We've Already Voted. We Just Forgot.

Somewhere in the Gulf, a cheap Iranian drone has achieved what decades of climate summits could not: it has made energy security interesting to people who previously found it tiresome. Brent crude touched $126 a barrel in early March. Australia’s diesel reserve stands at twenty-six days. The government quietly lowered fuel quality standards, a detail that did not make the front page, perhaps because it sat awkwardly beside the Prime Minister’s recent remarks about the energy transition going rather well.

Into this gap stepped Barnaby Joyce with a proposal as bracing in its simplicity as it was unencumbered by recent history: build refineries. Stop the green nonsense. Drill. He has a gift for arriving at the correct diagnosis - Australia’s fuel vulnerability is real and has been real for years, under governments of both persuasions, including several in which he served — and then prescribing something that addresses the 1970s version of the problem with 1970s confidence.

The case against a refinery is not ideological. It is arithmetical. A new refinery is a decade away, aimed at a market already moving steadily away from what it produces. You would be building expensive infrastructure for shrinking demand, using public money to solve a crisis that is simultaneously accelerating the shift that makes the infrastructure redundant. In portfolio terms, it is doubling down on the one asset you already cannot insure.

And here the current conversation keeps stepping around the obvious: the consumer has already decided. Not the green consumer, not the inner-city cyclist with the tote bag, the ordinary Australian household that looked at its power bill, rang a solar installer, and got three quotes. Over four million homes. Noosa at forty-five percent rooftop penetration. The Sunshine Coast Hinterland, not previously known as a laboratory of climate activism, tiling its rooflines quietly and methodically while Canberra debated the future in the abstract.

These people did not do it to save the planet. They did it to save money. The market worked from below, faster than the electricity companies planned for and considerably faster than politicians noticed. Grid operators are still adjusting their models. Retailers are still trying to recover lost revenue. The political class still talks about the energy transition as though it is approaching, rather than admitting it has been underway for fifteen years.

The mirror moment is this: the same person who installed solar in 2021 is now at the bowser in 2026, paying $2.50 a litre and nodding seriously at refinery talk. Not hypocrisy, simply a transition that reached the roof before it reached the driveway.

The sovereignty argument, which is, or should be, Joyce’s actual argument, points in precisely the opposite direction to the one he is pointing. Depending on Middle East oil through an American-policed chokepoint during a Trump-era military operation is the dependency. More refineries processing imported crude merely lengthen the chain. The household that put solar on its roof and is now wondering whether an EV makes financial sense is, whatever its politics, reducing Australia’s strategic exposure to decisions made in Washington and Tehran. That is not woke. It is what energy sovereignty looks like when it arrives.

Pakistan, facing the same supply shock, has cut gas imports by fifty percent and redirected the money to Chinese solar panels. One may observe, with mild interest, that Pakistan is not generally considered a progressive nation. It is, however, a nation doing arithmetic.

The standard local objection at this point is the EV. We have hills. We have distances. We have a dirt road that once ate a Subaru. All fair. Nobody on the Hinterland is being asked to replace a dual-cab with a Nissan Leaf by Tuesday. What is happening instead is more interesting than the debate suggests: households that sort their green bins with conviction also run two large four-wheel drives because they think the terrain requires it; people who worry publicly about fossil fuels fill them from a bowser without visible irony; off-grid pioneers, having invested heavily in panels and batteries, still shop for the most powerful internal combustion engine they can afford.

The ideology and the behaviour have never been terribly well acquainted on the Hinterland, which is not a criticism but merely the normal condition of people living lives in particular landscapes. Europe passed through the same convulsion: resistance remained loud and principled right up until the cars became good enough and the fuel expensive enough, after which it became largely a question of affordability. The transition did not wait for consensus. It rarely does.

We are not, for the avoidance of doubt, suggesting that petrol prices are not a genuine problem for people on the Range who need to drive to work. They are. We are suggesting that the answer to being held hostage by a chokepoint you cannot control is not to build more infrastructure that depends on the same chokepoint. It is to need less of what passes through it.

The Hinterland is already doing this, quietly, expensively, and in many cases while loudly insisting it is not. The Honking Goose is content to wait for the conversation to catch up.

If you know someone who’d appreciate this, they probably will. Please share. Sharing's nice.
...
If you enjoyed this article and would like to see more, 'Buy the Goose a Coffee →'.
...
The views expressed are those of the correspondent. Factual claims draw on publicly available sources.