Climate Science Glossary

Term Lookup

Enter a term in the search box to find its definition.

Settings

Use the controls in the far right panel to increase or decrease the number of terms automatically displayed (or to completely turn that feature off).

Term Lookup

Settings


All IPCC definitions taken from Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Annex I, Glossary, pp. 941-954. Cambridge University Press.

Home Arguments Software Resources Comments The Consensus Project Translations About Support

Bluesky Facebook LinkedIn Mastodon MeWe

Twitter YouTube RSS Posts RSS Comments Email Subscribe


Climate's changed before
It's the sun
It's not bad
There is no consensus
It's cooling
Models are unreliable
Temp record is unreliable
Animals and plants can adapt
It hasn't warmed since 1998
Antarctica is gaining ice
View All Arguments...



Username
Password
New? Register here
Forgot your password?

Latest Posts

Archives

Archived Rebuttal

This is the archived Intermediate rebuttal to the climate myth "Solar energy is more expensive than fossil fuels and completely dependent on subsidies". Click here to view the latest rebuttal.

What the science says...

Unsubsidized solar energy is now generally cheaper than fossil fuels and according to the International Energy Agency, solar PV is “the cheapest source of new electricity generation in most parts of the world."

Unsubsidized solar energy is now generally cheaper than fossil fuels. According to the International Energy Agency’s 2020 World Energy Outlook, photovoltaic solar power is “the cheapest source of new electricity generation in most parts of the world,” and “[f]or projects with low cost financing that tap high quality resources, solar PV is now the cheapest source of electricity in history1.”

Solar energy compares favorably to fossil fuels in terms of levelized cost (i.e., lifetime costs divided by lifetime energy output). According to Lazard’s April 2023 Levelized Cost of Energy Analysis, the mean unsubsidized levelized cost of utility-scale solar PV is $60/MWh2. By comparison, the mean unsubsidized levelized cost of gas combined cycle is $70/MWh, the mean unsubsidized levelized cost of coal is $117/MWh, and the mean unsubsidized levelized cost of gas peaking is $168/MWh. The figure below from Lazard shows historical mean unsubsidized LCOE values for different types of utility-scale energy generation.

historical mean unsubsidizes LCOE values

Figure 1: Selected historical mean unsubsidized LCOE values. This graph reflects the average of the high and low LCOE for each technology in each year. The percentages on the right of the figure represent the decrease in average LCOE since 2009. Source: Lazard.

Lazard attributes the significant historical cost declines for utility-scale renewable energy generation to decreasing capital costs, improving technologies, and increased competition, among other factors. For solar energy, as with onshore wind energy and electric vehicle batteries, historical decreases in costs have correlated with increases in cumulative capacity and sales3. As one example of decreasing costs of solar generation, the figure below from Inside Climate News shows a roughly 90% decline in solar module prices from 2011 to 20234.

Solar price from 2011 to 2023

Figure 2: Solar price from 2011 to 2023. Source: BloombergNEF/Paul Horn/Inside Climate News.

In addition to the many factors reducing solar’s unsubsidized LCOE, there are substantial subsidies that will further reduce cost on a subsidized basis. In particular, the Inflation Reduction Act is predicted to reduce the subsidized LCOE for solar by 20%–35% by 20305.  The figure below from ICF shows the anticipated impact of the IRA on the subsidized LCOE for solar.

Impact of the IRA in 2030

Figure 3: Impact of the IRA on anticipated LCOE in 2030. Source: ICF.

Fossil fuels also receive subsidies, albeit smaller subsidies than renewable energy currently received6. In fiscal year 2022, the federal government’s tax expenditures for natural gas and petroleum subsidies were $2.1 billion.

One shortcoming of relying on levelized cost as a metric for comparing solar with natural gas and other types of legacy power plants is that levelized cost does not take into account that additional energy generation is needed to compensate for any intermittency. But even when factoring in these so-called firming costs, the subsidized and unsubsidized LCOE of stand-alone solar is lower than the levelized cost of gas peaking and cost-competitive with gas combined cycle across most of the United States7. Solar-plus-storage systems are more expensive. However, when factoring in firming costs, both the subsidized and unsubsidized LCOE of solar plus storage is generally within or below the range of LCOE for gas peaking, depending on location within the United States.

LCOE for wind and solar

Figure 4: LCOE for wind, solar, and solar plus storage, adjusted for the cost of firming intermittency. Source: Lazard.


Footnotes:

[1] World Energy Outlook 2020, Int’l. Energy Agency, 202, 214 (2020)

[2] Levelized Cost of Energy Analysis: Version 16.0, Lazard, 9 (Apr. 2023)

[3] U.S. Global Change Research Program, Fifth National Climate Assessment at 32-29 (2023)

[4] Dan Gearino, Inexpensive Solar Panels Are Essential for the Energy Transition. Here’s What’s Happening With Prices Right Now, Inside Climate News (Jun. 15, 2023)

[5] Ian Bowen et al., How clean energy economics can benefit from the biggest climate law in US history, ICF (Sept. 16, 2022)

[6] Federal Financial Interventions and Subsidies in Energy in Fiscal Years 2016-2022, U.S. Energy Information Admin., at 3 (Aug. 2023)

[7] Lazard [2] at 8. California is the exception, where the subsidized and unsubsidized LCOE of solar exceeds that of gas combined cycle when factoring in firming costs.

This rebuttal is based on the report "Rebutting 33 False Claims About Solar, Wind, and Electric Vehicles" written by Matthew Eisenson, Jacob Elkin, Andy Fitch, Matthew Ard, Kaya Sittinger & Samuel Lavine and published by the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School in 2024. Skeptical Science sincerely appreciates Sabin Center's generosity in collaborating with us to make this information available as widely as possible.

Updated on 2024-08-31 by .



The Consensus Project Website

THE ESCALATOR

(free to republish)


© Copyright 2024 John Cook
Home | Translations | About Us | Privacy | Contact Us