Offshore Wind Report Exposed: $84 Savings for Households Built on Flawed Assumptions

No offshore wind turbines 90-mile beach group have hit back at a report released yesterday which claimed offshore wind could reduced electricity bill for the average household by 2024.

Here is what they had to say:

A new report commissioned by offshore wind developer Star of the South is facing serious scrutiny, with critics warning it relies on optimistic modelling, selective assumptions and delivers minimal real-world benefit to Australians.

The Jacobs NEM Offshore Wind Benefits Study claims offshore wind could reduce electricity bills by just $84 per year for the average household by 2040   — raising questions about whether the massive industrial rollout is justified.

Despite acknowledging offshore wind is significantly more expensive to build and operate — and widely regarded as one of the most expensive forms of new electricity generation — the report attempts to justify the technology through so-called “system savings” including avoided transmission costs and “social licence” assumptions.

Critics say these are theoretical, difficult to verify, and mask the true cost of offshore wind.

“Australians are being asked to accept industrialisation of our coastline for what amounts to about $1.60 a week in savings — based on a model commissioned by the developer itself.”

The report was prepared for Star of the South and explicitly states it is not intended for third-party reliance  , raising concerns about independence and objectivity.

Key issues identified include:

• Developer-funded modelling with inherent bias risk

• Heavy reliance on policy assumptions, carbon pricing and future projections

• Use of subjective “social licence costs” to improve the case

• Key system costs excluded, including broader fuel security and infrastructure impacts

• No consideration of impacts on tourism or fisheries, despite these being critical coastal industries

• No inclusion of the significant subsidies required, including port infrastructure upgrades, transmission expansions, and manufacturing support

• A binary comparison that ignores alternative energy pathways

The study also finds total system savings of just $2.9 billion over more than three decades   — a marginal figure in the context of Australia’s energy system.

The report also runs counter to growing concern from major industry groups. The Australian Industry Group, representing more than 60,000 businesses, has called for a rethink of Victoria’s offshore wind rollout, warning that rising costs and delays risk locking households and businesses into a more expensive energy pathway.

Industry has urged a “rapid and thorough review”, noting that alternative options such as expanded onshore renewable zones may deliver similar outcomes at lower cost.

“This is a classic case of modelling delivering the answer it was designed to produce.”

“When you strip away the assumptions, Australians are left with higher costs, higher risks, and very little benefit.”

“This modelling doesn’t factor in the massive subsidies required — from port upgrades to manufacturing and transmission — that taxpayers will ultimately fund.”

Critics are calling for:

• Independent, transparent modelling of offshore wind

• Full disclosure of assumptions and excluded costs

• Release of underlying modelling inputs and cost assumptions for independent review

• Equal assessment of alternative energy options

• A genuine public mandate before proceeding with large-scale offshore projects

“If this report had not shown a benefit, it’s unlikely it would ever have been released.”

“Australians deserve transparent analysis — not reports commissioned and paid for by developers to support their own projects.”