The PR Blog

We are told it’s all under control. Markets are managed, energy transitions are planned, and the future is green and bright.

But every promise comes with a bill. From the speculative frenzy of Bitcoin,  Australia’s costly flirtation with renewables to Norway’s rare success with hydro, the lesson is clear: good intentions are never free. Not in Australia, anyway.

While governments assure us they have the answers, the quiet drip of cost - economic, social, and personal - tells another story.

In the shadow of climate pledges, tech booms, and economic experiments, we find ourselves staring at something that feels a little like Seymour’s “Audrey II” from Little Shop of Horrors—an ever-hungry plant demanding more blood.

Except in our case, the plant is a tangle of renewable energy targets, AI’s insatiable power appetite, and the shimmering promise (or mirage) of crypto.

Our leaders assure us all is under control. But for those of us in the real world, watching power bills climb and systems strain, it’s hard not to wonder: who’s feeding the plant, and how much more will it demand?

Match Made in Heaven, or White Elephant?

Bitcoin and renewables can complement each other in theory, but good intentions can pave the road to ruin. Mining’s flexibility means it could soak up excess renewable power and provide rural jobs. But its scale is vast, its benefits mostly private, and its hunger relentless. Even if powered by renewables, the land, infrastructure, and capital required are enormous. The question looms: why burn clean power to mint digital coins that serve few?

Renewables already face intermittency, storage costs, and grid bottlenecks. Adding a 24/7 power glutton could be less a strategic masterstroke and more a white elephant dream. Without ironclad rules forcing miners to live off surplus green energy, Bitcoin risks becoming another burden - a shiny, energy-gobbling distraction that erodes trust.

 Bitcoin, once hailed as a revolution,  gulps electricity like a teenager at an all-you-can-eat buffet. Layer on top of that AI - machines that promise to change everything, but need vast amounts of energy to learn, process, and “think.”

In Australia, where power prices already punch us in the guts, and grids groan in summer heat, what happens when we add these new demands? Are we feeding innovation or just fattening the plant that might strangle us later?

Contrast that with Norway - a country blessed with reliable hydro and geothermal power. For them, going green seems straightforward; they’ve got natural assets that make sustainability less of a burden and more of a dividend. Australia, on the other hand, has sunlight and wind aplenty but also distances, storage issues, and a history of political energy wars that leave consumers feeling like pawns.

• Norway’s hydro: Century-old infrastructure, short distances, predictable rainfall, strong governance, low population density, and a grid built around water.

• Australia’s challenges: Vast landmass, long transmission lines, high variability in solar and wind, limited hydro potential compared to Norway’s system, and heavy export-driven industries.

• Key point: “Green” isn’t always green everywhere. Solar panels, wind farms, and batteries require rare earths, land clearing, and huge capital. In Australia, the environmental and social costs (mining, habitat impact, transmission corridors) can be as contentious as the benefits.

Risks and Costs

The risks are stark. Bitcoin’s relentless demand doesn’t pause for sunsets or seasons. Globally, 45% of Bitcoin’s energy comes from coal, and in Australia, fossil reliance could negate renewable gains. For Australia’s households and industries - like mining, which powers 10% of GDP - rising costs could echo Weimar’s hyperinflation, where ordinary citizens watched livelihoods erode while elites profited.

Which brings me back to the Weimar Republic. 

The social parallels are chilling. Weimar’s collapse wasn’t just economic; it was a betrayal of trust. The working class felt abandoned by a system that favoured the powerful. Today, Australia’s green transition, championed by policymakers and investors, risks alienating the everyday citizen. If Bitcoin inflates energy bills or derails net-zero targets, resentment could boil over. Add the pressure of external shocks - tariffs, market shifts, currency turmoil - and the squeeze tightens. Bitcoin, pitched as “digital gold” to hedge against fiat’s decay, could instead become an unstable parasite, piling e-waste and emissions on a fragile grid.

It’s hard not to feel skeptical. The road to hell, they say, is paved with good intentions. Net Zero, crypto, AI - each one promises progress but carries hidden costs. And maybe that’s the point of this piece: I don’t have all the answers. Frankly, I’m as confused as anyone. Maybe you are too. Maybe we’re all trying to work out if we’re pioneers or patsies. 

So here’s the question I’m left with: how much blood does Audrey II want? And at what point do we stop singing along and start asking whether we’re being bled dry? What do you think?