|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Despite some claims that wind and solar are less expensive than conventional power, the opposite is true, James Taylor writes.
Two recent analyses found natural gas is the most affordable, reliable and clean electrical power source. Not far behind natural gas are nuclear, hydro and coal. Lagging at the bottom of the affordability and reliability scorecard are wind and solar power.
Additionally, wind and solar require disrupting and developing far more land and ecosystems than other power sources, and directly kill far more animals than other power sources, including many protected and endangered species.
Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…
Affordable, Reliable, Clean Scorecard: Natural Gas Is Tops, Wind and Solar Are the Worst
By James Taylor as published by Real Clear Energy on 22 April 2025
In the USA, policymakers on both sides of the political aisle increasingly advocate for affordable, reliable and clean energy. This is for good reason – modern society requires energy that is affordable and available on demand. Environmental concerns are also very important. Together, affordability, reliability and cleanliness form the three pillars of ideal energy policy.
Two new analyses evaluate competing electrical power sources and produce an affordable, reliable and clean scorecard. The two analyses – one published by Northwood University and the Mackinac Centre, and the other published by my public policy organisation, The Heartland Institute – independently reach near-identical findings.
Both analyses find natural gas is the most affordable, reliable and clean electrical power source. Not far behind natural gas are nuclear, hydro and coal. Lagging at the bottom of the affordability scorecard are wind and solar power.
Natural gas is easily the lowest-cost electrical power source, with coal the second-most affordable. Natural gas also scores very high for reliable, high-volume power production, as do nuclear and coal.
Despite some claims that wind and solar are less expensive than conventional power, the opposite is true. Wind and solar benefit from far more subsidies than other power sources, which merely shift their high costs to taxpayers rather than directly to customers’ electricity bills. Also, the intermittent and often unpredictable nature of wind and solar power imposes substantial costs on the grid, requiring other power sources to frequently ramp up and down – quite inefficiently – to cover for the variability of wind and solar. Finally, wind turbines and solar panels must often be built far from population centres, requiring extensive and expensive networks of transmission wires to deliver power to customers.
Taking all the above factors into account, a peer-reviewed analysis of full-system levelised costs of competing power sources shows wind power is seven times more expensive than natural gas power and solar power is 10 times more expensive. That explains why most of the world – and nearly all the developing world – is building natural gas, coal and nuclear power plants rather than wind and solar power facilities.
Perhaps the most noteworthy findings of the two independent analyses are the poor environmental performance of wind and solar power. Wind and solar, like hydro and nuclear, are emissions-free. However, wind and solar score quite poorly regarding many other important environmental factors. Wind and solar require disrupting and developing far more land and ecosystems than other power sources. Wind and solar generation directly kill far more animals than other power sources, including many protected and endangered species. The mining of toxic and rare earth minerals for wind turbines and solar panels is enormously and uniquely harmful to water and soil health.
Earlier this month, President Trump signed an executive order noting the affordability and abundance of coal and removing obstacles to coal production and utilisation. The two new analyses support the Trump administration’s energy policies, which emphasise increased domestic production of oil, natural gas and coal. At the same time, the two analyses support similar action to remove obstacles to nuclear power, hydro power and – especially – natural gas.
Don’t expect the big utilities to necessarily support natural gas and other affordable, reliable and clean power sources. Utilities typically operate under a government-protected monopoly such that they don’t need to produce affordable power to gain an edge over competitors. Also, governments typically guarantee utilities approximately 10% profit on so-called green power projects and expenditures. As a result, utilities typically lobby for the most expensive power sources to boost their total profit.
For consumers and grid integrity, however, natural gas is the gold standard for affordable, reliable and clean electricity generation. Nuclear, hydro, and coal are not too far behind.
About the Author
James Taylor is President of The Heartland Institute. He holds a Juris Doctorate (JD) from Syracuse University College of Law and a Bachelor of Arts in government from Dartmouth College, where he also studied atmospheric science.
Taylor is known for his work in climate and energy policy, often presenting analyses on these topics on various media outlets such as CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, PBS, CBS and ABC.
The Expose Urgently Needs Your Help…
Can you please help to keep the lights on with The Expose’s honest, reliable, powerful and truthful journalism?
Your Government & Big Tech organisations
try to silence & shut down The Expose.
So we need your help to ensure
we can continue to bring you the
facts the mainstream refuses to.
The government does not fund us
to publish lies and propaganda on their
behalf like the Mainstream Media.
Instead, we rely solely on your support. So
please support us in our efforts to bring
you honest, reliable, investigative journalism
today. It’s secure, quick and easy.
Please choose your preferred method below to show your support.
Categories: Breaking News, World News
I was looking for cheap energy and found thelibertyengine2.0
and thought I could almost build it my self.
This sounds like a paid ad from big oil and gas.
As someone who has lived on a stand alone solar system for 40 years, I call bullshit.
What is your solar system? How does it work? What does it power? All your heating, all your air conditioning if you have some? All your electric lighting and devices? How much power do you consume from it? What are the costs? Are your solar panels still working after 40 years? Have you ever needed to replace them and if so at what cost and from whom? What kind of panels do you have and where did you get them from? At what geographic latitude do you live at? It is just such a provable load of childish globalist – communist green – Malthusian eugenicist – communist bullshit to claim that the petro-chemical industry pays so many serious scientists and engineers to tell lies on their behalf ! Please prove such insulting and slanderous claims!
Kyle Young is also not running a hospital, business, farm, factory, residential block (e.g. a block of flats), office block, warehouse, retail shop or transport system. He’s not providing street lighting, traffic lights or airport runway lights – basically the list is endless as to what Kyle Young is NOT doing with his solar power.
I know people who live in the tropics (full Sun for about 300 days of the year) and use solar power for domestic purposes. It is only useful with purpose made batteries to store the excess power produced during the day so it can be used at night. And it doesn’t work as well during the winter months (although the Sun shines everyday all day, it is weaker in winter), the solar power needs bolstering daily with a diesel/petrol powered generator to fully charge the batteries.
The solar power system will run lights (but not too many), the TV, charge phones, computers and, depending how many solar panels are on the roof, a fridge as well. For cooking or “boiling the kettle” they have to use LNG (natural gas). For hot water in the taps they have to use a heat exchanger (a separate system that heats up water using the sun’s energy which produces limited amounts of hot water, say two short shower’s worth in the summer months). If Kyle Young is “self-sufficient” on solar panels he must have cold showers and only eat cold/raw food and drink cold drinks. If he lives in a temperate climate, he must be permanently wrapped up in a more than one blanket, gloves, woolly hat, boots etc during the long winter months.
To achieve a relatively low level of self-sufficiency for power (domestically), they have a generator, 6-8 solar panels, batteries, invertor, heat exchanger and LNG appliances – and still draw some power for a few hours a day from the national electricity grid (to e.g. run the clothes washing machine, borehole for water, boil the kettle and then store the hot water in flasks for use throughout the day etc). Of course, the solar panels and batteries (both relatively expensive and their scope dependant on how much you can afford) need to be replaced at some stage, the batteries more often than the solar panels. And the generator incurs maintenance costs (as well as fuel and oil costs) and will eventually need replacing too.
https://search.brave.com/search?q=Cost+of+natural+gas+compared+to+other+energy+sources&source=desktop&summary=1&conversation=cf6bde2ea5c41afbd0b4e1
[…] https://expose-news.com/2025/05/14/natural-gas-is-the-cheapest-power/ […]