One Nation leader Pauline Hanson has launched a fresh attack on Australia’s Net Zero emissions target, arguing the country’s transition toward renewable energy is built on what she describes as “a lie” that is making Australians poorer while delivering little environmental benefit.

Writing in an opinion article published as Sky News Australia officially rebranded to News24, Hanson said successive governments had failed to honestly explain what Net Zero means or acknowledge what she sees as the hidden costs of Australia’s climate policies.

Her article forms part of One Nation’s long-running opposition to Australia’s legislated target of achieving net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, a policy supported by the Albanese Government and broadly accepted by most developed economies under the Paris Agreement.

Hanson argues renewable energy is frequently portrayed as “emissions free” despite relying on steel, concrete, aluminium and other materials whose production generates carbon emissions.

She contends that wind turbines and solar panels require coal, gas or other fossil fuels during manufacturing, transport and installation, while electricity systems still depend on gas-fired generation or other dispatchable power when weather conditions reduce renewable output.

“The hypocrisy of net zero doesn’t end there. It only begins there,” Hanson wrote, claiming Australians are paying higher electricity prices while receiving a less reliable energy system.

Many energy researchers agree that renewable energy technologies are not entirely emissions-free over their full life cycle.

Manufacturing wind turbines, solar panels, transmission infrastructure and battery systems requires significant quantities of steel, cement, copper, aluminium and rare minerals, all of which currently involve carbon emissions during production. Transporting and constructing large-scale renewable projects also generates emissions.

However, climate scientists and organisations such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) note that lifecycle emissions from renewable technologies remain substantially lower than those from electricity generated by coal or natural gas over the same operating lifetime.

Independent lifecycle assessments typically conclude that wind and solar power produce only a fraction of the greenhouse gas emissions associated with fossil fuel generation once decades of electricity production are taken into account.

Another central argument in Hanson’s article concerns reliability.

She argues Australia cannot safely replace coal-fired generation without maintaining substantial backup generation because renewable output varies according to weather conditions.

That criticism reflects one of the principal policy debates currently shaping Australia’s energy transition.

Supporters of Net Zero acknowledge that wind and solar generation are variable but argue reliability can be maintained through a combination of battery storage, pumped hydro, flexible gas generation during the transition, expanded electricity transmission networks and improved demand management.

The Australian Energy Market Operator’s Integrated System Plan outlines precisely that approach, forecasting an electricity system increasingly dominated by renewable generation supported by storage and firming technologies over coming decades.

Hanson remains unconvinced.

She argues Australians have been promised lower electricity prices and greater energy security through renewable investment but instead have experienced rising household energy bills and growing concerns over electricity reliability.

Cost-of-living pressures have become one of One Nation’s strongest political themes, with the party linking energy policy directly to inflation, manufacturing competitiveness and household budgets.

The timing of Hanson’s latest intervention is significant.

Her comments come as One Nation continues to record some of its strongest polling in years, with recent surveys suggesting increasing voter support driven by concerns over immigration, housing affordability and energy policy.

Climate and energy policy has become one of the party’s defining electoral messages.

One Nation advocates abandoning Australia’s Net Zero target, increasing domestic coal and gas production, expanding conventional electricity generation and reducing what it describes as unnecessary climate regulation affecting households and industry.

The Albanese Government takes a markedly different position.

Labor argues achieving Net Zero is essential both to reducing Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions and to maintaining international competitiveness as major trading partners increasingly move toward low-emissions economies.

Ministers also argue that investment in renewable energy, storage technologies and electricity transmission will ultimately deliver a more affordable and secure energy system while reducing exposure to volatile global fossil fuel prices.

The Coalition’s position has also evolved in recent years.

While it continues to support the objective of reducing emissions, the Opposition has placed greater emphasis on nuclear energy alongside renewables, arguing that firm, low-emissions generation will be required to replace ageing coal-fired power stations.

The differing approaches illustrate how Australia’s climate debate has broadened beyond the simple question of whether emissions should be reduced.

Instead, political disagreement increasingly centres on the speed of the transition, the technologies that should be prioritised, the economic costs involved and how governments should balance environmental objectives with affordability and energy security.

Economists likewise remain divided over aspects of the transition.

Some argue delaying decarbonisation would expose Australia to greater long-term economic costs through reduced export competitiveness and climate-related damage. Others contend that current policies impose excessive short-term costs on households and businesses while technological and infrastructure challenges remain unresolved.

Hanson’s latest opinion piece therefore reflects a broader political contest that extends well beyond One Nation itself.

As Australia continues pursuing its 2050 emissions target, debates over electricity prices, industrial competitiveness, reliability and the pace of renewable investment are likely to remain central issues in national politics. Whether voters ultimately embrace Hanson’s call to abandon Net Zero or continue supporting Australia’s current climate pathway will remain one of the defining policy questions leading into future federal elections.