One Nation leader Barnaby Joyce has announced that his party would condition its support in the Australian parliament on the establishment of a royal commission into what he describes as a nearly $900 billion renewables “disaster.” Speaking ahead of the Victorian state election scheduled for November 28, Joyce argued that the renewable energy transition, initially promoted as a cost-effective means of harnessing Australia’s wind and solar capacity, has become economically unsustainable and burdened the country with an expensive power network.
Joyce’s call follows growing scrutiny of major renewable projects and transmission infrastructure cost blowouts. Key examples include Snowy 2.0, a pumped hydro energy storage project whose estimated costs have reportedly increased by twentyfold due to drilling complications and poor planning. Similarly, Brookfield, the global infrastructure company behind Victoria’s Western Renewables Link (WRL) transmission project, disclosed to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission that costs have surged to approximately $4 billion, up from earlier estimates near $479 million.
Additional controversy surrounds Transgrid, the developer of another major transmission project, which claims it should be reimbursed $1.2 billion spent beyond its contract on the grounds of national criticality. Such disputes are expected to feature prominently if a royal commission is established.
The WRL and the 240-kilometer VNI West transmission line are pivotal infrastructure projects designed to connect Melbourne to the Snowy 2.0 hydro battery and renewable farms in New South Wales. Both require extensive installation of high-voltage transmission towers across prime agricultural land, drawing concern from communities and political opponents. Victorian Premier Ben Carroll has responded by ordering an independent cost review and delaying WRL’s progress ahead of the election. However, critics note that Brookfield’s comprehensive cost disclosures likely render an independent assessment redundant.
Opposition leader Jess Wilson has pledged to review both the WRL and VNI West projects, expressing particular opposition to VNI West and questioning the viability of completing WRL without the interstate link. Wilson’s position involves balancing political risks, especially in so-called teal electorates, amid growing voter dissatisfaction over escalating costs.
One Nation has taken a firmer stance, vowing to halt both transmission projects entirely. The party argues that failure to address these spiraling costs threatens regional Victorian seats traditionally held by the Nationals, who now face electoral pressure without a clear Coalition consensus.
At the federal level, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese plans to highlight Australia’s potential role in addressing social media impacts on youth during an upcoming United Nations Security Council bid. However, government reticence over the full costs of the renewables transition is expected to fuel opposition calls for transparency and investigation by a royal commission.
The renewables scheme’s challenges are compounded by transmission difficulties and delays in commissioning gas-fired backup generators originally expected to prevent blackouts. With new gas plants anticipated to take up to a decade to develop, coal-fired power is likely to remain essential in Victoria and elsewhere until the 2040s, according to opposition figures.
The Coalition is reportedly exploring alternatives focused on metropolitan “urban solar parks,” leveraging commercial and industrial rooftops to reduce reliance on costly interstate transmission lines and protect farmland. This approach includes continued use of gas as backup generation but seeks to reduce network charges on consumers.
Meanwhile, One Nation advocates revisiting nuclear energy options, including small modular reactors and advanced nuclear waste technologies, citing the escalation in renewable project costs and ongoing concerns about carbon emissions. Although nuclear energy was rejected by voters at the previous election—when renewables offered a lower-cost alternative—party leaders suggest it must be reconsidered in light of the current financial and infrastructure challenges facing Australia’s energy transition.