Photo Credit:CC BY 2.0: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/
Oregon Department of Transportation
Solar energy survives due to a web of ignorance, financial opportunism, and promotion by interested parties.Solar electricity has big problems. Solar is intermittent. It stops working if clouds obscure the sun. It does not work at night. Solar works much better in the summer than in the winter. Solar is peaky. Electricity delivery peaks in the middle of the day and is weaker in the early morning or late afternoon.
Solar electricity is very expensive compared to electricity generated by natural gas or coal. Unsubsidized solar electricity costs about $150 per megawatt hour. Using natural gas, one can generate electricity for as little as $20 per megawatt hour — over seven times less. The high cost of solar is hidden by an extensive system of subsidies.
The intermittent delivery of electricity could be smoothed if it were possible to store the electricity for use when solar is not working. But it’s not possible. Bridging the times and seasons when solar is not working by means of storage is not remotely possible because the amount of storage needed would cost ten or even a hundred times more than the solar farms generating the electricity.
There is a demand for electricity storage. Storage can solve the peakiness problem that plagues solar. Because solar output surges in the middle of the day It will often overtax the ability of the local electrical grid to accept the electricity. The solution is time-shiftng batteries that store excessive midday power and release it later in the day or in the early evening. New solar plants in solar-heavy states are equipped with time-shifting batteries. Time-shifting batteries increase the cost of solar electricity by about a third.
The U.S. is spending about $50 billion per year on new solar electricity plants. The money comes from government subsidies and increased electricity rates. New solar plants with a capacity, or peak output, of 27 terrawatts were built in 2023. The solar plants are backed up by fossil-fuel plants capable of stepping in when solar is not working. If existing solar plants were razed, the electric grid would continue to work smoothly using the fossil-fuel plants that would otherwise be on backup duty for solar.
When solar electricity is generated, the backup plants are throttled back and cheap fossil-fuel electricity is replaced with expensive solar electricity. The result is that in solar-heavy states like California residential electrical rates often exceed 50 cents per kilowatt hour or about four times as much compared to states that are not buying into the solar mythology.
Solar electricity is justified by claiming that we may run out of fossil fuels. Another major justification is that using solar will help prevent a climate catastrophe because solar does not emit CO2.
Solar is also promoted by claiming that solar electricity is cheaper than using fossil fuels.
We might run out of fossil fuels someday. But the U.S. has enough coal and natural gas to last for hundreds of years. No matter what the Sierra Club says, modern fossil-fuel generating plants are not giant air polluters. Insisting that we plan for the hypothetical exhaustion of fossil fuels in the future is like demanding that Columbus devise a plan for interstate horse trails to be built 500 years after his discovery of America.
The climate crisis is widely recognized as being junk science that showers career benefits on climate scientists. Predicting a future catastrophe is a wonderful way to attract attention and finance. Scientists who criticize the catastrophe theory are routinely persecuted, clear evidence that something is amiss in the world of climate science. Close examination of this so-called science, in the British government Stern Review, reveals that the catastrophe at most is a mild shift in the climate. Even that mild shift is probably an exaggeration.
<img alt="CC BY 2.0: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" captext="Oregon Department of Transportation” class=”post-image-right” src=”https://conservativenewsbriefing.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/every-dollar-spent-on-solar-energy-is-wasted.jpg” width=”450″>Using solar electricity instead of natural gas electricity, to reduce CO2 emissions is very expensive, costing about $400 for each metric ton of CO2 not emitted. Nuclear energy reduces CO2 emissions for three times less cost per metric ton. There is enough uranium and thorium to provide nuclear energy for thousands of years. Nuclear electricity is not intermittent and does not require backup plants. Roughly, a single truck can carry nuclear fuel that can supply as much energy as 5000 railroad cars full of coal. Nuclear fuel is much cheaper than any fossil fuel. There are clear paths to make nuclear energy safer and cheaper such as modular reactors or liquid salt thorium reactors.
The current adoption of solar energy on a mass scale is difficult to explain. It is too simple to blame it on collective insanity. The technical and financial analysis is not difficult. Many critics have written articles and books pointing out the fallacies. Somehow, the critics are ignored. Politicians, media, and academics are driving the solar bandwagon full speed ahead.
My best explanation for the survival of the solar hoax is that when the CO2-driven global warming theory gained popularity there was a need for a method of generating electricity without CO2 emissions. The obvious solution, nuclear energy, was rejected because the environmental lobby had previously demonized nuclear energy so much that it would be difficult to rehabilitate it — that left hydro and various marginal energy sources. Hydro was rejected because the environmental lobby previously demonized dams. Hydro also lacks scalability, because there is a limited supply of suitable sites. The most practical remaining technologies that are scalable are wind and solar. Generous government subsidies hide the high cost of wind and solar. Although wind energy is not discussed here, it has problems similar to solar energy problems.
The solar electricity industry depends on government subsidies and mandates. It is not surprising that a $50 billion a year industry is able to influence the government to protect its franchise. Many other industries of dubious value are protected by government favors. For example, half the corn crop is turned into ethanol and burned up in gasoline. That activity is supported because Republican farming states need places to sell their corn.
The media rarely critically examines the solar industry. I mark that up to scientific ignorance. Very few media types have any understanding of engineering or science. They can’t independently examine the issues because to them it is all a mystery.
The professors that support solar energy are very dependent on government grants that are heavily influenced by politics. Supporting uneconomic but politically popular energy solutions is a matter of career survival. Principled critics risk cancellation.
Solar energy survives due to a web of ignorance, financial opportunism, and promotion by interested parties. Killing the industry will save $50 billion per year and be a victory for rational policy.
Norman Rogers has a website solarshame.com.
Image: Oregon Department of Transportation
