«It is a typical phenomenon that is observed in the relationship between economics and politics: it is called “regulatory capture”, a branch of political economy , which studies the system used by the private sector – in certain conditions – to influence the public sphere by orienting legislation in favor of its own sector. In the case of renewable energy, the effects are the massive contributions paid by the State for projects for wind turbines and photovoltaic panels with which they would like to cover the countryside, hills, the slopes of Limbara, even sections of sea off the coasts of Gallura, Riviera del Corallo, Sulcis and Cagliaritano. Initiatives that sacrifice the environment, redistribute income by enriching only those who carry them out, limit development opportunities for those who live in that territory. A certain narrative has coined the slogan “green revolution”, but the reality is that the costs are passed on to citizens and businesses through bills. This is why the price of energy can only increase, as is already happening».
Tempiese raised in Olbia, Maria Giovanna Bosco lives in Milan and does research at the University of Ancona, after having taught Macroeconomics, International and European Economics and Labor Economics at Bocconi, at the University of Milan-Bicocca, at the Polytechnic of Milan, at the universities of Modena and Reggio-Emilia, at the Marshall School of Finance (University of Southern California, Los Angeles). In L'Industria, the magazine published by Il Mulino, she published a detailed analysis on the "Sardinia Case" that will be illustrated at the end of June in Oslo: «The idea of engaging in the study of energy transition arises from several reasons. First: I deal with ecological transition at the Polytechnic University of Marche. Reason number two: I have a personal interest in what is happening in Sardinia, where they would like to produce a seventh of the gigawatts planned by the projects presented throughout Italy: 52.88 against 354.35. It is clear that something does not add up». In Olbia for the weekend, he agrees to speak on one condition: "What I wrote concerns me and cannot be attributed in any way to the university where I currently work."
What did he discover?
«I started from the narrative elements - protests by citizens' committees, newspaper articles - to look for the facts that indicate the infiltration of the industrial world into politics, to the point that the decision-making and political process has been subservient to the interests of well-defined private entities. The framework is the rules that facilitate expropriations, the attempt to silence opposition movements to win over the public with an ad hoc narrative. There is an industrial dynamic that includes state aid despite the general European ban: investing in healthcare is not possible, because there is a budget constraint, which instead falls for renewables. The result is that the public entity has ended up advancing the needs of private individuals by passing them off as general interest. Not only that: there is scientific evidence that the objective of reducing CO2 emissions is a chimera, because at a global level everyone except Europe continues to invest in fossil fuels. Our effort, however legitimate, worthy, morally acceptable, will be useless. My task ends with the collection of factual data. Obviously only a magistrate can identify potential crimes, understand if and when environmental damage was committed, if there was a private interest in a public act, corruption and so on. I know that a complaint has also been filed with all the Public Prosecutor's Offices of Sardinia by the Committee for Insularity".
Does the free market not apply to renewable energy plants?
«Already in 2014, the professor of political economy Ross McKitrick denounced the problem for Ontario, in the very civilized Canada. He said: “Unfortunately, the idea of having to decarbonize at all costs has directed the system of economic incentives almost exclusively towards renewables, which however are a failure from an economic point of view”. Because what they require for installation and what they cause in terms of environmental damage is enormous compared to what they produce. I do not defend fossil fuels or nuclear, but in the comparison on productivity there is no comparison. For this reason, the only way to make wind and photovoltaic sustainable is for the State to intervene by funding the projects, eliminating competition and becoming the first customer for twenty years of activity, offering the guarantee of purchasing energy at a certain price. A risk-free activity for those who own the companies which, by extension, has eliminated the free market».
Corruption?
«Criminal behaviors have already occurred and have been sanctioned, I cite some in the investigation, just as mafia infiltration has been ascertained».
Will energy cost less?
"The promises of discounts on bills are false. A Morgan Stanley report from March 2025 highlights that prices in Europe have grown two to four times more than in the United States, five to seven times more than in China and India."
Who decided to direct the projects towards Sardinia?
"The choice was certainly not made by local communities. In 2021, Enel identified it in some press releases as the future energy hub of the Mediterranean. The extreme digitalization towards which we are moving requires an enormous amount of energy, I wonder: does the plan for the future of Sardinia have anything to do with it? The commodification of the sun and wind certainly risks perpetuating a neocolonialist attitude on the part of the institutions towards the Island".
The risks?
"From an identity, cultural and psychological point of view, seeing the landscape disfigured is a form of violence that is equivalent to losing a part of yourself: as if I looked in the mirror and no longer recognized myself. From an economic perspective, distorting the environment would make Sardinia less attractive and would hinder tourism: who would want to go on holiday to an industrial paradise made of wind turbines and photovoltaic panels? I think of Tempio, the jewel of the northeast that risks being distorted by the push for land rental for plants that enrich a few and harm everyone. Some owners I interviewed are regretting it because even profitability is not certain: when the plant's life cycle ends, it will be abandoned and the disposal costs are enormous. As happened in Nasca, on the island of San Pietro: the wind turbines have been there for decades even if they don't work."
Have you analyzed the regional law on Suitable Areas?
"The Region launched it by refusing to evaluate the Pratobello, born from a popular initiative and supported by hundreds of thousands of signatures. It was based on the absolute prerogative in urban planning matters. I interviewed a member of the Regional Council, he told me: "It would have been challenged by the State for unconstitutionality". This is certainly what happened to the Moratorium and Law 45 on Suitable Areas. So, was there incompetence or bad faith?"
What is the industrial environmentalism you write about?
«It proposes a transition that is only green in the adjective. It is anchored to rules that allow the use of parks, forests and agricultural areas for photovoltaic, wind, waste-to-energy and, in general, any other non-fossil energy source plants. Once upon a time, the law was more restrictive, the construction was limited to uncultivated or degraded areas of the territory. Today, if a farmer or a small landowner does not want to sell or rent their land on which a wind farm is to be built, the rules provide for expropriation. And it is in this passage that, for industrial environmentalism, lies the meaning of the ecological transition: moving from a territorial economic model with a high employment content based on quality agriculture, tourism and culture, to an industrial model specialized in the production of alternative energy, with a low employment content and very high returns. It goes without saying that at the base there is a false environmentalism that damages the economy, does not create jobs, impoverishes the territory and erases the landscapes for which we are famous in the world. Denmark is always mentioned, the birthplace of wind power: do you know of anyone going all the way there to admire the blades?
The attitude of environmental associations?
«Except for Italia Nostra and some small movements, they pretend not to see the interests of those who until the day before were producing CO2 at full blast and today have cooled their image - like the Erg in Saccargia - by throwing themselves into the business of renewable energy».
Why has no production cap been identified?
«It could have been an oversight by the legislator, or a reflection of the underlying fraud, that is, having deliberately created a speculative bubble similar to that of subprime mortgages that shook the world economy in 2008».
Are you mentioning companies that have annual operating costs of 28 thousand euros and receive incentives of three million?
«I simply collected data from numerous companies in the sector: they all have in common a disproportion between costs and money received from the State».
The way out?
"It would be enough to cover the industrial warehouses with photovoltaic panels: the objectives would be achieved without cementing the vineyards. If we then added all the roofs of the houses, the Italian problem would be solved, keeping in mind that to "stabilize" the energy system, fossil fuels would also be necessary in any case."
Geothermal?
"Sardinia's potential is very high and untapped, second only to that of Tuscany. To produce electricity, boiling water could be drawn from deep below ground and then reintroduced into the subsoil. In this way, a completely renewable production cycle would be created. I don't think anyone is willing to do so."
Paul Paolini