What if Australia had rejected net zero?

The massively expensive white elephant, Snowy 2.0, would never have been countenanced.

With no subsidies, electric cars would be more expensive. Assuming they eventually replace internal combustion vehicles, the experience of other countries as they deal with the issues of charging and range would be very informative.

With low energy prices, industries with significant electricity consumption would flourish. That includes not only steel, cement, plastic and fertiliser but also cryptocurrency mining and AI, both new high technology sectors.

The environment would be substantially better without the mass of wind turbines, solar farms and transmission lines. The clearing of pristine vegetation to erect wind and transmission towers has to be one of the worst examples of the hypocrisy of the renewable industry.

The budget would be in a much healthier state, not only due to a more robust economy with no electricity subsidies but also because of the additional excise revenue from coal and gas exports. The national debt would be lower and our ability to pay for a larger and more lethal military, to address potential threats, would be enhanced.

The World Economic Forum report says the transition to net zero will cost about $3 trillion a year. To hit net zero, it estimates that figure will need to rise to $13.5 trillion annually by 2030 and exceed $15 trillion every year from 2031 to 2050.

Australia should never have joined that treadmill. And it should certainly get off now.