate.” This, the climate scam and almost all of the stupidity and evil going on in the world today can be attributed to the type of politician the people elect to lead them.
The people are not evil yet this is not apparent from their leadership. The culprits have to be ignorance and stupidity. Stupidity for electing representatives who cannot represent their own conscience and ignorance for not knowing the consequence.
The electorate is generally thick as… (add descriptor as you wish). If you were to talk to the average voter in Oz you’d be surprised just how thick they are.
One classic example, I spoke to a university educated, (science based degree), regarding electric vehicles. He was adamant that the cars should be able to continuously recharge themselves using the alternator, (like the one in a petrol powered car), driven by the wheels as the car moves down the road. I was sure that he was pulling my leg, but no, he meant it. The electric car battery should only need to start the car moving, then the alternator would keep everything running.
They walk amongst us. And they vote. Bowen relies on them.
Said person sounds like a natural Green Party candidate.
Was his ‘science based degree’ in agricultural science, political science or 12century basket weaving science?
Ag.
And I thought that would have helped. My bad.
Alleluia! A perpetual motion machine.
I had a nearly identical discussion with a Green Party hack some years ago, who thought it would be a great idea to put small wind turbines on electric cars, which would then no longer need to be charged. I quickly concluded that my cat Graeme had a better understanding of Thermodynamics.
It might work if you started at the top of Pikes Peak and didn’t have far to go.
Ha! I had a similar conversation with my college roommate (an intelligent econ major) in the early 70’s before they had even invented “renewables.” (And this even before I had studied engineering.) He thought a wheel lowered to the road to charge a battery would be a good idea. He could not wrap his head around that the alternator got its energy from drag on the vehicle that was greater than the energy obtained.
Thermo is a bitch.
Bowen is not young either. Wait till the current school leavers get into power. They have been brainwashed since starting school with these fantasies.
Bowen, (for all his shortfalls), at least had to forget anything scientific, the kids never knew it.
I’m not sure Bowen ever had the intellectual capacity learn it in the first place.
I’ve heard him described by people who worked under him when he was Immigration Minister that describing him as “dumb as a box of rocks” was insulting the intelligence of the rocks.
The Globalist plans continue apace. Western countries wasting money and resources with negative gain.
“a few $millions, even $billions here & there just get lost in the avalanche” And pretty soon you are talking real money.
Coal contains plenty of hydrogen, stabilized with carbon. Australia has a good supply of it.
It’s time to JUST STOP with this fashionable misconception that oxidizing the carbon stabilizer along with the hydrogen, thereby emitting CO2 with the H2O, is capable of causing harm to “the planet.”
There.
If you really need to use Hydrogen and transport it, then coal is not the best source, by weight.
If you want a good hydrogen store go for the lighter alkanes. Or for liquids at room temperature, the lighter alcohols.
Coal can be burned hot and clean, the particulates can be filtered out, we should burn coal to help make our natural gas and oil last longer. Climate change is natural, the natural factors have always limited the temperature and sea level bounds, the recent ten thousand years have been more tightly regulated than any time in history, going back thousands, millions, billions of years, the powerful self-correcting regulation that has worked forever is not violated by a man-made trace gas. Factors that changed to reduce the huge excursions in Climate over the past million years to the more narrowly bounds of the recent ten thousand years is much too powerful to even notice man and our influence on CO2, with a tiny fraction of influence on a huge natural process. The natural exchange of CO2 between the oceans, all the water on land, the green plants is orders of magnitude more than the man-made influence. Hansen and Gore said Wall Street would be flooded by now. High water levels at high tide at the Statue of Liberty is about where it was a hundred years ago, sea level is rising more and more rapidly, everywhere that is not well documented, places everyone can see do not seem to have a problem. Yes, places that are subsiding do have rising water relative to sinking land, that is hugely powerful to feed the alarmism, but that is not an indicator of overall rising sea levels. Length of Day has decreased since 1972, less and less leap seconds were added each decade, no leap seconds have been added since 2016, a decade of no significant change in length of day, so no significant change in the inertia of the crust of the earth, so no significant change in sea levels. A rising sea level will increase the inertia of the crust of the earth, that will slow the spin rate of the crust of the earth, that will require more and more leap seconds to be added each year. If any one tells you the sea levels are rising, the sea level rise is accelerating, if no leap seconds have been added, they are clearly lying or mistaken.
The politicians mostly very left leaning apparently have no interest in investigation, observation, critical thinking and other skills that lead to actual science based conclusions. And they don’t look at history. They seem unaware that the vast majority are very unconcerned by “climate change”.
In the US the left leaning politicians are basically the same and I read there is another lawsuit that wants to overturn the windmill debacle.
They also side with the LBGT+ people who want to groom kids and present their delusions to kids in schools, libraries and other places. The vast majority don’t want this crap.
They also make the Trans issue a major thing which most people think is a mental illness. I don’t know what motivates females to think they can become males. Maybe with males is because the bits hanging between their legs is the size of a Vienna sausage? Just speculating of course.
The leftist mindset depends on peoples lack of understanding of science and history. They also depend on people not bothering to question statements.
I had one brainwashed individual, nominally intelligent but conditioned to follow the narrative, make a statement that didn’t sound correct to me. The next day I presented the factual information to him and his first exclamation was surprise that I would care enough to question and investigate his statement.
These morons depend on people being complacent and uninformed.
And as for Bowen’s ridiculously ignorant comments about storing electricity, like storing water….
Warragamba Dam has something like 7 years of water storage capacity for Sydney (5.6 million people)
Let’s see the battery with 7 years electricity storage for Sydney. !
The guy is a complete moron. !
Well, there ARE some basic similarities between bulk water storage dams and electricity storage in batteries –
once demand necessity makes you draw them way down with no guaranteed replenishment in sight, you’re at the mercy of the gods as to when then get filled up again.
Bowen should have looked at the histories of dried-up dams, reservoirs and lakes before he opened his stupid gob.
Lake Eyre could have served as a reference point for him –
Lake Eyre is normally dry; it fills completely only an average of twice in a century, but partial, minor fillings happen much more often. When completely filled (as in 1950, 1974, and 1984), the lake takes about two years to dry up again. Lake Eyre is in a region of very low and intermittent rainfall amounting to less than 5 inches (125 mm) annually.
https://www.britannica.com/place/Lake-Eyre
What he said: We store water, so we can store energy from renewable projects.
We have no alternative to storing water, we do not control the supply.
For energy, we can generate reliable, adequate energy, 24/7, that has been done for decades.
To destroy reliable 27/7 reliable energy generation and replace it with intermittent wind and solar and almost nothing storage is beyond stupid.
I did not mention hydrogen because it is an order of magnitude more expensive, and more dangerous, I mention it now. NASA has had problems containing hydrogen, I do not want my neighbors or my utility companies playing around with it.
In 2023, a huge deposit of white hydrogen (up to 250,000,000 tonnes, according to some estimates) was discovered in the French town of Folschviller, in Moselle. That seems rare enough to be worth noting. I don’t know what to make of natural hydrogen. Are those 250,000,000 tonnes enough to make extraction economically viable? Do we have the infrastructure and technologies needed to exploit it? I have no idea. But since Folschviller is really not far from where I live, and given that Lorraine (which includes the Moselle department) was devastated by the decline of the steel industry, I wouldn’t be unhappy if my region got a fresh start… Forgive my bluntness, but there really are some places around here that are depressing enough to make you want to shoot yourself. That’s deindustrialization for you!
It would still need to be compressed and cooled to -253ºC for transport and storage, a very costly exercise.
Perhaps the hydrogen could be burned on site in a turbine to generate electricity.
The simple proof of failure for green hydrogen as an energy store is to set up solar panels to run the hydrogen through day and store hydrogen for night time use to keep the plant producing 24/7.
The end result is no output because the plant consumes more hydrogen at night than it can produce through the day.
The plant designed for the Pilbara planned to use batteries to keep the plant running over night. That has net hydrogen output but the price of the hydrogen to get a return on capital is enormous.
Testing done in South Australia demonstrated that the electrolysers could tolerate daily shut down so the idea of just running the plant when the sun is shining is an option. But tracking solar in south Australia will give about 25% capacity factor. That means the electrolysers are running at only 25% of their potential. A lot of capital tied up spending most of its time producing nothing.
If you pile enough solar panels on you’ll be able to produce hydrogen. But the cost is beyond absurd. If you try to make it self sufficient, so hydrogen is used to manufacture replacement components including solar panels, I have no idea what the cost / output economics are but I’m sure they would be entertaining.
It’s the antimatter of due diligence.
So where is Nick to prove that spending twice the money for a third of the energy is going to save the planet?
While ignoring all the coal, oil and gas that will be used to mine and refine raw materials, manufacture, erect on site and haul to landfills the serial replacements for all the worse-than-useless wind and solar “collection” apparatus, of course.
Australia is currently cursed with a Minister who steadfastly declares that alternative energy is free, that green energy is the cheapest form of energy. Seriously. Repeatedly.
We have no idea whether he is an inveterate liar or he is a complete numbskull.
Maybe he is both.
Both.
I heard he was as smart as the average invertebrate too.
Bowen, our prize slug.
Anything our idiot Chris Bowen touches turns to custard. I honestly don’t know whether he actually believes all this cr@p but I do know that it is never his money that is pi55ed against a wall, always taxpayers’ money.
Yes maybe that would finally put an end to it – make all those politicians getting rich on the backs of the taxpayers personally fund the “green energy” boondoggles they want to push, *without* any bailouts.
Australia has plenty of coal that it exports to China.
Australia is pretending the CO2 in China has no effect in Australia.
NEW MINE-MOUTH COAL ELECTRICITY LESS COSTLY, AVAILABLE NOW, NOT PIE IN THE SKY, LIKE EXPENSIVE FUSION AND SMALL MODULAR NUCLEAR
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/coal-electricity-less-costly-available-now-not-pie-in-the-sky
Wind/Solar electricity is at least 3 times more expensive than coal electricity.
US utilities are forced to buy offshore wind electricity for about 15 cents/kWh.
That price would have been 30 cents/kWh, if no 50% subsidies.
.
Hidden Costs: These are the A-to-Z costs (windmill to land fill) almost all folks are kept ignorant about.
At a future 25-30% W/S annual penetration on the grid, based on UK and German experience:
– Onshore grid expansion/reinforcement to connect far-flung W/S systems, about 2 c/kWh
– A fleet of traditional power plants to quickly counteract W/S variable output, on a less than minute-by-minute basis, 24/7/365, which means more Btu/kWh, more CO2/kWh, more cost of about 2 c/kWh
– A fleet of traditional power plants to provide electricity during 1) low-wind periods, 2) high-wind periods, when rotors are locked in place, and 3) low solar periods during mornings, evenings, at night, snow/ice on panels, which means more Btu/kWh, more CO2/kWh, more cost of about 2 c/kWh
– Pay W/S system Owners for electricity they could have produced, if no curtailment, about 1 c/kWh
– Importing electricity at high prices, when W/S output is low, 1 c/kWh
– Exporting electricity at low prices, when W/S output is high, 1 c/kWh
– Disassembly on land and at sea, reprocessing and storing at hazardous waste sites, about 2 c/kWh
Total: 2 + 2 + 2 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 2 = 11 c/kWh
.
Offshore wind full cost of electricity FCOE = 30 c/kWh + 11 c/kWh = 41 c/kWh, no subsidies
Offshore wind full cost of electricity FCOE = 15 c/kWh + 11 c/kWh = 26 c/kWh, with equivalent of 50% subsidies
This compares with 7 c/kWh + 3 c/kWh = 10 c/kWh from existing gas, coal, nuclear, large reservoir hydro plants.
Some values increase due to inflation and as more W/S systems are added to the grid.
.
Such expensive W/S electricity would have made the US even less competitive in world markets.
Any US tariffs on the European/Chinese supply of W/S systems would greatly increase their turnkey capital costs/MW and their electricity costs/ kWh.
.
Here is an example of the lifetime cost of a coal plant
Coal gets very little direct subsidies in the US.
The key is running steadily at 90% output for 50 years, on average
.
Assume mine-mouth coal plant in Wyoming; 1800 MW; turnkey-cost $10 billion; life 50 y; Capacity factor 0.9; no direct subsidies; Wyoming coal, low-sulfur, no CO2 scrubbers needed; efficiency 0.4
Annual production = 1,800,000 kW x 8,766 h/y x 0.9 = 14,200,920,000 kWh
Coal heat value = 2000 lb/US ton x 8600 Btu/lb = 17,200,000 Btu/US ton
Year 1 coal cost = 14,200,920,000 kWh/y x (3412 Btu/kWh/0.4)/17,200,000 Btu/US ton x $15/US ton = $105,639,983/y
Year 1 O&M and other costs = 3 c/kWh. See Note.
Annual revenue, 14,200,920,000 kWh x $0.078/kWh = $1,107,671,760/y
Payments to bank, $5 billion at 6% for 50 y; amortized at $316 million/y x 50 y = $15.8 billion
Owner investment, $5 billion at minimum of 10% for 50 y
Standard inflation of coal, electricity, O&M at 3.0 %/y
Year 1 electricity price $0.078/kWh
Project cashflow for 50 years
.
Per google AI, the owner’s initial cash-on-cash yield starts at a strong 5.55% in Year 1. Because the bank debt stays entirely static while operating profits increase via inflation, your cash yield crosses the 10.00% mark by Year 11 ($514.8M) and hits 44.18% by Year 50. This shifts the entire 50-year weighted return profile to a 10.04% exact IRR.
The Owner can deduct interest on borrowed money, and can depreciate the entire plant over 50 y, or less, which helps him achieve his 10% return on investment.
Those are general government subsidies, indirectly charged to taxpayers and/or added to government debt.
.
NOTE:
Fixed O&M (labor, maintenance, insurance, taxes, land lease)
Variable O&M (water, chemicals, lubricants, waste disposal)
Fixed + Variable, newer plants 2 c/kWh, older plants up to 4 c/kWh
.
Traditional Nuclear has similar economics; life 60 to 80 y; CF 0.9 in the US.
.
For perspective, China used 2204.62/2000 x 4300 = 4740 million US ton in 2024.
China and Germany have multiple ultra-super-critical, USC, coal plants with efficiencies of 45% (LHV), 42% (HHV)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/ultrasupercritical-plant