logo
Australians choose batteries over nuclear after election fought on energy

Australians choose batteries over nuclear after election fought on energy

When Peter Dutton unveiled his party's nuclear energy plan last year, it opened up a seismic difference between the two major parties.
It offered a real choice for Australian voters over the future of the country's energy policy.
"I'm very happy for the election to be a referendum on energy, on nuclear, on power prices, on lights going out, on who has a sustainable pathway for our country going forward," he said.
Taken on those terms, Saturday's election outcome was an endorsement of renewable energy over nuclear.
"It's clearly a referendum on energy policy, given the prominence of energy throughout the entire election campaign," the Clean Energy Council's CEO Kane Thornton said.
"
I think it's an emphatic victory for Australia's transition to clean energy.
"
Australia's energy market operator estimates nearly 80 per cent of homes will be powered by rooftop solar by 2050.
(
ABC News: Briana Shepherd
)
At a household level, Labor offered a significant discount on home batteries to accompany the booming solar on rooftops all across the country, aiming to get 1 million batteries installed under the scheme by 2030.
The last election saw a new generation of independents join the parliament, riding a wave of climate concern. Any expectation that the "teals" were a single-election trend has been dispelled, with most of them set to be returned, and new ones joining their ranks.
Photo shows
An illustration of climate change for the Australian Federal Election 2025.
While Labor policies have made some progress to decarbonise, the Coalition threatens to scrap or weaken them.
While the Greens have an anxious wait ahead to see how many lower seats they'll win, they recorded their highest-ever primary vote and will hold the balance of power in the Senate with 11 senators.
After losing Liberal heartland to the teals last election, the Coalition decided to pitch instead to the outer suburbs.
But the decision to campaign against renewables, and scrap climate policies such as the EV tax breaks, seems to mismatch the views of middle Australia.
Outer suburbs embrace solar
Dutton set out to make up gains in the outer suburbs by offering a discount on the fuel excise. But the data for solar uptake and electric cars paints a very different picture to the caricature of solar and batteries as a plaything for the inner-city.
While energy may not have been a top concern for voters, it's the outer suburbs where our love for rooftop solar is at its highest, especially in Queensland and Western Australia.
In Dutton's former electorate of Dickson, some 60 per cent of households have a solar system, double the national average, according to data from the Clean Energy Regulator.
It's these same areas where the uptake of household batteries is likely to be highest, with one-third of new household solar installations now including a battery, according to data from the Clean Energy Council.
Photo shows
A man leaning on a car.
Nanda, who lives about 60km from Melbourne's CBD, says he's saved up to $6,000 a year thanks to switching to an electric car.
Labor offered these households, and others looking to invest in solar, a discount of 30 per cent for home batteries.
Despite the data on solar uptake, Dutton characterised Labor's battery plan as a subsidy for wealthy households.
Similarly, the Coalition's attacks on support for electric cars could have hurt them more in the outer suburbs, where EV uptake is the highest as drivers look to pocket savings on their commute.
Anti-renewables rhetoric didn't flip seats
Beyond the suburbs, the Coalition also swung behind anti-renewables campaigners in an attempt to pick up regional seats where offshore wind farms are being proposed
But this tactic also appears to have fallen flat.
The issue doesn't look to have flipped any seats, with the majority of electorates with offshore wind proposals actually seeing a swing away from Liberal and National Party candidates opposing projects.
Along the New South Wales coast, those seats included Newcastle, Paterson and the ultra-marginal seat of Gilmore.
The swing wasn't uniform — Liberal MP Dan Tehan held off a strong independent to hold onto his seat of Wannon in south-west Victoria, with both candidates expressing concerns over community consultation of an offshore wind project.
And in the seat of Whitlam, which takes in the coastal city of Wollongong, Labor saw a swing of about 3 per cent against it, not enough to make a dent in the safe seat, and possibly due to long-serving MP Stephen Jones retiring.
Despite years of mis- and disinformation in these areas, Thornton says voters saw through these campaigns.
"Clearly there was some pretty ferocious, anti-renewables campaigning in different parts of the country.
"A lot of that was built on some really dodgy misinformation and disinformation campaigns.
Protesters gathered at Parliament House in Canberra last year for the Reckless Renewables rally.
(
ABC News: Jessica Davis
)
ANU associate professor Rebecca Colvin says the election results backed a growing body of research that shows support for renewable energy is high in both regional and metro areas.
But she said that many Australians believed support in regional parts of the country was much lower than the reality.
"There is heaps of evidence that most people in Australia, whether they're in the city or the country areas, want to see action on climate change and are supportive of renewable energy," she says.
"And that, in general, most people also underestimate those levels of support."
Many of the 30,000 Your Say respondents highlighted nuclear power and the Coalition's anti-renewables stance as a vote changer.
Despite the overwhelming support for renewables the election results seems to indicate, Colvin said concerns from communities impacted shouldn't be dismissed.
"There is potentially rhetoric that emerges, in spaces of public commentary or amongst advocates that say this election is a mandate for renewables, that's probably reasonable," she said.
"But to not allow that to become, dismissive … we still need to grapple with how to do this the right way and how to work respectfully with the people who are needing to host the infrastructure."
Community concerns about renewable energy projects should not be dismissed.
(
ABC News: Jessica Davis
)
Colvin says the more constructive debate now is how to get the transition to renewables right and support communities impacted.
"
If we're no longer debating is it renewables or is it nuclear, for instance, it might open up the basis for a debate about how to do renewables well.
"
Transition to renewables locked in
The debate over Australia's energy future hasn't just confused voters, it also threatened to dampen investor confidence in the renewables sector.
Photo shows
A chart shows the breakdown of energy generation over the course of a day, including coal, gas and renewables
Our energy system is evolving at breakneck speed. Here we look at how our power grid works, what more renewables mean for energy prices, how nuclear fits into the picture, and how we might build a grid fit for the future.
Whereas the Labor Party had introduced a number of policies intended to bolster renewables investment, the Coalition's nuclear pathway would have cut that support and effectively limited the overall amount of renewable energy required in the grid.
"It provides a lot of certainty for investors … what it means is continuity of policies that the government put in place over the past three years," Thornton said.
"
I think that gives investors some longer-term confidence that some of the policy wars and the silly politics we've had on clean energy over many years, that hopefully we're putting that behind us.
"
The Clean Energy Council's Kane Thornton.
Labor has set the target of 82 per cent renewable energy by 2030, compared to the current rate of 40 per cent. The challenge will now be for the government to ensure those targets are met and capacity is added as the country's coal-fired power stations are decommissioned.
More ambitious policy going forward
Frank Jotzo, the director of the ANU's Centre for Climate and Energy Policy, believes Labor's overwhelming majority could pave the way for more ambitious policies.
"With Labor having won this election in a landslide, there is every opportunity and arguably also a mandate for comprehensive and ambitious climate change policy in in this period of government," Jotzo says.
By not locking in a 2035 emissions target before the election, Jotzo says the government has given itself wriggle room to embrace stronger policy settings.
ANU's Centre for Climate and Energy Policy Professor Frank Jotzo.
"The Climate Change Authority has indicatively suggested a range of 65 to 75 per cent emissions reduction by 2035," he says.
"That would be a very significant ramp up from the rates of reduction inherent in the existing 43 per cent target for 2030."
Now that the election is over, Jotzo expects a "minor flood of climate related documents" to be released by various federal government departments, including a much-anticipated national climate risk assessment.
While the federal government's focus in its first term was on transitioning the electricity sector, Jotzo says it's important it starts targeting other industries as well.
"More needs to be done to accelerate the building of public transport and electrification of transport," he said.
"Meaningful action will need to be taken in agriculture, there is tremendous opportunity for Australia to build up clean green low emissions agriculture production."
With a record majority, a large climate-focused crossbench and the Greens holding the balance of power in the Senate, there'll likely be no shortage of scrutiny on the government's climate agenda.
The election may pave the way for more ambitious climate targets.
(
Reuters: Jason Lee
)
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Michelle Grattan: Sussan Ley must fill net zero void if Coalition scraps 2050 target
Michelle Grattan: Sussan Ley must fill net zero void if Coalition scraps 2050 target

West Australian

time4 minutes ago

  • West Australian

Michelle Grattan: Sussan Ley must fill net zero void if Coalition scraps 2050 target

There's no other way of looking at it: Sussan Ley faces a diabolical situation with the debate over whether the Coalition should abandon the 2050 net zero emissions target. The issue is a microcosm of her wider problems. The Nationals, the minor party in the Coalition, are determined to run their own race on most things. The Liberals have become akin to two parties, split between those eyeing urban seats and younger voters, and right-wingers reflecting the party's conservative grassroots. Nobody misses the contrast. The Albanese Government is beset by a host of actual issues around the transition to a clean energy economy. The renewables roll-out is not going as fast as desirable and is meeting with resistance in some communities. Energy costs are high. But such problems are not putting any pressure on Labor's unity. At the same time, the Opposition is fractured over an argument about a target that's a quarter of a century away, when who knows what the technological or political landscape will look like. For the Opposition, the internal debate about net zero is about symbols and signals, rather than substance. The net zero debate exploded within the Opposition this week with Barnaby Joyce's private member's Bill to scrap Australia's commitment to it. The timing, in Parliament's first week, was extraordinarily inconvenient for Ley. But if not now, it would have erupted later. On present indications, the Nationals appear likely to ditch the net zero commitment. David Littleproud, anxious to avoid the issuebecoming a threat to his leadership, is reading the party room and positioning himself to be in the anticipated majority. Asked on Thursday whether he supported net zero, Littleproud told the ABC, 'well, I have real concerns about it, to be candid. What net zero has become is about trying to achieve the impossible, rather than doing what's sensible.' But, he insisted, 'we're not climate deniers'. It is less clear how the debate will pan out in the Liberal Party, once the group under shadow energy minister Dan Tehan produces itsreport on energy and emissions-reduction policy. Liberal sources say the issue is now being driven by the party's grassroots, rather than the parliamentary party. Branches are throwingup motions to get rid of the 2050 target. The WA Liberal State council will debate a motion this weekend to drop the net zero commitment. The Queensland LNP organisation will consider its position next month. A few weeks ago, the South Australian Liberal State council rejected net zero. With a policy review underway, Ley and the parliamentary Liberals have left a vacuum on the issue. Some Liberals warn the parliamentarians risk being run over by the party outside Parliament. Others point out that on policy, the parliamentarians are independent of the organisation, which often comes up with right-wing motions. How should Ley best handle the situation? By filling the vacuum with a position sooner rather than later. That means accelerating the Tehan report. Beyond that, ideally she should be taking leadership on the issue herself. But is she in a strong enough position to do that? One idea being floated would be for the Liberals to retain the net zero target but extend the time frame. This wouldn't stop thecriticism about the shift. Whether the Coalition could stay as one if its two parties had different positions on net zero may be an open question but itcertainly would be messy. On the other side of politics, the Government is rapidly approaching a decision on another key target — the one Australia will put upinternationally for cutting emissions by 2035. Inevitably, this will be contentious. This target must be submitted by September. Minister for Climate Change and Energy Chris Bowen has yet to receive advice on the target from the Climate Change Authority. The target is expected to be between 65 per cent and 75 per challenge will be to strike a target with sufficient ambition that doesn't alienate business and the regions. Next week the executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Simon Stiell, will be in Canberra for talks. His comments will be carefully watched. Last year he told the Sydney Morning Herald, 'the world needs countries like Australia to take climate action and ambition to the next level'. Climate and energy issues will have a place at next month's economic reform roundtable. Bowen is organising two preliminary roundtables — on electricity, with energy user stakeholders, and on climate adaptation. He told The Conversation's podcast that adaptation will 'be an increasing focus of this Government and future governments because, tragically, the world has left it too late to avoid the impacts of climate change'. The Government is waiting, somewhat impatiently, for the decision on whether Australia will be given the nod to host next year's UN climate conference. The COP meeting, which would be in Adelaide in November 2026, is an enormous event to put on, so the decision is becoming urgent. Bowen says Australia already has the numbers over Turkey, the other contender. But 'one of the things about the process to decide COPs, I've learnt, is it's quite opaque and there's no particular timeline and no particular rules to the ballot. 'It's meant to work on a consensus, (a) gentlemanly sort of approach to say whoever loses will withdraw. That's not the way it's panning out. I've had multiple meetings with my Turkish counterpart to try to find a 'win-win' solution. We haven't been able to find that yet.' Stiell's trip includes Turkey as well as Australia. Bowen will hope he may provide some clarity, when they meet, about how the 'opaque' process of assigning the COP meeting is going. Bowen will be emphasising how important the proposed co-hosting COP with the Pacific is to the region, with climate change already an existential issue for many Pacific countries.

REVEALED: The surprising WA suburb to spend the most online
REVEALED: The surprising WA suburb to spend the most online

Perth Now

time4 minutes ago

  • Perth Now

REVEALED: The surprising WA suburb to spend the most online

Cost of living pressures? Not in Mandurah… residents of the 6210 postcode spent the most online in WA and were one of the top spenders in the country during the end-of-financial-year online shopping boom. Australians spent $19.2 billion online in the last quarter as the anticipation of interest rate cuts and easing inflation sparked a surge in end-of-financial-year shopping, according to Australia Post's latest Quarterly eCommerce Report. The top shopping suburbs in WA were Mandurah, Success and Wanneroo. Mandurah was in the top five locations for online shopping Australia-wide. From April to June this year, there was a 15 per cent increase in online spending with 7.9 million Australian households shopping online. Australians spent $4.2 billion through online marketplaces, food and liquor attracted $3.9 billion in online spending, followed by $2.7 billion spent on fashion. Millennials contributed $6.9 billion to online shopping, and appeared to have the most discretionary spending of any generation, followed by Gen X ($5.3 billion) and Gen Z ($3.4 billion). Gen Z saw the biggest increase of any generation, seeing a 16% growth since last year. Toowoomba (QLD), Mackay (QLD), Bundaberg (QLD), Point Cook (VIC), and Mandurah (WA) shopped the most online. Australia Post general manager Chelsea O'Reilly said consumer behaviour has shifted when it comes to how they shop online. 'With inflation cooling and consumer confidence returning, we're seeing more Australians shop online, with higher expectations,' she said. 'Shoppers are spending more, but they're also expecting more in the way of speed, convenience and value. 'Retailers that put the customer experience first, through faster delivery and more flexible options will stand out in an increasingly competitive landscape'. To learn more about online shopping trends and consumer insights, visit:

US steaks on the barbie: Trump smug on Aust beef u-turn
US steaks on the barbie: Trump smug on Aust beef u-turn

The Advertiser

time2 hours ago

  • The Advertiser

US steaks on the barbie: Trump smug on Aust beef u-turn

US President Donald Trump has applauded Australia's relaxation of import restrictions on American beef, adding that other countries that refuse US beef products are on notice. Australia on Thursday said it would loosen biosecurity rules for US beef, something analysts predicted would not significantly increase US shipments because Australia is a major beef producer and exporter whose prices are much lower. Australia plans to take US beef for the "first time," Trump said in a post on Truth Social on Thursday, calling it a "very big market". Canberra has restricted US beef imports since 2003 due to concerns about bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or mad cow disease. Since 2019, it has allowed in meat from animals born, raised and slaughtered in the US but few suppliers were able to prove that their cattle had not been in Canada and Mexico. Last night, in another post, Trump said the US would "sell so much to Australia because this is undeniable and irrefutable Proof that US Beef is the Safest and Best in the entire World." "The other Countries that refuse our magnificent Beef are ON NOTICE," the post continued. Trump has attempted to renegotiate trade deals with numerous countries he says have taken advantage of the United States – a characterisation many economists dispute. "For decades, Australia imposed unjustified barriers on US beef," US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said in a statement, calling Australia's decision a "major milestone in lowering trade barriers and securing market access for US farmers and ranchers". Australia is not a significant importer of beef but the United States is and a production slump is forcing it to step up purchases. Last year, Australia shipped almost 400,000 metric tonnes of beef worth $US2.9 billion ($A4.4 billion) to the United States, with just 269 tonnes of US product moving the other way. Australian officials say the relaxation of restrictions was not part of any trade negotiations but the result of a years-long assessment of US biosecurity practices. On Wednesday, Australia's agriculture ministry said US cattle traceability and control systems had improved enough that Australia could accept beef from cattle born in Canada or Mexico and slaughtered in the United States. The decision has caused some concern in Australia, where biosecurity is seen as essential to prevent diseases and pests from ravaging the farm sector. "We need to know if (the government) is sacrificing our high biosecurity standards just so Prime Minister Anthony Albanese can obtain a meeting with US President Donald Trump," shadow agriculture minister David Littleproud said in a statement. Australia, which imports more from the US than it exports, faces a 10 per cent across-the-board US tariff, as well as 50 per cent tariffs on steel and aluminium. Trump has also threatened to impose a 200 per cent tariff on pharmaceuticals. Asked whether the change would help achieve a trade deal, Australian Trade Minister Don Farrell said: "I'm not too sure". "We haven't done this in order to entice the Americans into a trade agreement," he said. "We think that they should do that anyway." US President Donald Trump has applauded Australia's relaxation of import restrictions on American beef, adding that other countries that refuse US beef products are on notice. Australia on Thursday said it would loosen biosecurity rules for US beef, something analysts predicted would not significantly increase US shipments because Australia is a major beef producer and exporter whose prices are much lower. Australia plans to take US beef for the "first time," Trump said in a post on Truth Social on Thursday, calling it a "very big market". Canberra has restricted US beef imports since 2003 due to concerns about bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or mad cow disease. Since 2019, it has allowed in meat from animals born, raised and slaughtered in the US but few suppliers were able to prove that their cattle had not been in Canada and Mexico. Last night, in another post, Trump said the US would "sell so much to Australia because this is undeniable and irrefutable Proof that US Beef is the Safest and Best in the entire World." "The other Countries that refuse our magnificent Beef are ON NOTICE," the post continued. Trump has attempted to renegotiate trade deals with numerous countries he says have taken advantage of the United States – a characterisation many economists dispute. "For decades, Australia imposed unjustified barriers on US beef," US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said in a statement, calling Australia's decision a "major milestone in lowering trade barriers and securing market access for US farmers and ranchers". Australia is not a significant importer of beef but the United States is and a production slump is forcing it to step up purchases. Last year, Australia shipped almost 400,000 metric tonnes of beef worth $US2.9 billion ($A4.4 billion) to the United States, with just 269 tonnes of US product moving the other way. Australian officials say the relaxation of restrictions was not part of any trade negotiations but the result of a years-long assessment of US biosecurity practices. On Wednesday, Australia's agriculture ministry said US cattle traceability and control systems had improved enough that Australia could accept beef from cattle born in Canada or Mexico and slaughtered in the United States. The decision has caused some concern in Australia, where biosecurity is seen as essential to prevent diseases and pests from ravaging the farm sector. "We need to know if (the government) is sacrificing our high biosecurity standards just so Prime Minister Anthony Albanese can obtain a meeting with US President Donald Trump," shadow agriculture minister David Littleproud said in a statement. Australia, which imports more from the US than it exports, faces a 10 per cent across-the-board US tariff, as well as 50 per cent tariffs on steel and aluminium. Trump has also threatened to impose a 200 per cent tariff on pharmaceuticals. Asked whether the change would help achieve a trade deal, Australian Trade Minister Don Farrell said: "I'm not too sure". "We haven't done this in order to entice the Americans into a trade agreement," he said. "We think that they should do that anyway." US President Donald Trump has applauded Australia's relaxation of import restrictions on American beef, adding that other countries that refuse US beef products are on notice. Australia on Thursday said it would loosen biosecurity rules for US beef, something analysts predicted would not significantly increase US shipments because Australia is a major beef producer and exporter whose prices are much lower. Australia plans to take US beef for the "first time," Trump said in a post on Truth Social on Thursday, calling it a "very big market". Canberra has restricted US beef imports since 2003 due to concerns about bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or mad cow disease. Since 2019, it has allowed in meat from animals born, raised and slaughtered in the US but few suppliers were able to prove that their cattle had not been in Canada and Mexico. Last night, in another post, Trump said the US would "sell so much to Australia because this is undeniable and irrefutable Proof that US Beef is the Safest and Best in the entire World." "The other Countries that refuse our magnificent Beef are ON NOTICE," the post continued. Trump has attempted to renegotiate trade deals with numerous countries he says have taken advantage of the United States – a characterisation many economists dispute. "For decades, Australia imposed unjustified barriers on US beef," US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said in a statement, calling Australia's decision a "major milestone in lowering trade barriers and securing market access for US farmers and ranchers". Australia is not a significant importer of beef but the United States is and a production slump is forcing it to step up purchases. Last year, Australia shipped almost 400,000 metric tonnes of beef worth $US2.9 billion ($A4.4 billion) to the United States, with just 269 tonnes of US product moving the other way. Australian officials say the relaxation of restrictions was not part of any trade negotiations but the result of a years-long assessment of US biosecurity practices. On Wednesday, Australia's agriculture ministry said US cattle traceability and control systems had improved enough that Australia could accept beef from cattle born in Canada or Mexico and slaughtered in the United States. The decision has caused some concern in Australia, where biosecurity is seen as essential to prevent diseases and pests from ravaging the farm sector. "We need to know if (the government) is sacrificing our high biosecurity standards just so Prime Minister Anthony Albanese can obtain a meeting with US President Donald Trump," shadow agriculture minister David Littleproud said in a statement. Australia, which imports more from the US than it exports, faces a 10 per cent across-the-board US tariff, as well as 50 per cent tariffs on steel and aluminium. Trump has also threatened to impose a 200 per cent tariff on pharmaceuticals. Asked whether the change would help achieve a trade deal, Australian Trade Minister Don Farrell said: "I'm not too sure". "We haven't done this in order to entice the Americans into a trade agreement," he said. "We think that they should do that anyway." US President Donald Trump has applauded Australia's relaxation of import restrictions on American beef, adding that other countries that refuse US beef products are on notice. Australia on Thursday said it would loosen biosecurity rules for US beef, something analysts predicted would not significantly increase US shipments because Australia is a major beef producer and exporter whose prices are much lower. Australia plans to take US beef for the "first time," Trump said in a post on Truth Social on Thursday, calling it a "very big market". Canberra has restricted US beef imports since 2003 due to concerns about bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or mad cow disease. Since 2019, it has allowed in meat from animals born, raised and slaughtered in the US but few suppliers were able to prove that their cattle had not been in Canada and Mexico. Last night, in another post, Trump said the US would "sell so much to Australia because this is undeniable and irrefutable Proof that US Beef is the Safest and Best in the entire World." "The other Countries that refuse our magnificent Beef are ON NOTICE," the post continued. Trump has attempted to renegotiate trade deals with numerous countries he says have taken advantage of the United States – a characterisation many economists dispute. "For decades, Australia imposed unjustified barriers on US beef," US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said in a statement, calling Australia's decision a "major milestone in lowering trade barriers and securing market access for US farmers and ranchers". Australia is not a significant importer of beef but the United States is and a production slump is forcing it to step up purchases. Last year, Australia shipped almost 400,000 metric tonnes of beef worth $US2.9 billion ($A4.4 billion) to the United States, with just 269 tonnes of US product moving the other way. Australian officials say the relaxation of restrictions was not part of any trade negotiations but the result of a years-long assessment of US biosecurity practices. On Wednesday, Australia's agriculture ministry said US cattle traceability and control systems had improved enough that Australia could accept beef from cattle born in Canada or Mexico and slaughtered in the United States. The decision has caused some concern in Australia, where biosecurity is seen as essential to prevent diseases and pests from ravaging the farm sector. "We need to know if (the government) is sacrificing our high biosecurity standards just so Prime Minister Anthony Albanese can obtain a meeting with US President Donald Trump," shadow agriculture minister David Littleproud said in a statement. Australia, which imports more from the US than it exports, faces a 10 per cent across-the-board US tariff, as well as 50 per cent tariffs on steel and aluminium. Trump has also threatened to impose a 200 per cent tariff on pharmaceuticals. Asked whether the change would help achieve a trade deal, Australian Trade Minister Don Farrell said: "I'm not too sure". "We haven't done this in order to entice the Americans into a trade agreement," he said. "We think that they should do that anyway."

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store