Listen up deniers and right-wing nut-jobs! Our critical energy systems have been under attack for a couple of decades but the normies are starting to wake up. Can we finally break free of our climate chains?

First a definition. A ‘normie’ is usually taken to mean someone whose tastes, habits, lifestyle, etc. are mainstream or otherwise unremarkable. Here I extend that definition to encompass folks who have spent no time investigating why their electricity bills are climbing.

It’s been a long haul for those of us already awake to the unfolding catastrophe of emissions reduction policies. Many of us have been arguing for a change in direction for years with almost no effect. Every step forward is attacked by activism from supposedly independent bureaucracies, or hope from a political win is dashed on the rocks of Net Zero capitulation.

Hope springs with the rise of normies around the world: Argentina, the US, Canada, New Zealand, and maybe early 2025 here in Australia too. Our plight was noticed by American energy commentator Doomberg in his December article titled Power Down Blunder. Doomberg’s five recommendations will ring true with this audience:

…[1] political leaders in Australia must have an honest discussion with their fellow citizens about how meaningless their country’s carbon emissions are relative to the rest of the world. …[2] Australia must immediately put a moratorium on the construction of new wind and solar facilities, [3] halt its plans to waste billions of taxpayer money on clean hydrogen projects, and [4] make an abrupt shift toward embracing nuclear energy. …[5] develop gas resources in southern states

Clearly articulated and factual analysis like this is refreshing, and sometimes only possible by looking in from outside. Here in Australia we need to take heed, and take the time to look ahead at what is happening inside our own bubble. Forewarned is forearmed, and strategy is vital. Chris Uhlmann’s documentary The real cost of net zero is an important milestone in the public debate and is now available for free on YouTube.

You might get a laugh out of GetUp’s unintentionally hilariously titled Pro-Nuclear Disinformation in Australia Disinformation Analysis – RESEARCH REPORT that attempts to throw shade on good people like Adi Paterson, Dick Smith, and Will Shackel. I’m sure Will & co had a good chuckle at the inept result.

Speaking of inept, CSIRO’s latest draft GenCost was released on the same day the ABC scheduled Chris Bowen and Ted O’Brien to debate on the 7:30 report. Unfortunately for all those expecting Ted to be destroyed by the CSIRO’s findings, many analysts and commentators have GenCost by the proverbials and its regular shortcomings were no surprise to Ted by the time he got to the ABC studios.

AEMO – the market operator and initiator of unnecessary and expensive white elephant cost blowouts (I mean transmission projects) – have their own podcast to promote their version of the narrative. Spare yourselves, it’s as bad as you’d expect. Listen to mine instead – The Baseload Podcast.

The renewable narrative pushed by all and sundry – that more renewables will reduce electricity costs and improve reliability – is gaslighting in the extreme, and surprisingly easy to debunk. One simple fact-check is your electricity bill. Another more intellectual method is to consider the electricity supply chain and ask – which part of the supply chain (wholesale, networks, retail, environmental) is reduced by renewables? If you present this question to anybody claiming a high renewable system is a good idea, you will struggle to get a straight answer. It’s good fun, I recommend it.

But will the LNP’s nuclear plan lower retail electricity prices? Not directly in the next five years, but looking ahead there is a genuine a path to lower prices. This is in stark contrast to the alternative.

The most important factor in our bills over the last decade is the effect of gas price on the wholesale cost. With a resurgent US under President Donald Trump we can expect global gas prices to fall. Recall that during the 2020 lockdowns global gas prices fell due to low demand, and so did our wholesale electricity prices. The correlation between gas price and wholesale electricity is clear to see.

While reduced wholesale prices are an important factor in our retail bills, the total network cost is a bigger factor, and current plans championed by Chris Bowen, AEMO, and the CSIRO will increase the cost recovery from us consumers. If these projects go ahead they will wipe out any reduction in wholesale prices, locking in higher retail bills pretty much forever. The AER’s Clare Savage:

…significant proposed capital expenditure increases for many distribution networks which are on top of the billions to be spent on projects [transmission lines] that are critical to unlocking new sources of renewable energy to replace our aging and increasingly unreliable coal plants. I described this as a “wall of capex” coming at consumers that could more than offset the lower costs of wholesale energy as we make the switch to renewables unless we find ways to be more efficient. These network capex costs will be baked in not just for today but for many years to come.

What is not mentioned are the guaranteed cost blowouts that also need to be factored in. Who can forget QLD’s CopperString project that in 2023 attracted a $1.5 billion price tag, but after the recent QLD election is now costed at over $9 billion. This is hardly an optimistic outlook for electricity consumers, but if these white elephant projects are halted immediately, these future cost increases will not be baked in.

The side benefit of stopping expensive new transmission line projects is that very few new wind and solar projects will be developed. The naysayers in Teal and Green electorates will cry and whine, but those directly impacted primarily in Nationals regions will cheer. Looking ahead, this raises a question about what will ‘keep the lights on’ as the coal plants close. The obvious answer, and lived experience, is that coal plants will remain in service, a difficult proposition with massive volumes of rooftop solar destroying market share – this is the primary reason baseload generators are less profitable.

I suggest that nobody wants to force a private company to operate a loss-making asset for years. Similarly, we don’t necessarily want to take the easy option and nationalise any power station that wants to close. I propose instead that the existing three-year closure notification be modified to include a caretaker period, at the discretion of the government. This would require a subsidy, there’s no getting around it. But the subsidy can be tailored to benefit consumers.

The caretaker period I am proposing would guarantee the owner a return on their asset, but in return for an availability guarantee and a somewhat open-book relationship with the federal government on their costs. Taxpayers would provide the asset owner a clear return on their operation and maintenance costs. This caretaker period might last years, and might end up with every coal-fired power station on the books. Even so, it will still be cheaper than the renewables alternative. Plus it eliminates the ‘what keeps the lights on’ question, it secures jobs and grid stability, and it buys us time to fully consider the nuclear question.

Gas supply is another piece of the jigsaw, and again there’s no getting around the fact we need it, or that we’ve sold large volumes in advance. The best answer is two steps: more gas development especially in VIC and QLD in combination with a limited reservation scheme. QLD has never filled their LNG export terminals, and doing so will be attractive to the gas majors, even as export gas prices fall. Converting to LNG is expensive, and if global prices fall then excess spot cargoes may be more profitable sold domestically.

And who knows, if the normies continue their general awakening, then sometime in the next decade we might build another coal-fired power station and finally break free of these climate chains.