A story by Greg Roberts in The Australian a couple of months ago seems to have been missed. It exposed a motherlode of funds is flowing into Australia from foreigners to promote Net Zero.
Think of how enormous $343 million dollars is. Even spread over six years, it’s a huge amount of money to any Australia charity to buy teenage rent-a-crowds, social media campaigns, and tin-pot reports.
It’s so sweet that all these foreigners care so much about our environment, right? It’s just the mum’s and dad’s of Shanghai who want Australians to have nicer weather in 100 years…
Or maybe state entities and foreign industrialists want to protect their investments? How could we tell? The largest number of donations supposedly came from the US, but charities are under no obligation to name donors. And large US philanthropic funds can absorb and pass on donations from anywhere if they wanted to disguise the original source.
If, say, the Chinese wind industry (or the Danish one) were able to buy off Australian environmental activists, they win in two ways. Their pet activists demand the government mandate more wind turbines which increases the profits of Big Wind, while at the same time the Australian greenies turn a blind eye as the wind industry kills eagles, chops the forest and clubs the koalas. Whatever money the Chinese may have spent on Australian Net Zero lobbyists, the money surely flows right back to them through contracts for wind, solar and batteries.
We have no specific chain of evidence that this has happened, but if it was happening, no one would know. The wind industry have the means, motive and the opportunity, so to speak. They’d be crazy if they weren’t doing it.
And so we arrive at the charity in Sydney called “The Sunrise Project” which brings in millions from anonymous foreigners. They, in turn, fork out money to groups like the Friends of The Earth so they can call climate skeptics “shills for Big Oil”. Even the CFMEU (Construction Forestry and Maritime Employees Union) scored some cash. Whoever is funding the Sunrise Project apparently doesn’t want the world to know about their generosity. Mark Hepburn is the head of the Sunrise Project and was caught telling one donor via email that they were taking steps to avoid disclosure — saying ” I do have concerns about the potential PR impact of disclosure of both our funding and grantees.””
Secretive Sydney-based charity The Sunrise Project has raked in hundreds of millions of dollars in donations from cashed-up overseas financiers to spearhead the push for net-zero emissions, allowing it to fill the coffers of Australian conservation groups turning a blind eye to mounting concerns about the environmental impacts of renewable energy projects.
Investigations by The Australian indicate that conservation group Friends of the Earth, one of the The Sunrise Project’s donation beneficiaries, teamed up with wealthy overseas companies to back their plans to carve up pristine forest in North Queensland for a wind farm.
Friends of the Earth Australia has received more than $26m in donations and “grant income” in recent years, giving it the resources to boost an increasingly fractious campaign to keep the broader environment movement onside in support of the net-zero emissions push.
The Sunrise Project received almost $343.5m in grants and donations between 2018 and 2024, according to annual financial statements filed with the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission. Over the same period, the charity forked out more than $279m in grants to groups and projects in Australia and overseas.
Sunrise has raised eyebrows by making $365,000 in payments to the controversial Construction Forestry and Maritime Employees Union. The charity is also under scrutiny by the Senate over an extraordinary admission that it held a “strategy session” that included discussion about hiding the identity of funding sources.
The funding flowing to the Sunrise project has ramped up massively in the last ten years. While they got less than $5m in 2016 (which still buys a lot of angry teenagers), by 2021 they were raking in $50 million plus. And by 2024 they were pulling in $75 million.
The Green-activists are in bed with industrial renewables corporation
There are some pretty odd exchanges revealing the tight alliances of green groups and industrial wind corporations.
The Australian vice president of the giant renewables corporation called Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners was sending emails to Ark Energy, another renewables giant at the same time as they were sending messages to Friends of the Earth. The big renewables groups were in, or wanted to be in on the Chalumbin wind farm.
For some reason the head of the Copenhagen renewables group were praising the top guy at the Friends of the Earth (Foe) because “ “We’ve worked closely with Foe in the context of Star of the South, and Cam has been very helpful in relaying information from their people in North Queensland.”
That was when the top guy at Friends of the Earth wrote to another environmental charity which was critical of the Chalumbin project and “wanted them to talk to people at Ark Energy and CIP to find a way to get the Chalumbin wind farm approved.” That head was Steve Nowakowski, a passionate photographer who’d been working to stop wind farms, and he was astonished, saying:
“I have been involved with conservation groups all of my life and I have never witnessed a conservation group working with multibillion-dollar companies trying to get a development over the line. This was the most obscene development, hard up against a World Heritage area with gorgeous forests, and Foe didn’t seem concerned about the forests, just focusing on its relationships with Ark Energy and CIP.”
The Greenie types are selling out quickly for the money. Cheap Cheap…
Drew Hutton, a former founder of The Greens says: “You can’t keep an energy or mining company honest if you are accepting money from them. They are holding you hostage. The capture of an environmental NGO usually involves that organisation turning a blind eye to environmentally harmful activities they should be opposing.”
It’s a long article in The Australian from April 2, 2026. Read it all.
Image: AI generated. “Greens are best friends with the Bankers”
No matter how arrogant and evil we think the Deep State is — it’s worse
The conspiracy nuts were right again.
Marberg Virus | NIAID
The US funding that helped create the Wuhan Flu was not a one-off. It was just the tip of a clandestine industry spread across the world.
The next world war may be a Bioweapon War, and it may have already started.
Tulsi Gabbard, Director of National Intelligence (DNI) reveals that the US was funding biolabs in more than 30 countries, many of which were working with ways to make dangerous pathogens even more dangerous. There was very little visibility or oversight on these labs and with some in war-zones, or hostile nations, there was always the dark possibility of losing control of the labs.
And so it is that the bad-man Trump-Hitler is the only President so far, who asked his officials to provide the evidence to the world, and to stop the US government funding of gain-of-function experiments.
Past Presidents would just call you a conspiracy nut.
With the AI rush, we are on the cusp of a kind of mutually assured destruction by bioweapons. It’s just a matter of time before the hyperscale manipulation of molecules and codes cracks a new deadly combination. The hard part is not creating infectious death, it’s creating something that targets only a certain group of people while finding a way to protect the creators.
It is one of the major reasons we cannot afford to lose the AI race. The winner may be able to develop the world’s most deadly weapon, and if they (or renegades among them) arrogantly believed they had a “cure” or a vaccine that protected themselves — they might be prepared to use it. That’s part of the reason we need to discuss the failure rates and problems with vaccines instead of burying that bad news. We need the worlds psychopaths and military forces to understand the risks.
The newly declassified evidence can be found here.
“I’m releasing intelligence showing U.S. funding for more than 120 biolabs in over 30 countries, including Ukraine,” Gabbard said, adding that ODNI will continue working with federal partners to map where these facilities are located and what research they conduct.
“Many of these U.S. government-funded biolabs are currently or have previously engaged in research using hazardous and highly contagious pathogens, in some cases to include dangerous Gain-of-Function research, with very little visibility or oversight,” Gabbard said.
Until now, evidence regarding the full existence and funding of these laboratories had been knowingly withheld from the American people. The information surrounding the existence, history, locations and funding of these US funded biolabs has been intentionally covered up by powerful people falsely, claiming that they do not exist and accusing anyone who says otherwise to be foreign assets and traitors to America.
“We will continue working across the government to identify where these labs are and what pathogens they contain,” she added, tying the effort to President Donald Trump’s directive aimed at restricting federal funding for gain-of-function research abroad.
“President Trump understands the serious threat dangerous Gain-of-Function research poses to the American people, which is why he took decisive action on May 25, 2025, signing EO 14292 to end federal funding of Gain-of-Function research around the world,” ODNI said.
The wanton disregard, and foolish arrogance of the Deep State is something to behold.
For some reason the pursuit of global teenage-girly weather-control has meant Australian workers are less productive. Who could have guessed that attempts to stop storms, floods and droughts in a hundred years would not make us richer today? I mean, apart from everyone?
“Australians are working harder for less”
In the last 25 years we’ve spent 126% more on capital costs but only improved output by 14%. It’s bad!
Now even the Productivity Commission is warning that renewable green investment is holding back the nation.
Australian productivity was rising until it suddenly fell off a cliff around May 2022 (see the graph below). Coincidentally this was the moment the Albanese Labor Party first got elected and went gangbusters with renewable energy. It seemed to be worthy of an annotated arrow, so I added that in…
After Energy Minister Chris Bowen made a push alongside the UN’s top climate official this week for further investment in renewable energy, Productivity Commission deputy chair Alex Robson released a study showing that such investment had “contributed to a productivity decline” and Australians were working harder for less...
The warnings follow Jim Chalmers and Anthony Albanese nominating improved productivity as a cornerstone of the Labor government’s second term, and Mr Bowen in his role as COP31 president of negotiations encouraging a push for a new global electrification target.
Estimates have placed the government’s annual spending commitments to climate and renewable energy at more than $9bn a year.
In other news this week, families are in shock at the cost of electricity:
While the 17 solar panels on her roof used to cut her electricity bill down to almost nothing, now even that is not enough. “We used to only ever get a bill in the winter months,” she says. “It was always very low, sometimes even $100 a quarter. Over the last 12 months, the bills have just gone up by hundreds and hundreds of dollars.”
In September 2022, Ms Killorn paid $412 for a quarterly electricity bill. In 2025, her September bill came to an eye-watering $1506. Her most recent bill in March this year was $893.
And the government has to prop up our smelters or they would go out of business because they can’t afford the electricity either:
Ayres open to more Nyrstar funding as taxpayer aid tops $240m
Industry Minister Tim Ayres has left the door open to further support for Nyrstar’s loss-making Port Pirie lead smelter and Hobart’s zinc refinery, saying overseas “non-market practices” would be a key factor in future funding decisions.
On Wednesday, the Albanese government announced a further $105m support package…
This is a Singaporean company we’re paying to dig up our minerals using our green expensive electrons. Go figure…
New data centers in Australia may use as much as 6% of the electricity demand by 2030. (That’s a whole six percent increase in demand four years from now. Call the ambulance, eh!).
But the thing is, our fragile grid already has these odd jiggly voltage and frequency spikes now that we’ve blown up all the spare coal plants, and any one of these jiggles may trigger a cluster of data centers to trip out at the same time to protect themselves. If a large load disappears off the grid simultaneously, it could set off a cascading chain of failures causing a widespread blackout. (A bit like the wind farms did in the Great South Australian Blackout of 2016).
So the manager of our forced fantasy transition is lining up the excuses to cover for his own failures. If there’s a blackout, it’s AI’s fault he says. And if prices rise, it’s AI’s fault too claims Minister Chris Bowen — who says that “Wholesale electricity prices could jump by a quarter in NSW and Victoria if data-centre growth is not matched by new renewable generation and storage…“.(Unlike the 50 years before that where demand grew and prices fell because we just built more coal power).
Then there’s the extortion. If AI want to do business here, they have to install renewables to “strengthen (meaning, weaken) the grid” says Mr Bowen.
Why don’t we just let the AI centers choose the generator themselves Minister, like there was a free market? Is it because we all know they’d build gas or coal plants?
The sad story is his new Capacity Investment Scheme is failing to win over investors, so Chris Bowen has to force the new customers to buy his pet generators, to help him pretend to meet the targets we have no chance of reaching.
Energy Minister Chris Bowen has warned that data centres must “do their bit to strengthen” the energy grid, asserting that operators will be required to underwrite new renewable power and fund their own connectivity so the massive spike in energy demand does not become a strain on consumers.
But the grid operator found that by 2030 a single fault near western Sydney could knock out about 1500 megawatts of data-centre power in milliseconds. It cautioned that data centres clustered around Sydney and Melbourne could disconnect across multiple locations as a result of an ordinary voltage dip, raising a new risk for the operation of the grid.
And the lie perpetuates.
Data centre giant Airtrunk estimates that, for every additional gigawatt of data centre demand, Australia will likely need around 3 to 4 gigawatts of new renewable generation capacity to support 24/7 operations.
It doesn’t matter how many renewables anyone installs, it will never support 24/7 electricity without a monster load of storage.
*PS: The internet is out here. I thought I could not write but I managed to rig up a drip feed miracle through a phone, “yay”.
Back in 2020 nothing was more important than climate change. Swept away by the crisis, Amazon Founder Jeff Bezos set up a $10,000 million dollar fund to ‘fight climate change and protect nature’. It was the largest piece of atmospheric philanthropy known to mankind. But it’s become a bit of a ghost account.
The money was supposed to be spent by 2030, but six years in, 72% of the funds still haven’t been allocated.
Officials at the Bezos Earth Fund said they remain committed to disbursing $10 billion by 2030. With four years left on the timeline, however, only 28% of the promised funds have been allocated so far.
In interviews and statements, Earth Fund executives reaffirmed their plan to spend $10 billion by the end of the decade. “Many of our strategies remain the same,” a spokesperson said…
Now that Trump sucked the government subsidies away from pet climate projects, you’d think the Bezos funding would be more “needed” than ever.
Breakthrough Energy, the Bill Gates-backed group that bankrolls climate tech, has stopped making new investments from one of its key funds to scale up nascent green technologies, just as the market for these startups is being squeezed by President Donald Trump’s assaults on climate policy.
After supporting 10 startups and spending “high hundreds of millions of dollars,” a Breakthrough Energy spokesperson said, it has now suspended new investment from the fund.
They all have their excuses for the turnaround
Jeff Bezos says AI will solve climate change. Even though AI is consuming vast quantities of gigawatts, pushing old coal plants back into action, it will undo the crisis about climate change (especially if it accidentally looks at the scientific data, eh?)
According to the Fund, it is ‘harnessing [AI’s] power to transform how the world addresses climate and nature’.
Dr Stephan Singer, a senior global energy policy adviser with Climate Action Network International, said in a report by the Guardian in 2024: ‘The projects of the Bezos fund do not address the key issues of the fundamental climate crisis we are facing – they are nice but unfortunately cosmetic.’
Dr Singer was discussing the Fund’s big bet on carbon offsetting schemes, widely understood to do little to mitigate global heating.
Bill Gates says technology has already saved us
Gates was thrilled at how well the decarbonization plan was going. If we pretend that giant unaccountable organizations like the IEA make useful predictions, rather than hyperbolic spam, then things are going much better than they might have been in the IEA doomer imaginary future.
In a LinkedIn post published yesterday, Microsoft co-founder and climate investor Bill Gates shared an optimistic update on global energy-related CO₂ emissions that challenges much of the prevailing doom-and-gloom narrative.
The key graphic Gates posted tells the story clearly:
In 2014, the International Energy Agency (IEA) projected that, under then-current policies, the world would be emitting roughly 50 billion tons (50 Gt) of energy-related CO₂ per year by 2040.
The IEA’s latest 2024 assessment, using the same “current policies” framework, now puts that 2040 figure at just 29 Gt — a stunning 42% reduction in the expected emissions trajectory in only one decade of forecasting updates.
The 2020s was the ‘decisive decade’, said Bezos. Indeed.
For some reason no one can explain, the catchments for the Burnett and Mary rivers are included in the Great Barrier Reef protection legislation. These rivers don’t even flow into the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, they empty to the south of it, and get swept away by the giant East Australian Current which heads south away from the reef.
The amount of water moving there is so vast that the entire annual flow of the Burnett and Mary Rivers passes in just two minutes.
Any runoff the rivers add to that flow will have to do a full lap of the Pacific Ocean to Peru and back before they get to the Great Barrier Reef.
We’re being so precious about the reef, but there are also eddy currents and gyres in the area that stir up the ocean floor and add a rich nutrient mix to the water. One near Fraser Island is so rich it causes phytoplankton blooms all by itself. Farms also use pesticides, and bad land management could add sediment to water — but as Peter Ridd says “where is the data”?
So despite farms adding an insignificant amount of nutrients to a current flowing away from the reef, farmers spread over 53,000 square kilometers of land must comply with rules about runoff, watering, and fertilizer. And they and their advisors all need to keep records of their compliance.
On this close up map below the distance from Bundaberg to Lady Elliot Island (the nearest reef) is 77 kilometers away.
The Burnett and Mary Rivers flow into an area south of the Great Barrier Reef.
Let’s check that science — Queensland readers — we need your help.
Peter Ridd has looked closely into this (see his video below from last year.) The Australian Environment Foundation (AEF) is starting up a campaign to get the Queensland Productivity Commission to run an independent inquiry into the scientific assumptions behind environmental laws. The initial case study would be the Great Barrier Reef Protection Measure in the catchment of the Burnett-Mary rivers because it is a star example of pointless Big Government legislation.
To get started we need 3000 signatures on the QLD Parliamentary Petition before it closes on June 12th. Only people living in Queensland can sign it. But if you know someone who lives there please send them an email.
Professor Peter Ridd is organizing this as Chairman of the Board at the AEF. I am also a Director of the AEF.
We’re facing the sixth mass extinction but carbon accounting games are a performance art and almost no one cares that the largest emitter on Earth has gaping holes in their numbers.
One reader in The Wall Street Journal, pointed out that The Onion saw this coming years ago:
The Paris Agreement allows everyone to set their own targets, and to define their own terms (and retrospectively as well). So China decided it would count “carbon intensity”, rather than carbon output. But it didn’t define carbon intensity. Normally it means the amount of CO2 emitted per unit GDP — which would work well for China with its rapidly growing economy. But something else is going on.
In the last five years China had promised to cut emissions by 18%, but all the official statistics suggested it was only getting 12% of the way there. Then a miracle happened and suddenly China leapt to a 17.7% reduction, just in the nick of time.
The Ecoworriers team at Carbon Brief are probably the only ones who do care and they drilled through all the detail. But being as generous as they can, even they can’t explain where 380 megatons went.
To put that in perspective, Australia’s entire annual emissions was 459 megatons. It’s like someone just said Oopsie to 80% of our national emissions.
So the rules are loose, and China is taking advantage of every loophole. The CCP knows that the UN isn’t going to turn up with guns to say “pay up”. But there is a price. The whole renewables project that China profits from looks just that much more dodgy, and so does the CCP. Who can trust anything they say?
Unlike the West’s green radicals, China isn’t willing to sacrifice its economy to meet its climate pledges. But Beijing isn’t above cooking its carbon books to gull Western activists into thinking it is.
At United Nations climate conferences in Copenhagen in 2009 and Paris in 2015, Beijing vowed sizeable reductions in the amount of carbon China emits per dollar of gross domestic product, or carbon intensity. Subsequent national planning documents reiterated this goal.
Old-style accounting implies China’s emission grew by a huge 1,430 megatonnes in the last five years. But the new carbon-intensity figures imply only 690 megatons of CO₂ growth, creating a 730 megatonnes from CO₂ gap.
A major change in the way that China measures its core climate goal has effectively halved the growth in the country’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions over the past five years.
Here’s one slight of hand — only coal burnt in pursuit of energy counts. Not coal converted to plastics, asphalt, rubber, chemicals or fertilizer.
A footnote in China’s latest statistical communique offers a brief description of carbon intensity as relating to the CO2 emissions from “energy activities and industrial production”.
This indicates that the carbon-intensity calculation now includes industrial process emissions and excludes non-energy uses of fossil fuels, shown by the “new scope” in the figure above.
Remember China’s huge coal-to-liquids program that I wrote about two months ago? Every year nearly 400 million tons of coal are converted to fertilizer, chemicals, plastics, jet fuel and diesel.
And some of these accounting tricks make sense. The Tupperware containers for example, are legitimately holding their CO2 (for now). But even that trick doesn’t account for the missing CO2.
So China treats us like mugs and we cheer it on. Why?
Wetzel describes this as a ‘wind power puzzle’ and discusses several possible causes:
Several years with weak wind conditions,
More frequent curtailments of wind turbines due to grid bottlenecks,
The expansion of wind farms at weaker inland locations,
So-called shading or ‘wind theft’ effects between wind turbines.
Australia has already done the same experiment. No matter how much wind power we add to the grid we can’t seem to get the bare minimum to increase, (the dark green columns at the bottom).
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.
A story by Greg Roberts in The Australian a couple of months ago seems to have been missed. It exposed a motherlode of funds is flowing into Australia from foreigners to promote Net Zero.
.jpg){kind=link}
Recent Comments