A peer-reviewed study published in 2022 found that wind and solar power are more expensive than coal, natural gas and nuclear power.

The study shows that even in favourable locations like Texas, solar power is 10 times and wind power 7 times more expensive than natural gas.  The differential is even greater in regions of the world that do not enjoy Texas’ favourable climate.

The next time some climate activist or wind and solar shill claims wind and solar are less expensive than conventional energy sources, point them to this study and the actual truth, James Taylor writes.

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…

Stay Updated!

Stay connected with News updates by Email

Are You a Human? 4 + 8 =

---

Yes, Coal and Natural Gas are Much Cheaper Than Wind and Solar

By James Taylor as published by Climate Realism on 4 March 2025

Renewable power advocates often claim wind and solar are less expensive energy sources than coal, natural gas and nuclear power. Such a claim begs the question of why the heavily subsidised Ivanpah solar power facility [in California] is going out of business, following a long line of other renewable energy project bankruptcies. Also, why would most of the world continue to build coal power plants if it is more expensive than wind and solar? The answer is wind and solar are expensive, financial losers. A recent peer-reviewed analysis proves that point.

A recent study, published in the peer-reviewed journal Energy, reports on the “levelized full system costs” of electricity generation. The term “full system” is key. Many entities have assessed what it costs utilities to purchase or produce electricity from existing sources and deliver it to customers. These cost assessments, however, ignore the intermittency of wind and solar and how intermittency adds substantial costs to the entire electric grid. The cost assessments also fail to account for how wind and solar projects cannot be built just anywhere and often require new, long, expensive and inefficient transformation lines to deliver power from the generation locations to consumers. This also adds substantial costs to the overall electric grid.

The peer-reviewed Energy study analyses these factors and presents an apples-to-apples cost comparison of the full system cost of wind, solar, coal, natural gas and nuclear power. The verdict is devastating to wind and solar power and explains why most of the world prefers to build coal and natural gas power plants.

Geographic location is a significant factor in the cost of producing wind and solar power. For example, producing solar power in Germany, with its northern latitude and frequent cloudiness, is three times more expensive than producing solar power in the southern latitude and general sunniness of western Texas.

Indeed, Texas is about as favourable an environment as there is for wind and solar power. In western Texas, in particular, the southern latitude, predominant sunshine and persistent windiness make for extremely favourable conditions for wind and solar power.

Even in Texas, however, the Energy study shows wind and solar power are prohibitively expensive. The peer-reviewed study shows solar power produced in Texas is more than triple the cost of nuclear power, more than quadruple the cost of coal power and more than 10 times the cost of natural gas power.

By the full system numbers, solar power in Texas costs $413 per megawatt hour (“MWh”) of generation. Wind power costs $291 per MWh. Nuclear power costs $122. Coal power costs $90. Natural gas power costs merely $40. That is a huge price differential between wind and solar versus all other energy sources.

In most places, it costs even more to produce wind and solar power than in the favourable climate conditions of Texas. So, the disparity is typically greater than the numbers reported above.

Another important factor to consider is a typical proposal for a new wind or solar power project does not entail building wind and solar to fill an imminent new power need. Typically, climate activists and monopoly utilities propose shutting down a perfectly operating – and already built and paid for – coal, nuclear or natural gas power plant and replacing it with wind and solar. Building a new wind or solar power project to provide power is substantially more expensive than building a new coal, nuclear or natural gas power plant to provide power. Shutting down an already paid-for coal, nuclear or natural gas power plant to build an expensive new wind or solar project makes even less economic sense.

Utilities often support such wind and solar madness because they make a financial killing on wind and solar projects. Governments typically guarantee monopoly utilities an approximately 10% profit on their expenditures, including the cost of building new wind and solar projects. Construction for large solar projects can cost $2 billion, $3 billion or more. That means a guaranteed utility profit of $200 million or more per project. A utility pushing for more wind and solar power has nothing to do with saving consumers money and everything to do with stuffing the utility’s own pockets.

The next time some climate activist or wind and solar shill claims wind and solar are less expensive than conventional energy sources, point them to the peer-reviewed Energy study and the actual truth.

Note: The article above was originally posted on The Center Square which is not available for IP addresses within a country belonging to the European Economic Area (“EEA”) including the EU which enforces the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”).

About the Author

James Taylor is the President of the Heartland Institute. He is also the director of Heartland’s Arthur B. Robinson Centre for Climate and Environmental Policy. Taylor is the former managing editor (2001-2014) of Environment & Climate News, a national monthly publication devoted to sound science and free-market environmentalism.

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.

Stay Updated!

Stay connected with News updates by Email

Daily Digest

US News Posts

UK News Posts

World News Posts

All News Posts

Are You a Human? 5 + 4 =

The use of genetically engineered organisms in the food industry is widespread

A new book details how the US government debunks inconvenient and unwanted truths about childhood vaccines

Just like the UK, the US imposes “renewable” energy and charges consumers for creating an unreliable and costly energy supply

Opinion: History will not remember Keir Starmer kindly … if it remembers him at all

Rhoda Wilson

While previously it was a hobby culminating in writing articles for Wikipedia (until things made a drastic and undeniable turn in 2020) and a few books for private consumption, since March 2020 I have become a full-time researcher and writer in reaction to the global takeover that came into full view with the introduction of covid-19. For most of my life, I have tried to raise awareness that a small group of people planned to take over the world for their own benefit. There was no way I was going to sit back quietly and simply let them do it once they made their final move.

See Full Bio