Wind and solar sound nice, but come with a lot of hidden costs.
Picture a family with three cars: Mom and Dad both drive to work while their children need rides to school and practice. The cars cost money for gas, repairs, and insurance—but they start when you turn the key, which is the whole point.
Then a salesman shows up with an amazing deal: solar-powered and wind-powered vehicles that require no gas, with free fuel. The family buys both, believing they will save money and eventually eliminate two older cars.
Reality, however, is stark. The solar car runs only during daylight hours. The wind car operates when the wind blows. On dark winter mornings, Dad still leaves at 7:30 a.m., while Mom must pick up her child at 5 p.m.—even when the air is dead calm. Families move where they need to go, not when the weather cooperates.
The family ends up keeping all three reliable cars and now owns five. Five vehicles don’t fit in their driveway, so they pour more concrete and build a bigger garage. Someone suggests large batteries to store power during periods when sunlight and wind are absent—costing a fortune.
The salesman emphasized free fuel but never mentioned the two extra cars, the expanded garage, the batteries, or the fact that they still need their older vehicles.
This is America’s electricity policy in action. Wind turbines and solar panels generate electricity without purchasing fuel—a key selling point. Yet electricity must be available instantly when you flip the switch. Factories cannot idle until wind picks up. Hospitals cannot delay care for better weather. Families expect their furnaces, refrigerators, and lights to function continuously.
Because wind and solar depend on weather conditions, adding them does not allow us to retire existing power plants. Natural gas, nuclear, coal, and hydroelectric facilities must remain operational when renewables produce little or nothing. We pay for two systems but receive only the output of one reliable grid.
Transmission infrastructure also becomes critical: wind and solar installations are often distant from where people live, requiring new transmission lines, substations, and grid upgrades. The Energy Department’s own draft transmission study points to one of the largest build-outs in U.S. history.
Batteries help temporarily but only for a few hours—most grid batteries run for about four hours before needing recharging.
None of this negates wind and solar’s value, but it underscores the need to count the entire bill honestly. The real question is not how cheap electricity becomes when the generator runs—it is what it costs to ensure reliable power whenever people need it.
This price includes generation, transmission, grid upgrades, storage, backup capacity, and consistent power during calm, cloudy days. It also encompasses the supply chain: most solar panels are manufactured in China, a nation currently expanding coal plants to fuel those factories.
If wind and solar remain the most cost-effective option after all expenses are accounted for, they should win on merit. If nuclear energy, natural gas, coal, hydroelectric power, or another solution delivers greater value, that alternative should prevail.
Regular people do not need politicians selecting their power plants. They require honest pricing, genuine competition, and electricity that operates when the switch is flipped.
Free fuel sounds appealing—but before purchasing a fourth or fifth car, someone must ask whether they are truly saving money or simply paying for more vehicles, concrete, and a larger garage to reach the same destinations.
Frank Lasee is president of Truth in Energy and Climate.
