{"id":379557,"date":"2025-05-23T10:13:58","date_gmt":"2025-05-23T08:13:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=379557"},"modified":"2025-05-23T10:13:59","modified_gmt":"2025-05-23T08:13:59","slug":"why-cheaper-solar-raises-costs-part-ii-the-hidden-costs-of-residential-solar","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=379557","title":{"rendered":"Why \u201ccheaper\u201d solar raises costs. Part II: The hidden costs of residential solar"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"683\" height=\"1024\" data-attachment-id=\"379561\" data-permalink=\"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?attachment_id=379561\" data-orig-file=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/0ChatGPT-Image-23.-Mai-2025-10_12_49.png?fit=1024%2C1536&amp;ssl=1\" data-orig-size=\"1024,1536\" data-comments-opened=\"1\" data-image-meta=\"{&quot;aperture&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;credit&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;camera&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;caption&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;created_timestamp&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;copyright&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;focal_length&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;iso&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;shutter_speed&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;title&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;orientation&quot;:&quot;0&quot;}\" data-image-title=\"0ChatGPT Image 23. Mai 2025, 10_12_49\" data-image-description=\"\" data-image-caption=\"\" data-large-file=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/0ChatGPT-Image-23.-Mai-2025-10_12_49.png?fit=683%2C1024&amp;ssl=1\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/0ChatGPT-Image-23.-Mai-2025-10_12_49.png?resize=683%2C1024&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-379561\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/0ChatGPT-Image-23.-Mai-2025-10_12_49.png?resize=683%2C1024&amp;ssl=1 683w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/0ChatGPT-Image-23.-Mai-2025-10_12_49.png?resize=200%2C300&amp;ssl=1 200w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/0ChatGPT-Image-23.-Mai-2025-10_12_49.png?resize=768%2C1152&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/0ChatGPT-Image-23.-Mai-2025-10_12_49.png?w=1024&amp;ssl=1 1024w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 683px) 100vw, 683px\" \/><figcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">ChatGPT<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">From <a href=\"https:\/\/judithcurry.com\/2025\/05\/22\/why-cheaper-solar-raises-costs-part-ii-the-hidden-costs-of-residential-solar\/\">Climate Etc.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">By Planning Engineer (Russ Schussler)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In Part 1, we showed how wind and solar\u2019s low costs over 80% of the time are overwhelmed by expenses at peak times such that they offer no cost advantages to the generation mix. Residential solar follows a similar pattern: it seems affordable for homeowners but raises system costs through rate structures that over-incentivize adoption. Generous subsidies, like retail-rate net metering, drive excessive solar growth, risking grid stability and shifting costs to non-solar customers that are often less affluent. Less generous rates for residential solar slow adoption, but better align solar adoption with grid needs, ensuring fairness and sustainability.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>The Economic Problem: Cost-Shifting Through Rate Structures<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It\u2019s hard to understand why many don\u2019t see the unfairness in rate structures, as similar arrangements would seem absurd in other industries. Imagine hotels required to keep rooms ready for all customers (at standard rates) just in case they \u201cmight\u201d want them. Worse, during low occupancy, hotels must send guests to customers\u2019 Airbnb properties whenever there are excess rooms. Or consider pizza chains forced to buy excess pizzas from restaurants during slow hours while supplying low-cost pizzas during peak hours and covering all pickup and delivery costs. In all of these cases, the major problem is that large infrastructure investment is required that will sit idle most of the time and receive inadequate compensation from the beneficiaries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>How Residential Solar Rate Structures Work<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Residential solar systems, typically tied to net metering, let homeowners generate and sell power in ways that appear cost-effective:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Serving own needs<\/strong>: Solar panels produce during sunny, low-demand periods (e.g., midday spring), letting homeowners avoid utility charges. These charges are usually a flat rate based on average costs. (Note: The utility backs them up when panels don\u2019t produce enough electricity.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Selling excess power<\/strong>: Surplus power goes to the grid, with net metering crediting it at rates varying by state. Typically, these payments exceed the energy\u2019s value to the utility during low-demand periods.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Hard Times<\/strong>: At night, on cloudy days, or during peak demand (e.g., summer evenings), panels produce little. Homeowners buy grid power at flat rates, which don\u2019t reflect the high costs of peaking plants.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Rate structures today vary to the degree to which they subsidize residential solar. Below are general categories of rate structures, ordered by levels of subsidies, from high to low.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Retail-Rate Net Metering<\/strong>: Credits residential solar at full retail rates (~$0.20\u2013$0.42\/kWh, e.g., Hawaii, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island). Yields high returns for residential \u00a0solar (20\u201350% ROI) and encourages rapid adoption (e.g., Hawaii\u2019s 30% penetration, ~200,000 homes).<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Partial Retail\/Hybrid Net Billing<\/strong>: Credits at 50\u201380% of retail (~$0.10\u2013$0.20\/kWh, e.g., Connecticut, Vermont, Maryland, Minnesota) support moderate adoption of residential solar (e.g., Vermont\u2019s 8% penetration, ~15,000 homes) with less cost-shifting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Net Billing at Avoided Cost<\/strong>: Lower credits (~$0.05\u2013$0.08\/kWh, e.g., California\u2019s NEM 3.0, Arizona, Arkansas) slow growth.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Wholesale\/Avoided Cost Rates<\/strong>: Minimal credits (~$0.03\u2013$0.07\/kWh, e.g., Alabama, South Dakota, Tennessee, Idaho, Kentucky) yield low penetration (0.02\u20131.2%, ~270\u201310,000 homes), reducing subsidies and<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Initially, solar power rate structures used retail-rate net metering. Lower subsidies could not attract sufficient participation.\u00a0 Since participation was low initially, the small subsidies from the overwhelmingly large group of non-participants were not significant. As more customers adopt solar, the economics change.\u00a0 California\u2019s experience highlights the unsustainability of this approach. California now on version 3.0 of its net metering approach, which pays only for avoided costs for new customers. Retail-rate net metering became unsustainable as participation levels increased.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This chart shows the relationship between higher credits and the resulting penetration of residential solar for a sampling of states.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"723\" height=\"503\" data-attachment-id=\"379559\" data-permalink=\"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?attachment_id=379559\" data-orig-file=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/image-344.png?fit=1384%2C962&amp;ssl=1\" data-orig-size=\"1384,962\" data-comments-opened=\"1\" data-image-meta=\"{&quot;aperture&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;credit&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;camera&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;caption&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;created_timestamp&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;copyright&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;focal_length&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;iso&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;shutter_speed&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;title&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;orientation&quot;:&quot;0&quot;}\" data-image-title=\"image\" data-image-description=\"\" data-image-caption=\"\" data-large-file=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/image-344.png?fit=723%2C503&amp;ssl=1\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/image-344.png?resize=723%2C503&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-379559\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/image-344.png?resize=1024%2C712&amp;ssl=1 1024w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/image-344.png?resize=300%2C209&amp;ssl=1 300w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/image-344.png?resize=768%2C534&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/image-344.png?resize=1200%2C834&amp;ssl=1 1200w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/image-344.png?w=1384&amp;ssl=1 1384w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 723px) 100vw, 723px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Of course, higher subsidies correlate with greater participation. California NEM 3.0 looks like an outlier, but it must be understood this participation rate was built not on the NEM 3.0 rate structure. The big base they have of residential solar was built on legacy policies, and viability today is supported by the area\u2019s high retail rates and grandfathering of existing residential solar customers under the old tariffs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In a&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/judithcurry.com\/2015\/04\/21\/what-should-renewables-pay-for-grid-service\/\">2015 post<\/a>, I discussed various approaches to cost sharing for residential solar.&nbsp; It\u2019s worth reviewing at this time as it provides additional coverage on the topic at hand.&nbsp; In that piece I noted that the models with the least subsidies still only required residential solar users to pay the incremental costs they incur, not shared system costs. Should residential solar customers help with basic system costs?&nbsp; &nbsp;The answer becomes increasingly important with high levels of residential solar.&nbsp; Responsibility for the basic system costs becomes attributable to fewer and fewer customers.&nbsp; Unfortunately, those footing the bill are disproportionately less affluent consumers who are most burdened by increasing energy costs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The economic toll of overly generous rates:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Lost Revenue<\/strong>: Utilities need steady charges to cover fixed costs (grid lines, backup power). Solar homeowners avoid these during low-demand periods, reducing revenue.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Overpaid Purchases<\/strong>: High credits for low-value power strain utility budgets.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Fat Tail Costs<\/strong>: Peak periods drive high costs (peaking plants and transmission and distribution expansion). Non-solar customers face 1-2% rate hikes in high-solar areas, per National Renewable Energy Laboratory studies.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Generous rate structures, like retail-rate net metering, fuel excessive solar adoption, raising costs and inequity. Less supportive rates, like California\u2019s NEM 3.0 or South Dakota\u2019s wholesale rates, reduce uptake, which is proper when solar outpaces system needs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Early net metering aimed to boost solar, but its costs\u2014shifted expenses and grid risks\u2014are now evident. Regulators, prioritizing green energy, often mandated generous rates, as in California\u2019s NEM 1.0\/2.0, which achieved 25% penetration before NEM 3.0\u2019s lower rates slowed growth. Fair pricing proposals are often labeled as anti-renewable, stifling reform.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">A common justification is that subsidizing residential solar will lower prices and increase affordability.&nbsp; What goes unrecognized is that the cheaper residential solar becomes, it exacerbates unsustainable rate designs as fewer non-solar customers remain to support the system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>A Path Forward<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Residential solar programs rely on structures that overpay for power and undercharge for grid use. Better designs would reduce incentives and align adoption with grid economics.&nbsp; Potential options for improving solar tariffs include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Time-of-Use Rates<\/strong>: Credit solar at market value less during the mid-day and charge more for peak power. This slows adoption, as seen in California\u2019s NEM 3.0 (80% installation drop).<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Pay Avoided Costs: unlike\u00a0<\/strong>time-of-use rates,\u00a0<strong>avoided costs could be set at average rates to avoid costly metering and complexity.<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Grid Access Fees<\/strong>: Fixed fees ensure solar homeowners pay for reliability.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Peak Demand Charges<\/strong>: Bills based on peak usage reflect true costs.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">These options promote equity, reducing subsidies from non-solar customers to wealthier adopters. The key is recognizing cost differentials between what solar customers receive and what they provide.&nbsp; Fewer incentives mean less solar, which is proper when it drives costs, as in states like Alabama (0.7% penetration). Political pressure to support solar will resist such efforts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Wrapping Up<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Poor rate designs hide solar\u2019s true costs, making it seem affordable while raising electricity rates for all. Retail-rate net metering drives excessive adoption of solar, shifting costs to non-solar customers. Less supportive rates, like avoided costs or California\u2019s NEM 3.0, slow solar growth, aligning it with grid needs. This ensures fairness and avoids cost spirals. A sustainable energy supply requires pricing that reflects true costs, ensuring affordability for all.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Future posts will focus on utility economics, discuss problems with energy markets and delve into many of the often-ignored unaccounted costs associated with wind and solar.&nbsp; For example, many assume the grid is easier to operate when part of the load base meets its own needs. In reality, residential solar burdens system operators, increasing complexity and costs of stabilization efforts. In Australia, a renewables leader,&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.pv-magazine.com\/2024\/12\/03\/australian-regulator-makes-case-for-rooftop-solar-control-mechanism\/#:~:text=The%20Australian%20Energy%20Market%20Operator,on%20the%20nation's%20electricity%20grid\">operators see a need to switch off rooftop solar<\/a>&nbsp;during stressful periods to maintain system stability. &nbsp;Look for follow-up posts in the coming weeks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In Part 1, we showed how wind and solar\u2019s low costs over 80% of the time are overwhelmed by expenses at peak times such that they offer no cost advantages to the generation mix. Residential solar follows a similar pattern: it seems affordable for homeowners but raises system costs through rate structures that over-incentivize adoption.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":379561,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691818068,691835265,691835264,691818412,691835266,691818299],"class_list":{"0":"post-379557","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-california","9":"tag-cost-shifting","10":"tag-grid-stability","11":"tag-solar-panels","12":"tag-solar-systems","13":"tag-subsidies","15":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/0ChatGPT-Image-23.-Mai-2025-10_12_49.png?fit=1024%2C1536&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1AJT","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":427962,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=427962","url_meta":{"origin":379557,"position":0},"title":"Solar Industry Searches for a Message (it is not economics)","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"02\/25\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cBut messaging isn\u2019t the problem. The economics, the numbers, are. If solar is truly affordable, reliable, and resilient, the suppliers should say so plainly: in cents per kWh, free of explicit subsidies and mandates.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In \"\"better messaging\"\"","block_context":{"text":"\"better messaging\"","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=better-messaging"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0-solar-scam1.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0-solar-scam1.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0-solar-scam1.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0-solar-scam1.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":423726,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=423726","url_meta":{"origin":379557,"position":1},"title":"False, Everyday States, Prices Show Renewables Aren\u2019t \u2018Cheaper Than Fossil Fuels\u2019","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"01\/29\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"Everyday States published an article claiming wind and solar power, but especially solar power, provide cheaper electric power than fossil fuels in various states. Media outlets have repeatedly made similar claims over the past decade, but as with those previous stories, data on power prices and trends in those states\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Everyday States\"","block_context":{"text":"Everyday States","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=everyday-states"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/AQMlzkBuJK4pf6fFo7Grw5coWyKd8cZt4GR48pBs5cIA5XFsfztZPDSeu4aJUVCWQpx-l8RkH-Urz3zxzOHUFl0L03CUHFN2xKr84NWybjdXXGSyD3MvWbTdJ3E2hgCWidl3zTV4D_Itxrq24sUmm2wDbuGO5g.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/AQMlzkBuJK4pf6fFo7Grw5coWyKd8cZt4GR48pBs5cIA5XFsfztZPDSeu4aJUVCWQpx-l8RkH-Urz3zxzOHUFl0L03CUHFN2xKr84NWybjdXXGSyD3MvWbTdJ3E2hgCWidl3zTV4D_Itxrq24sUmm2wDbuGO5g.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/AQMlzkBuJK4pf6fFo7Grw5coWyKd8cZt4GR48pBs5cIA5XFsfztZPDSeu4aJUVCWQpx-l8RkH-Urz3zxzOHUFl0L03CUHFN2xKr84NWybjdXXGSyD3MvWbTdJ3E2hgCWidl3zTV4D_Itxrq24sUmm2wDbuGO5g.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/AQMlzkBuJK4pf6fFo7Grw5coWyKd8cZt4GR48pBs5cIA5XFsfztZPDSeu4aJUVCWQpx-l8RkH-Urz3zxzOHUFl0L03CUHFN2xKr84NWybjdXXGSyD3MvWbTdJ3E2hgCWidl3zTV4D_Itxrq24sUmm2wDbuGO5g.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/AQMlzkBuJK4pf6fFo7Grw5coWyKd8cZt4GR48pBs5cIA5XFsfztZPDSeu4aJUVCWQpx-l8RkH-Urz3zxzOHUFl0L03CUHFN2xKr84NWybjdXXGSyD3MvWbTdJ3E2hgCWidl3zTV4D_Itxrq24sUmm2wDbuGO5g.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":380646,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=380646","url_meta":{"origin":379557,"position":2},"title":"Why \u201ccheaper\u201d wind and solar raise costs. Part III: The problem with power markets","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"05\/29\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Part 3 of this series examines power markets, promoted by policymakers (FERC) and industry advocates to lower costs through competitive bidding and merit-order dispatch. While markets can optimize resource allocation in many sectors, they struggle to deliver affordability and reliability in electricity systems dominated by intermittent renewables. This post first\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"policymakers (FERC)\"","block_context":{"text":"policymakers (FERC)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=policymakers-ferc"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/0ChatGPT-Image-29.-Mai-2025-10_24_08.png?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/0ChatGPT-Image-29.-Mai-2025-10_24_08.png?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/0ChatGPT-Image-29.-Mai-2025-10_24_08.png?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/0ChatGPT-Image-29.-Mai-2025-10_24_08.png?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/0ChatGPT-Image-29.-Mai-2025-10_24_08.png?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":423961,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=423961","url_meta":{"origin":379557,"position":3},"title":"The Cost of Wind and Solar Power Backup","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"01\/30\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"Another excellent discussion of the topic is in this\u00a0TPPF report\u00a0by Michael Reed and Brent Bennet. Reed and Bennett estimate that modifying the Texas grid to handle wind and solar output variability cost Texas electricity consumers $2.3 billion in 2023.","rel":"","context":"In \"coal\"","block_context":{"text":"coal","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=coal"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/0Screenshot-2026-01-30-191943.png?fit=1200%2C589&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/0Screenshot-2026-01-30-191943.png?fit=1200%2C589&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/0Screenshot-2026-01-30-191943.png?fit=1200%2C589&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/0Screenshot-2026-01-30-191943.png?fit=1200%2C589&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/0Screenshot-2026-01-30-191943.png?fit=1200%2C589&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":408773,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=408773","url_meta":{"origin":379557,"position":4},"title":"Increasing Power Prices Are Being Wrongly Blamed on the Trump Administration instead Biden&#8217;s Climate Cult Policies","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"10\/17\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Residential electricity prices increased 25% while Joe Biden was president, and they are continuing to increase. This continuation occurs because there is a lag for the Trump administration\u2019s policies to take effect due to the time it takes to enact legislation, phase in changes, and finalize new or modified regulations.\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"AI data centers\"","block_context":{"text":"AI data centers","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=ai-data-centers"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/0AQPeRGIkoBkWx7C9TkV6XveP1qpCkO0Ybhf72DFCjvyh_NMrFBBw0xz-AhVJbkTiwvJwJmz2cR3aesB8bnnMTe-0ds_0MGt-l1js08KNmBCugitDQk3urHvCHghlHtzK-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C801&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/0AQPeRGIkoBkWx7C9TkV6XveP1qpCkO0Ybhf72DFCjvyh_NMrFBBw0xz-AhVJbkTiwvJwJmz2cR3aesB8bnnMTe-0ds_0MGt-l1js08KNmBCugitDQk3urHvCHghlHtzK-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C801&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/0AQPeRGIkoBkWx7C9TkV6XveP1qpCkO0Ybhf72DFCjvyh_NMrFBBw0xz-AhVJbkTiwvJwJmz2cR3aesB8bnnMTe-0ds_0MGt-l1js08KNmBCugitDQk3urHvCHghlHtzK-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C801&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/0AQPeRGIkoBkWx7C9TkV6XveP1qpCkO0Ybhf72DFCjvyh_NMrFBBw0xz-AhVJbkTiwvJwJmz2cR3aesB8bnnMTe-0ds_0MGt-l1js08KNmBCugitDQk3urHvCHghlHtzK-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C801&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/0AQPeRGIkoBkWx7C9TkV6XveP1qpCkO0Ybhf72DFCjvyh_NMrFBBw0xz-AhVJbkTiwvJwJmz2cR3aesB8bnnMTe-0ds_0MGt-l1js08KNmBCugitDQk3urHvCHghlHtzK-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C801&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":356133,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=356133","url_meta":{"origin":379557,"position":5},"title":"$$ Gone with the Wind &amp; Solar","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"12\/20\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Advocates of renewable energy in Ontario say that these energy sources are so low in cost as to be the ideal sources of electricity generation in future. Indeed, they claim wind and solar energy are so inexpensive that electrical utilities should abandon the use of hydrocarbon-based (coal and natural gas-fired)\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Decarbonization\"","block_context":{"text":"Decarbonization","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=decarbonization"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0Screenshot-2024-12-20-161332.png?fit=1076%2C920&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0Screenshot-2024-12-20-161332.png?fit=1076%2C920&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0Screenshot-2024-12-20-161332.png?fit=1076%2C920&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0Screenshot-2024-12-20-161332.png?fit=1076%2C920&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/0Screenshot-2024-12-20-161332.png?fit=1076%2C920&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/379557","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=379557"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/379557\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":379562,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/379557\/revisions\/379562"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/379561"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=379557"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=379557"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=379557"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}