‘A Wake-Up Call Ignored’: Coalition’s Climate Policy Gets a Failing Grade
In a stark assessment following the Coalition's historic election defeat on 3 May, energy analyst Tristan Edis has issued a devastating 'report card' on the party's climate and energy policies. Addressing Shadow Minister Sussan Ley directly, Edis lamented that the electoral 'exam result' had failed to serve as the necessary wake-up call, warning the party risks 'repeating 2025' if it does not fundamentally change its approach.
Fundamental Flaws in Logic and Research
The critique highlights a series of basic errors in the Coalition's energy narrative. Edis points to a fundamental misunderstanding of chemistry, noting that the continued assertion that Australia can achieve 'energy abundance' and reduce emissions by burning its plentiful coal reserves is illogical. Coal is predominantly carbon, and burning it creates CO2.
The analysis also takes aim at the party's reliance on unproven technologies and poor research sources. The promotion of carbon capture and storage by figures like Daniel Tehan is compared to using a poorly-trained AI that 'hallucinates facts'. Similarly, the failed assignment on small modular nuclear reactors by Ted O’Brien is cited as a previous example of this flawed methodology.
Mathematical Errors and Plagiarism Allegations
Edis identifies a critical failure in the Coalition's grasp of basic mathematics. The party repeatedly claims that net zero will cost $9 trillion, a figure he corrects, stating that studies from the Universities of Melbourne and Queensland and Princeton University actually estimated the cost at $300 billion.
Furthermore, the report card accuses the party of 'plagiarism' by copying the work of incompetent peers. The ideas of Matt Canavan and David Littleproud on community engagement are dismissed as irrelevant for an audience with university degrees. Littleproud's claim that renewables will 'tear up Australia’s food security' is debunked, with Edis clarifying that only 0.03% of agricultural land would be needed to support projects replacing all fossil fuels.
A Path to Redemption Before 2025
The advice for improvement is clear: abandon misleading sources like Sky News and The Australian and stop listening to figures like Donald Trump or Pauline Hanson. Instead, Edis urges the Coalition to turn to reputable scientific bodies such as the Bureau of Meteorology, the Australian Academy of Science, and the CSIRO.
The final warning is blunt. To avoid another electoral failure, the Coalition must pay far greater attention to the quality of its research and stop copying the homework of those who have consistently failed the subject.
