Albanese government throwing $9 billion per year at net zero climate targets, new IPA findings reveal
The federal government's spending on climate change and net zero has soared to more than $9 billion a year, new research has found.
Analysis from the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) has shown that spending on climate-related programs has increased fifteenfold over the past decade.
According to IPA's analysis of federal budget papers, spending on net zero has risen from about $600 million to $9 billion annually since 2015.
At the same time, the Albanese government has seen emissions actually rise year on year to figures higher than under the former Morrison government.
IPA deputy executive director and economist Adam Creighton said the array of 'programs' and 'funds' related to climate change and net zero was 'ridiculous'.
'Spending on climate change and net zero in the most recent federal budget has reached around $9 billion annually,' he said.
Mr Creighton said the true cost was likely even higher once state-level and private sector compliance costs were considered.
Despite this, Energy Minister Chris Bowen has repeatedly claimed renewables to be the 'cheapest and cleanest form of energy'.
Meanwhile, the Australian Energy Regulator's default market offer has rise by as much as 50 per cent in parts of the country since 2022.
Mr Bowen and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese have still not conceded that they did now lower power bills by $275 as promised at the 2022 election.
'We have never denied that energy prices are higher than we would like,' Mr Bowen said at the National Press Club energy debate ahead of the election.
'If we keep the path we're on, energy prices will fall by 13 per cent over the next 10 years.'
According to the IPA, the high energy prices in Australia have been caused, at least in part, by the ambitious net zero target.
'Decades of poor decision making, based on flawed and misleading advice and ideology, is crushing … household budgets,' Mr Creighton said.
The Albanese government has reaffirmed its commitment to net zero since winning its mandate in the 2025 federal election.
However, Environment Minister Murray Watt recently gave approval to the North West Shelf gas project, which Mr Albanese said was needed to address energy reliability.
'You don't reduce emissions and take action on climate change by just having good wishes,' Mr Albanese said on Tuesday.
'We need to make sure that there is security of energy supply at the same time as we support the transition which reduces our emissions.
'What you do is have a target, which is what we have with net zero.'
Sky News understands the Albanese government won't support a climate trigger in national environmental laws, as proposed by the Greens.
Mr Albanese is not expected to announce Australia's 2035 climate target until closer to September, Sky News recently revealed.
The new climate target could be put as high as a 75 per cent emissions reduction by 2035 from 2005 levels as internal deliberations and departmental advice continue.
The growing price tag has renewed political pressure on the opposition, with internal divisions surfacing over the future of the Coalition's commitment to net zero by 2050.
Senior Coalition figures have been openly debating whether to revisit or abandon the net-zero target.
Opposition Leader Sussan Ley said it was necessary to 'take the time to get this right' on net zero, and that the joint party room would evaluate its position.
'We have to play—as a country—our part in the global response to climate change,' she told reporters at Parliament House last Thursday.
'Net zero, Paris targets, gas—all of the resources conversations around critical minerals, they're all part of that.
'We have to get this right. We have to play our part, but we have to make sure that we don't do it at any cost.'
The Nationals nominally reaffirmed support for net zero by 2050 but leader David Littleproud confirmed that the commitment is now under review.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
5 hours ago
- Sky News AU
‘Get over there PM': Anthony Albanese urged to visit Trump
Nationals Senator Matt Canavan highlights Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's lack of engagement with US President Donald Trump amid China's increased presence in the region. 'Why hasn't he gone over to Washington, DC, to meet the leader of our most important ally,' Mr Canavan told Sky News host Rowan Dean. 'Only a few months ago, we had the Chinese navy circumnavigate our continent, we had the Chinese navy conduct live fire exercises under a civilian flight path. 'And the Prime Minister's had zero engagement with our most important ally. 'Get over there PM.'
Sky News AU
7 hours ago
- Sky News AU
'More punches to come': Bitter feud between Elon Musk and Donald Trump predicted to develop even further
A feud between Elon Musk and Donald Trump has exploded this week, but a US commentator believes there may yet be "more punches to come". A war of words erupted between the pair after Musk, who finished his tenure with the administration overseeing the Department of Government Efficiency, lashed the leader of the free world's signature "big beautiful bill" which would unleash trillions in tax cuts and slash spending. Musk this week hit out, describing the bill as a "disgusting abomination" and criticised those who voted for it after it was passed by the House of Representatives last month. United States President Donald Trump has threatened to cut off government contracts with companies owned by Elon Musk in retaliation. Trump claimed Musk was angry because the bill removed an electric vehicle tax break, introduced by Joe Biden which benefited his company Tesla. Co-host of Steve Bannon's War Room Natalie Winters told Sky News' Rowan Dean she believes there will be 'more punches' to come amid the public arguments between the pair. 'I definitely think this is going to evolve,' Ms Winters said on Friday. 'MAGA diehards, who I think are sort of trying to come to terms and understand where exactly they fall in MAGA diehards overwhelmingly are going to be on President Trump's camp. 'On principle, this bill, Elon is sort of in the right.' Musk continued to attack Trump on social media on Thursday, going as far as alleging the President's name is in the Epstein files. The New York Post's Washington correspondent Diana Glebova said the allegation was a "bombshell" claim but that there may be more to the story than what the public knows. "We don't know the extent that Trump is, of course, involved in these files. They haven't been released, and it is up to the Department of Justice to release them," she told Sky News' Steve Price. "We haven't seen those yet. But the White House said today that Musk's claim was nothing new, that Trump was on the flight logs. But of course we don't the whole story here, so we'll just have to see. "I mean, for Musk to know this information, that would be really interesting if there is something there. Again, the White House is denying that there's a (story) there right now." Glebova said the Democrats would be enjoying the "drama" between Trump and one of his biggest supporters throughout the campaign. She added that Musk would be short on support, having potentially put some Republican supporters offside with his remarks about the President. " I think Democrats are eating this up because, you know, it's drama. It's exciting. And I don't think that many people are supporting Musk right now," she said. He lost a lot of his support from Democrats when he joined Trump on the campaign trail and we saw all those protests against Tesla. You know, he was getting death threats. They were going after his vehicles, like lighting them on fire. "The Republicans were supporting Musk because he was so close to Trump, his right-hand man. But now that Musk has departed from Trump, I mean, I don't know who's supporting him right now."
The Age
7 hours ago
- The Age
‘Progressive patriot' PM faces his call to arms
'In today's Australia, the new default should be that patriotism is a love of country that is democratic and egalitarian. It is something that includes those of different races and backgrounds,' he wrote in this masthead a couple of weeks ago. 'With his political authority unquestioned, Albanese has an opportunity to craft a nation-building agenda. The significance is more than just national. At the moment, parties of the centre-left are struggling to find compelling alternatives to Trumpist populism.' Albanese's defiance of America doesn't come out of nowhere. It rings a Labor bell. It resonates with the decision by Labor's celebrated wartime leader, John Curtin, to defy Australia's great and powerful friend of his time, Britain. 'I'm conscious about the leadership of John Curtin, choosing to stand up to Winston Churchill and say, 'no, I'm bringing the Australian troops home to defend our own continent, we're not going to just let it go',' Albanese said last year as he prepared to walk the Kokoda Track, where Australia and Papua New Guinea halted Imperial Japan's southward march of conquest in World War II. Defiance of allies is one thing. Defeat of the enemy is another. In a moment of truth-telling, the Chief of the Defence Force, Admiral David Johnston, this week said that Australia now had to plan to wage war from its own continental territory rather than preparing for war in far-off locations. 'We are having to reconsider Australia as a homeland from which we will conduct combat operations,' Johnston told a conference held by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. 'That is a very different way – almost since the Second World War – of how we think of national resilience and preparedness. We may need to operate and conduct combat operations from this country.' He didn't spell it out, but he's evidently contemplating the possibility that China will cut off Australia's seaborne supply routes, either because it's waging war in the Taiwan Strait or South China Sea, or because it's seeking to coerce Australia. 'The chief of the defence force is speaking truth,' says Professor Peter Dean, co-author of the government's Defence Strategic Review, now at the US Studies Centre at Sydney University. 'There's a line in the Defence Strategic Review that most people overlook – it talks about 'the defence of Australia against potential threats arising from major power competition, including the prospect of conflict'. And there's only one major power posing a threat in our region.' History accelerates week by week. Trump, chaos factory, wantonly discards America's unique sources of power and abuses its allies. China's Xi Jinping and Russia's Vladimir Putin are emboldened, seeing America's credibility crumbling. Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer, alarmed at the rising risks, this week declared a campaign to make Britain 'battle ready' to 'face down Russian aggression'. Loading He plans to enlarge the army, commission up to a dozen new nuclear-powered submarines jointly built with Australia under AUKUS, build six new munitions factories, manufacture 7000 long-range weapons, renew the nuclear warheads on Britain's strategic missiles, and put new emphasis on drones and cyberwar as war evolves daily on the battlefields of Ukraine. Starmer intends to increase defence outlays to the equivalent of 2.5 per cent of GDP with an eventual target of 3 per cent. Ukraine's impressive drone strike on Russia's bombers this week knocked out a third of Moscow's force, with AI guiding the drones to their targets. The Australian retired major-general Mick Ryan observes that Ukraine and Russia are upgrading and adapting drone warfare weekly. 'The Australian government has worked hard to ignore these hard-earned lessons and these cheaper military solutions,' he wrote scathingly in this masthead this week, 'while building a dense bureaucracy in Canberra that innovative drone-makers in Australia cannot penetrate in any reasonable amount of time.' At the same time, the FBI charged two Chinese researchers with attempting to smuggle a toxic fungus into the US. It's banned because it can cause mass destruction of crops. A potential bioweapon, in other words. What would John Curtin do today? 'Curtin, like Albanese, was from the left of the Labor Party,' says Dean. 'He was not an internationalist, he was very domestic focused.' Indeed, he was an avowed Marxist who believed that capitalism was in its late phase and bound to fail, leading to world peace. He abandoned his idealism when confronted by the reality of World War II. 'He realised that a leader has to lead for his times. He had to bend his interests from the domestic sphere to the international.' Curtin famously wrote that, after Britain's 'impregnable fortress' of Singapore fell to the Japanese in just a few days, Australia looked to America as its great and powerful friend. 'Albanese can't repeat that,' observes Dean, 'because there's no one else to turn to.' 'A modern John Curtin,' says the head of the National Security College at ANU, Rory Medcalf, 'would take account of the strategic risk facing the unique multicultural democratic experiment of Australia. He'd unite the community and bring the trade unions, industry, the states and territories together in a national effort. 'It's certainly not about beating the drums of war, but we do need a much more open conversation about national preparedness. Australia might be directly involved in war, but, even if we aren't, we will be affected indirectly [by war to our north] because of risks to our fuel security, risks to the normal functioning of the economy and risks to the cohesion of our society. Is there scope to use national cabinet' – which includes the states and territories – 'to talk about these issues?' And the defence budget? Albanese is dismissive of calls to peg spending by set percentages of GDP. Apply that to any other area of the budget and you'd be laughed out of the room. The prime minister prefers to decide on capability that's needed, then to fund it accordingly. How big a gun do you need, then find money to pay for it. Medcalf endorses this approach of deciding capability before funding, but says that risk should come before both. 'And if you look at risk first, it will push spending well above 2 per cent of GDP and much closer to 3 or 4 per cent.' Regardless of what the Americans say or do. Do they turn out to be dependable but demanding? Or uselessly absent? 'Australia will need to spend more either way,' says Medcalf. 'The only future where we don't need to increase our security investment is one where we accept greatly reduced sovereignty in a China-dominated region.' Dean applauds the government's success in building stronger defence relationships with countries ranging from Japan to Indonesia and PNG, and Foreign Minister Penny Wong's diplomacy in the Pacific islands and South-East Asia. In the next couple of weeks, Albanese will travel to Canada for a G7 summit, and to hold his first in-person meeting with Trump either there or on a trip to chaos central, Washington. Dean describes it as 'is a real moment for him to set out his vision for international affairs, should he choose to use it'.
