Coal plants cost $5B more than wind, top reliability
Get the Energy newsletter
Daily energy & climate — solar, EVs, oil, the policy fights and tech bets shaping the transition. Free.
- America's Power disputed the Utility Dive claim that retiring coal plants would save consumers up to $6 billion in 2028, calling the Grid Strategies analysis unrealistic.
- Energy Ventures Analysis found that replacing retiring coal plants with wind farms would increase annual costs by $5 billion, and solar replacements would be even costlier.
- PJM Interconnection’s 2026/2027 Base Residual Auction ELCC ratings show coal plants have higher capacity value than natural‑gas combined‑cycle plants, twice the reliability of onshore wind, and nearly eight times that of solar.
- U.S. Energy Information Administration data showed that during winter storm Fern, coal plants boosted electricity output by 30 % compared with a week earlier, while wind and solar output fell or stayed flat.
- Coal plants’ capacity factor rose from 43 % pre‑storm to 78 % at the storm’s peak, the largest increase among all generation sources, whereas wind’s capacity factor fell from 32 % to 26 % and solar remained unchanged.
Why it matters: Ratepayers would face $5 billion higher annual bills if coal plants are retired, while grid operators would lose a high‑capacity, fast‑ramping resource that proved essential during winter storm Fern, undermining cost‑effective reliability and forcing reliance on pricier, less dependable renewables for consumers and the broader energy market.
Ask SkimNews
