A conservation charity with a strong anti-renewables stance has been found to have submitted evidence to federal and state inquiries that included references to non-existent government bodies, a fictional windfarm, and scientific papers that publishers say were never published. The revelations follow an investigation by Guardian Australia into Rainforest Reserves Australia (RRA).
Two US academics whose work was cited in RRA's submissions have described the references as '100% misleading' and 'absurd'. Harvard professor Naomi Oreskes, co-author of the 2010 book Merchants of Doubt, said the submission claimed her work supported arguments about net zero emissions, but 'Merchants of Doubt does not support that claim'. Professor Bob Brulle of Brown University said citations of his papers were 'totally misleading' and that he had 'never written on these topics'.
RRA's submission to a Senate inquiry into misinformation also cited two papers from the Journal of Cleaner Production as evidence that solar panels and wind turbines release 'forever chemicals'. However, the journal's publisher, Elsevier, confirmed the references 'appear to be hallucinated and do not exist'. The organisation's submission writer admitted to using AI to help draft more than 100 submissions since August 2024, and to using AI to answer questions from the Guardian.
RRA came to prominence opposing windfarm projects in north Queensland but has since become a vocal critic of renewable energy generally. Its analysis was recently celebrated by Nationals leader David Littleproud, and an open letter coordinated by the group has been signed by several notable Australians, including energy entrepreneur Trevor St Baker and Dick Smith. The Guardian does not suggest those documents were AI-generated.
