Key takeaways
Climate change conversations aren't just politically or geographically divided; there's a more subtle yet critical generational divide.
It's incorrect and misleading to simply characterise older generations as apathetic and younger ones as deeply concerned.
Generations are shaped by formative experiences, influencing their approach to climate issues.
Economic well-being directly impacts an individual's capacity to prioritise environmental concerns.
People facing financial struggles focus on immediate survival rather than long-term climate risks.
Climate activism can inadvertently become an elite pursuit, alienating financially stressed populations, and potentially turning into a cultural divide similar to US COVID debates.
Resolving generational and geographic divides requires pragmatic, future-focused leadership embracing engineering, economics, and empathy equally.
Climate change is real, and it's here to stay.
But while the climate may be changing gradually, the conversations around it are becoming more polarised by the day.
You’d expect the divide to be political — progressive versus conservative.
Or maybe geographic — city dwellers versus country folk.
But after a fascinating discussion with demographer Simon Kuestenmacher on our Demographics Decoded podcast, a more subtle, deeper split came into focus.
The real divide?
It’s generational.
And it’s not as simple as “young people care, old people don’t.”
That narrative is lazy and dangerously misleading.
Let’s unpack what’s really going on.
For weekly insights and strategic advice, subscribe to the Demographics Decoded podcast, where we will continue to explore these trends and their implications in greater detail.
Subscribe now on your favourite Podcast player:
Each generation sees climate change through a different lens
Generations are shaped by the big events of their formative years.
And when it comes to climate change, that’s leading to starkly different worldviews.
Baby Boomers, for example, often get accused of apathy on the climate front.
But that’s not fair and it’s not accurate.
Simon made the point that Boomers were at the forefront of many environmental movements.
They were the ones who cleaned up our rivers, pushed for national parks, and embraced recycling — long before the climate became a global buzzword.
And yes, while their focus was often local rather than planetary, the legacy is real.
Simon reminded us that the Bob Brown-led “Green Movement” was a Boomer creation.
Environmentalism didn’t start with Gen Z.
It’s just evolved as science and urgency have shifted.
Now compare that with Gen Z.
These young Australians came of age with smartphones in their pockets and 24/7 news cycles in their faces.
Climate catastrophe is their constant backdrop — floods, fires, melting ice caps, coral bleaching, and dire IPCC reports.
That constant exposure has shaped not just their thinking but their psychology.
We're now seeing a surge in eco-anxiety — a diagnosable psychological condition.
Some councils are even hiring therapists to help young people cope with their fears about a world they believe is in freefall.
Simon likened this anxiety to the Cold War-era nuclear dread.
Back then, children practised duck-and-cover drills and feared global annihilation.
Today’s youth fear an overheated planet, rising seas, and societal collapse.
The scale of doom is similar, only this time, it’s wrapped in environmental warnings.
“You can’t go green without having enough greens in your wallet”
Simon made an important observation that’s often overlooked in these discussions: people can only care about climate change when they’re not struggling to survive financially.
It’s hard to worry about sea levels rising in 2050 when you’re wondering how to pay the rent next week.
That’s not apathy — that’s reality.
We can’t ignore the fact that cost-of-living pressures are taking centre stage in both urban and rural Australia.
And when people are under financial strain, climate concern fades.
You don’t buy an electric car or install solar panels when you’re behind on your mortgage repayments.
That’s why the current climate debate, if not handled well, risks becoming a cultural wedge.
It’s already happening.
The inner-city elites pushing the strongest climate narratives are often the least affected by climate events.
Meanwhile, regional Australians — the ones facing drought, floods, and bushfires — often feel left out of the discussion.
As Simon pointed out, this mismatch could turn climate policy into a cultural fight, the same way the US saw COVID health mandates split along tribal lines.
And that benefits no one.
Climate change is already reshaping property and migration trends
Now, let’s bring this back to property, because that’s where the rubber really hits the road.
Australia is already seeing parts of the country become uninsurable due to rising climate risk.
Think about parts of Far North Queensland, low-lying coastal suburbs, or bushfire-prone regions in the hinterlands.
Insurance premiums are skyrocketing and in some areas, insurers are simply walking away.
Simon and I agreed that once an area becomes uninsurable, it becomes uninvestable.
People move away.
- Also read:Brisbane Property Market Forecast [2025] – What’s Ahead & Where to Invest
- Also read:Melbourne property market forecast for 2025 | Is it a good time to invest in Melbourne?
- Also read:Sydney property market forecast for 2025. Is it a good time to invest in Sydney?
- Also read:This week’s Australian Property Market Update – Latest Data, State by State April 15th 2025
- Also read:Latest property price forecasts for 2025 revealed. What’s ahead in our housing markets in the next year or two?
Infrastructure investment dries up.
Property values stagnate or fall.
We’re likely to see a silent but powerful wave of climate migration, not across national borders, but internally, as Australians slowly move away from high-risk areas to safer, better-prepared regions.
And this isn’t theoretical.
It’s already happening.
Councils in places like the Blue Mountains and Brisbane are producing detailed interactive maps showing flood zones, fire risk overlays, and future climate threats.
If you’re buying property today, especially long-term, you’d be foolish not to consult these maps.
It’s not just about your family’s safety.
It’s about insurability, resale value, and long-term asset resilience.
The real climate solution? Engineers, not activists
Simon argues that if we want to reach net zero, the only path is to make green energy technologies cheaper, more scalable, and more reliable than fossil fuels.
Do that, and everything else follows.
That means investing in innovation.
Training more engineers.
Building better storage systems, energy grids, and emissions-reducing infrastructure.
In other words, if you’re a young person who wants to change the world, study engineering, not just environmental studies.
Because if we can't make renewables the economically obvious choice, we won’t win this battle, no matter how loud the moral arguments become.
Why we should look to Norway — and not just for the weather
Simon offered another powerful example: Norway.
They struck oil in the North Sea, built a state-run fossil fuel empire, taxed it heavily, and threw the proceeds into a sovereign wealth fund.
That fund now underwrites Norway’s green energy transition.
Today, Norway is among the greenest economies in the world.
And they did it by harnessing fossil fuels the smart way.
They mined the past to fund the future.
We could do the same in Australia.
We have the resources.
We have the global demand.
What we lack is the political will to tax it properly and invest the proceeds in long-term energy innovation.
It’s politically awkward, of course.
The Greens will oppose mining outright.
The fossil fuel lobby will resist taxation.
But the pragmatic middle path — mine smart, tax hard, invest wisely — could make us a global climate leader without crippling our economy.
Climate change will affect all of us — but not equally
Let’s be clear: climate change doesn’t discriminate.
Whether you're rich or poor, young or old, city or country, you're going to feel the effects.
But how you experience those effects depends on where you live, how much wealth you have, and how resilient your infrastructure is.
This is why climate change isn't just a scientific or environmental issue.
It's a social, economic, and demographic one.
And we need to treat it that way.
If Simon could get every Australian policymaker in a room, here’s what he’d tell them:
- Be honest about the future: Yes, climate change is happening. Yes, more extreme weather is coming. No, we can’t wish it away.
- Invest in innovation: Fund engineers, research, and tech that makes green energy the cheapest and easiest option.
- Use mining smartly: Tax our resource exports effectively and invest the proceeds in net-zero infrastructure and future-proofing.
- Stop the culture war: Don’t let climate change become another “us vs them” debate. We’re all affected, and we all have a role to play.
Final thoughts
Climate change isn’t just a slow-moving environmental crisis.
It’s a mirror — revealing our values, fears, and priorities.
The generational divide is real, but it’s not about good versus evil.
It’s about experience, exposure, and urgency.
The geographic divide is real too, but it’s fixable with smart investment and better communication.
What we need now is a new kind of leadership — one that’s pragmatic, forward-looking, and unafraid to make the hard calls.
One that understands that engineering, economics, and empathy all need to work together.
Because climate change won’t wait.
And neither should we.
If you found this discussion helpful, don't forget to subscribe to our podcast and share it with others who might benefit.
Subscribe now on your favourite Podcast player:
