Fact Check: Solar, wind, and batteries are cheaper than fossil fuels and nuclear power.

Fact Check: "Solar, wind, and batteries are cheaper than fossil fuels and nuclear power."

What We Know

The claim that solar, wind, and battery technologies are cheaper than fossil fuels and nuclear power is supported by various studies and reports. According to a Wikipedia article, on average, the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) from utility-scale solar power and onshore wind power is less than that from coal and gas-fired power stations. This finding is corroborated by a Scientific American article, which states that utility-scale solar projects have costs ranging from $38 to $78 per megawatt-hour (MWh), while new combined-cycle natural gas plants range from $48 to $109 per MWh.

Additionally, a report from Energy Central indicates that solar and storage technologies have become cheaper than fossil fuels, highlighting significant reductions in battery costs. The cost of renewable energy sources has been decreasing due to technological advancements and economies of scale, making them increasingly competitive against traditional energy sources.

Analysis

While the claim holds merit, it is essential to consider the context and variability in costs. The LCOE metric, which is often used to compare different energy sources, can be influenced by various factors, including location, regulatory environment, and the specific technologies employed. For instance, the Kyocera simulation tool suggests that actual costs can vary significantly based on local conditions, such as sunlight availability and energy prices.

Moreover, the comparison between renewable energy and fossil fuels or nuclear power must take into account the intermittency of solar and wind energy. As noted in the Fossil Free Around the World article, while renewables may be cheaper in terms of LCOE, their ability to provide consistent power (dispatchability) can be a challenge without adequate energy storage solutions. This aspect is crucial when evaluating the overall reliability and cost-effectiveness of renewable energy compared to more stable sources like nuclear power.

The reliability of the sources cited is generally high, with peer-reviewed studies and reputable publications backing the claims. However, the interpretation of costs can vary, and some sources may emphasize different aspects of energy generation, such as external costs or the economic value of energy sources to the grid.

Conclusion

The claim that "solar, wind, and batteries are cheaper than fossil fuels and nuclear power" is Partially True. While there is substantial evidence indicating that the LCOE for solar and wind is lower than that for fossil fuels and nuclear power, the overall economic viability of these renewable sources can be influenced by various factors, including location, energy storage capabilities, and grid integration challenges. Therefore, while the statement is accurate in many contexts, it does not universally apply without considering these nuances.