The Greens movement is kick-starting debate about the impact of government ownership on two fronts: renewables, where government management has been a total disaster; and supermarkets where a think tank linked to Greens wants to buy supermarkets from Coles and Woolworths and cut prices by 30 per cent.

I am going to put the issue of government-controlled supermarkets aside and recognise that, due to the revised renewables policy adopted by the new Greens leader, David Shoebridge, we may now have a proper debate over our renewable energy plans.

Shoebridge has signalled that there would be no “blank cheque” to renewable projects, with particular emphasis on impacts on the environment.

Until now the ALP, Greens, teals and almost all the media have enthusiastically embraced every project that involved “renewables”, and anyone who cast doubts on the way Australia was managing renewables was thrust into the “climate denier” pit.

We can only speculate just how “blank” the Shoebridge cheque book will be.

But my guess is he will be ­appalled to discover that, due to renewable mistakes by Australian and state governments, we are going to need to erect about 26 gas-fired power stations (including replacing old ones) about the size of Melbourne’s Newport gas-fired station to supplant coal and avoid blackouts.

And, not only is Snowy 2.0 a total cost disaster, it may also ­affect the environment.

Contrary to what governments planned, Australia will need to mine coal well into the 2040s. That’s exactly what the Greens do not want, but that’s what they are delivering by backing the renewable masterplan now being implemented by Energy Minister Chris Bowen and NSW Premier Chris Minns.

To illustrate the environmental impacts, let’s isolate the NSW New England Renewables Zone, where I urge Shoebridge to study the research done by the remarkable local community body (Walcha High Country Guardians) that documents the “environment impact”.

There will be a 305km country transmission corridor with 1318 transmission towers, many the size of Sydney Harbour Bridge pylons.

The government proposes to construct 670km of access tracks and generate about one million cubic metres of surplus material and 126,000 spoil-truck movements on local roads.

This material must be excavated, loaded, transported and disposed of through a regional road network that is already narrow, winding, unsealed and constrained.

These tracks and tower pads must be constructed across natural side slopes in steep, high-rainfall country.

Persistent rainfall will make exposed surfaces slippery, increase erosion, destabilise earthworks and restrict access by heavy machinery. It was not the original plan.

Shoebridge will need to determine, under his definition, whether this is an environmental disaster. He should also check out the NSW Central-West Orana Renewable Energy Zone. There is a proposed solar operation in an area called the “Valley of the Winds” that is riddled with environmental issues.

In the finance arena, the mess represents a complete network cost disaster that must be met by NSW power users because Queensland woke up to the looming disaster and stopped its ­connection.

Even in Victoria, the ALP government is putting one of the two connecting cables to NSW on hold.

The Liberals will block one and are considering the other. One Nation plans to block both and wants a royal commission. That simple and logical policy spells likely disaster for the National Party in the upcoming state election.

The Liberals should be campaigning vigorously against connecting to the Bowen-Minns plan.

It is clear that renewables only make sense when the power is generated close to where it is used and where there is an efficient system to cover periods when solar and wind are not generating power.

We are planning to spend in the vicinity of $400bn on capital works for the Bowen-Minns NSW renewables plan. That figure more than doubles when you consider the governments have guaranteed the financial returns of developers often with very generous deals. Because they are so generous, Bowen and Minns have kept them secret.

When Shoebridge studies what Bowen and Minns are doing to the environment and to the cost of NSW power, my guess is he will be shocked.

In Europe, they have experienced a similar renewables disaster and can see that the renewables failure means a lot more carbon emissions in power generation. Young European Greens are now considering challenging the “no nuclear” attitudes of their leaders.

Shoebridge is 55, so I assume he will be steeped in non-nuclear attitudes.

At the 2025 election, nuclear made no sense to the community because they were told renewables were cheap and good for the environment. Partly as a result of bad government management, Australians, including young Greens, have been misled on both counts. My guess is once young Greens realise what has happened they will follow their European counterparts.

The fact that Shoebridge is challenging the Bowen-Minns renewables mess gives me hope. And the nuclear stations for today have much better and more flexible technology than the 1980s, when people’s views were established.

For Shoebridge and the older Greens, that is a huge step. But he undertook his secondary education at the James Ruse Agricultural High School, so he may have a sympathy for the rural sector.