freediver wrote on Oct 5
th, 2025 at 2:04pm:
The cause of the soaring costs is lack of investment in energy infrastructure.
So what you seem to be saying is that private profit making companies should suck on the government tit for subsidies, because Government did that infrastructure when they owned the generation, transmission lines etc.
freediver wrote on Oct 5
th, 2025 at 2:04pm:
And even if it does, all it will mean is that we adopted the most expensive energy technology, and the one with the longest lead time to develop, after it had already become the most expensive option available.
Hmm. Let's see Snowy 2.0 a part-time solution now costing, currently over $12 billion, and climbing. And that isn't producing.
The Centre for Independent Studies says $29 billion, currently.
"Indeed, the current federal government has further increased subsidies in an effort to achieve its ambitious goal of having renewables supply 82% of national electricity by 2030. The 2024-25 budget allocates more than $22 billion to boost renewables in Australia. This includes $13.7 billion in production tax incentives for green hydrogen and processed critical minerals as well as the $1.7 billion Future Made in Australia Innovation Fund aimed at developing new industries like green metals and low carbon fuels. Additionally, the Capacity Investment Scheme has been expanded to a target of 32 GW of new capacity nationally.[2]"
https://www.cis.org.au/publication/counting-the-cost-subsidies-for-renewable-ene...Curiously The Australia Institute doesn't seem to do renewables subsidies, but concentrates on fossil fuels, with flawed methodology.
https://australiainstitute.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/P1543-Fossil-fuel-s..."The increase to $14.5 billion in 2023-24 from $11.1 billion in 2022-23 was driven largely by the Federal Government’s Fuel Tax Credits Scheme (FTCS). "
Fossil fuel subsidies that don't benefit the fossil fuel companies.
...
"Concessions on aviation fuel grew by $430 million, or 36% to a total of $1.6
billion. Concessions on the Petroleum Resource Rent Tax
(PRRT)
, which benefits major oil and gas producers, cost the Commonwealth an estimated $165 million. In the NT, the Commonwealth Government is spending $1.9 billion to assist the Middle Arm petrochemical hub in Darwin, and $100 million to build roads explicitly for the onshore gas industry. In NSW, the Commonwealth-owned Australian Rail Track Corporation spent $113 million on upgrading Hunter Valley coal railways to help “coal producers to…capitalise on global demand and high prices for thermal coal”."
IbidAviation fuel is a benefit to Aviation companies.
PRRT is taxed on profits, when made, Drilling wells etc is very cost intensive.
Middle Arm? What are they spending the money on, they coyly don't say.
Building roads explicitly for onshore gas should not be done.
The Commonwealth OWNED Rail Track Authority is also not a subsidy to fossil fuel companies.
"The International Monetary Fund (IMF), which put the figure USD $44 billion in 2020,
including unpaid costs of air pollution and climate change.6
• The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), which put the figure at $12.4 billion in 2021.7
• The Productivity Commission, which estimated that $1 billion was given to sectors that include fossil fuel activities in 2018–19."
"This range estimates demonstrates a key issue in any discussion about subsidies: different definitions of “subsidy” make a large difference to the final estimate. The largest estimates, such as those from the IMF, incorporate the uncompensated costs of climate, health and other environmental damage into the definition of fossil fuel subsidies. The lower estimates, like those from the Productivity Commission, take into account a much narrower range of
assistance measures to fossil fuel producers, typically direct payments and the estimated value of trade barriers."
Forum
Pages: 
