It’s taken a while to get here but Anthony Albanese is on the verge of promising what some economists and most clean energy advocates have been urging Australian governments to do for years. Or at least a version of it.

The prime minister’s promised “Future Made in Australia” act is clumsily named, and the announcement last week had few details, but the idea – that the government will need to use its weight to help develop green industries if the country is to make a rapid transition from fossil fuels to a clean economy – has been a long time coming.

Some of the criticism that followed has made headlines but been pretty unremarkable. It’s true that, if badly developed, an interventionist industry policy could become a money pit and create subsidy-dependent businesses. The government should absolutely aim not to do that. It underlines the importance of the decisions being made in Canberra before next month’s budget.

It’s also true that leaders will need to be bold, and an overly cautious approach is unlikely to do what’s needed. The expert consensus is that there is an opportunity in this moment – as the climate crisis worsens, and as countries comparable to Australia introduce strategies to attract trillions in clean investment – to spur the new industries needed to gain a foothold in new industries and help create green jobs.

It won’t last for ever at this scale. And taking it slow won’t avoid attacks on the government from people stuck on the idea that little of substance needs to change as the climate crisis rewrites the global economy. They’re going to happen anyway.

Other countries – in Europe, and Japan, Korea and Canada – are already chasing some of the trillions in global clean investment up for grabs in the decades ahead. They have mostly been reacting to what could be US$1tn in support for clean industries contained in that country’s paradigm-shifting Inflation Reduction Act.

But they are also responding to the slower creep of China’s massive green investment that has, for example, given it near complete dominance of the global solar supply chain that everyone relies on. It explains why several of the countries stuck the word “security” in the name of their green industry strategies.

The challenge for a resource-rich, medium-sized economy such as Australia is to identify industries in which it has a competitive advantage, and weigh how best to minimise the risks to taxpayers. It will be a while before it’s clear the extent to which the areas the government has backed to date – $2bn to kickstart a proposed green hydrogen industry, $1bn for solar panel supply chain manufacturing, and $4bn for mining and processing of critical minerals – fit into the category.

Smart minds have suggested that a sensible approach would be to mostly stop exporting raw materials and instead back onshore production and refinement of products such as ammonia, iron, steel, aluminium and a variety of critical minerals. Substantially more support will be needed, probably through tax breaks and direct investments as well as cheap loans and guarantees.

Consideration of how best to do this is running parallel with the equally important issue of how to ensure that people in the most fossil fuel-reliant parts of Australia are not trampled into the dust in a stampede for a clean future. We have known for years that parts of the country are likely to face a disproportionately hard future as dirty industries are inevitably phased down, and eventually out. Though often discussed, this issue has largely been ignored in national policy.

It hasn’t had the same attention as the promised shift to green industry policy, but there is evidence this is changing. Last month, as the government introduced legislation to create a Net Zero Economy Authority to help manage the transition to a clean economy, it quietly posted an impact analysis that is shaping its thinking.

The report assesses what will happen as at least 10 of the country’s remaining 19 coal-fired power plants shut by 2035. It estimates more than 3,000 coal power workers could lose their jobs, with spillover losses for about 900 contractors.

Past experience suggests as many as a third of the people who work at coal plants could still be unemployed a year after the generator has closed if left unsupported, and that their drop in earning capacity tends to be much greater than in other closing industries. The impact on financial hardship and health can ripple through a community and become a “self-reinforcing cycle” as people find it increasingly difficult to find work and lose skills and motivation.

These coal jobs are concentrated in just six regions across the country, notably Gladstone in central Queensland, the Hunter and Latrobe valleys, and Collie in Western Australia. Some of these areas are likely to benefit from new clean industries, which will mostly be regional, but it obviously won’t be a one-for-one match.

The report lists three ways the government could respond: do nothing, create a pooled redeployment policy for affected workers that the owners coal plants bosses can opt in to, or introduce laws that would allow it to force the owners of coal plants and their suppliers to take part in the redeployment arrangements and support their employees to find new jobs.

The latter two options would come at a public cost – almost $130m for the legislated third option – but the report argues the benefits that flowed from creating a pool of skilled workers for new employers, improving the social, health and welfare outcomes for workers and their families, and maintaining social cohesion and local identity would be significantly greater.

It also found more than 2.5 times as many workers were likely to be transferred into new jobs under the option that gave the government the power to force companies to act than if it made it a voluntary scheme. The “do nothing” option, in which the future of the workers would be left to the market, was not even assessed.

The implicit message is that the people affected by the historic transition under way need to be brought along for the ride, and given the help they need to get through it. As with the promised green industry policy, it’s taken a while to get here. But it’s the right place to start.

Australians are choosing hybrid over electric vehicles, but sales of both continue to climb while internal combustion engines record a decline.

Hybrids outsold EVs in three consecutive quarters with 95,129 sales – overtaking 69,593 EVs sold, according to the Australian Automobile Association’s quarterly EV Index released on Tuesday night.

The data also reinforced a recent trend of declining sales of conventional cars, which have fallen by 8.03% in the fourth quarter of 2023 to the first quarter of 2024. Their market share also dropped to 78.18%, sinking below 80% for the first time.

EVs rose to 8.70% market share in this time, while hybrids jumped to 11.95% – up from 6.26% in the first quarter of 2023.

“People are wanting to go into that lower cost, lower emissions motoring, but they just don’t think they are ready for the full EV experience,” Australian Automotive Dealer Association boss James Voortman said.

Premium prices amid a cost of living crisis, as well as a lack of recharging infrastructure, are the main concerns stopping consumers from making the transition to EVs, he said.

Three in five consumers are “less open to paying more money for an electric vehicle due to the current cost of living pressures,” Voortman said, pointing to AADA survey results released in February.

“During this time where everything is costing more” it can be more difficult for consumers to look beyond an EV’s upfront price premium and towards fuel savings, he said.

Charging infrastructure is “no doubt” another concern.

“There is a growing acceptance that you can do a lot of your charging at home, but not everyone has access to home charging,” Voortman said.

“I think as the infrastructure rolls out, we will see more and more people willing to take up an electric vehicle.”

The specific types of vehicles available can also pose as a barrier for consumers in need of a larger vehicle, like a ute, van or SUV are an affordable price point.

“It is going to take time for those vehicles to arrive,” Voortman said.

In the meantime, “hybrid technology [is] a stepping stone,” Voortman said.

While “there is no doubt that driving a hybrid is a lot more friendly for the environment than a pure petrol or diesel vehicle”, it is also “a lot more affordable for those customers”.

“There are significant benefits for for both customers but also for the environment,” Voortman said.

“There is no doubt the future is fully electric and zero emissions motoring, but there is going to be a bit of a journey to get there.”

“Hybrids are a good stepping stone to that future.”

Greece has become the first country in Europe to announce a ban on bottom trawling in all of its national marine parks and protected areas.

The country said will spend €780m (£666m) to protect its “diverse and unique marine ecosystems”.

The Greek prime minister, Kyriakos Mitsotakis, told delegates at the Our Ocean conference in Athens on Tuesday: “We’ve established two additional marine national parks, one in the Ionian and one in the Aegean, increasing the size of our marine protected areas by 80% and covering one third of our marine territorial waters.

“We will ban bottom trawling in our national parks by 2026 and in all marine protected areas by 2030.”

He said he would also establish a state-of-the-art surveillance system, including drones, to enforce the ban.

The proposed Ionian marine national park will cover almost 12% of Greek territorial waters, safeguarding sea mammals like sperm whales, striped dolphins and the vulnerable Mediterranean monk seal and the South Aegean MPA, which covers 6.61% of Greek territorial waters.

However, the Athens government’s decision to go ahead with two new marine parks in the Aegean and Ionian has stirred up tensions with its historical rival Turkey. Ankara’s foreign ministry warned Greece last week that the proposal in the Aegean lay in a disputed area and that the initiative was “politically motivated”.

Conservationists welcomed the announcement and said they hoped the move would create a “domino effect” for other EU countries to do the same.

Nicholas Fournier, the campaign director for marine protection at the international conservation group Oceana, said: “Everyone was expecting France or Germany or Spain to step up. The fact that Greece is championing this ban on bottom trawling is surprising but very welcome.

“We hope this creates a domino effect on other European countries to do the same. The pressure is on France, as it hosts the UN oceans conference next year.”

The news came as France was accused of hypocrisy by conservationists over a post-Brexit dispute with the UK over fishing rights. The country launched an official protest after the UK moved to ban bottom trawling from parts of its territorial waters to protect vulnerable marine habitats.

Charles Clover, the co-founder of Blue Marine Foundation, a UK-based conservation organisation, said: “The grownups of Europe really do need to sort out the extraordinary chaos between its member states over marine protection. France claims to have already protected 30% of its waters – while their own conservationists tell us less than 0.1% of its waters are effectively protected from trawling.

“On top of that, France wants to prevent Britain banning trawling in marine protected areas in the UK’s own waters – which is utter hypocrisy, contrary to habitats laws that apply to both of us and unacceptable to the UK. Today we have Greece leading Europe by announcing that it will actually protect all of its MPAs from trawling by 2030, which amounts to a huge 32% of its waters. Has the EU no common standards?”

Bottom trawling by industrial vessels is a hugely damaging fishing technique that drags heavy nets across the seabed, destroying habitats and releasing carbon into the sea and the atmosphere.

Oceana – along with other NGOs, the Marine Conservation Society and Seas at Risk – has urged the EU to take tougher action against members that still allow bottom trawling in their marine protected areas. A report in March showed that the destructive practice is still happening in 90% of all offshore MPAs in the EU.

At the moment, just 7-8% of the ocean is protected, and only 3% falls under the “highly protected” category.