Australians, don’t be fooled by the promise of “green-collar jobs” structured around so-called “carbon footprints.” These jobs are a recipe for economic ruin, leaving our most vulnerable citizens in desperate poverty.

Most of these jobs will be a net loss to our economy and do nothing to benefit our environment. In fact, Kevin Rudd and Penny Wong would do no worse paying people to dig holes and fill them in again—that’s about the true value of many of these so-called “green-collar jobs.”

Take for example, the government’s $2 billion “investment” into carbon capture and storage. The proposal is to capture carbon dioxide from coal-fired power stations’ emissions and bury it deep underground. What lunatic would even suggest this project? For every tonne of coal burnt, 8 tonnes of air are required, resulting in 9 tonnes of exhaust gases. Of this, 2.6 tonnes of carbon dioxide would have to be separated, compressed and pumped deep underground. The fact that an enormous amount of energy—up to 40% more—would be required to do this compressing and pumping is an absolute scandal.

In reality, this means digging up our coal up to 40% faster than at present to generate the same amount of power. We would need to employ more coal dredge operators and numerous other jobs would be created along the way, but you could count on skyrocketing energy prices.

Now consider the insanity of wind farms. The Silverton Wind Farm, Stage 1 of which was just approved by NSW Premier Nathan Rees last week, is planned to be the biggest in the southern hemisphere. The project, with up to 598 wind turbines has a forecast capital cost of a massive $2.2 billion. While the total capacity would be about 1,000 MW, since the wind rarely blows at optimum speed, the turbines would only end up on average producing about 330 MW. For $2.2 billion we could nearly afford to order two of the latest Westinghouse AP1000™ nuclear reactors, each rated at 1,154 MW. These reactors will produce their rated power 24 hours a day if required—not just when the wind blows. The AP1000™ has a design life of sixty years—wind turbines only last about twenty years. And with wind power, we would still need to keep all of our conventional power stations open for the days when the wind doesn’t blow!

Anyone thinking these so-called renewables are even desirable needs a basic science lesson. The key is energy flux-density—this is the quantity of energy flow per unit cross section. Wind turbines make use of the kinetic energy in moving air, but air has a density of only 1.2 kg/m³ and wind gusts are erratic—trying to utilise such a miserable energy flux-density requires enormous capital investment for a small amount of return in energy. By contrast, the energy flux-density of water driving a turbine in a hydroelectric plant is many thousands of times greater, given that water has a density of 1,000 kg/m³ and is also under a head of pressure. So too, wind is no match for the high pressure and velocity in a steam turbine.

Solar power is no better. A proposal to build the world’s biggest solar power station here in Australia has an estimated start-up cost of nearly $1 billion yet would only generate 250 MW at peak times. It comes back to energy flux-density—the sun may give you sunburn, but a large capital expenditure is required to concentrate the energy to be of use for electricity generation. By contrast, the energy stored in coal, or better still, uranium and thorium, is already highly concentrated.

Barack Obama said last year: “under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.” Rudd and Wong should confess to Australians that this would indeed be the consequence of these “green-collar jobs.” And when you drive up the real cost of energy, you drive the nation into economic ruin, and a new Dark Age.