Below is a picture taken December 1, 2024 in Waterford, Pennsylvania. Located just 15 miles from Lake Erie, Waterford is in the snow-belt—named for the lake effect snow that pounds the southeastern shores of the great lakes when cold Canadian winds blow. The snow-belt is a good location for nearby ski resorts, Peak n Peak and Holiday Valley. But does it make sense for solar panels to be plunked in the snow-belt???
The popular press would have us believe that costs of wind and solar are becoming competitive with traditional electric generation. But readers of this blog know that injecting wind and solar power into the grid means unreliability and higher costs for electricity. When the wind isn’t blowing and the sun isn’t shining, the grid must still have enough natural gas or coal powered facilities to compensate for the wind and solar that suddenly goes missing. That duplication is wasteful and expensive. Germany and California have already ventured down this road, and citizens there pay up to 3 times what Pennsylvanians pay for electricity.
With more experience under our belts, we are now learning about another hidden cost of wind and solar: weather risk. In Midland Texas a hailstorm destroyed 400,000 of some 685,000 solar modules. The project was one year old and insurance losses totaled $70 million. In Scottsbluff, Nebraska hail destroyed over 13,000 panels of a 14,000-panel solar system. The solar system (which had been hailed as “hail-proof”) was only 4 years old and had to be entirely rebuilt. Hail claims now average about $58.4 million per claim.
Of course, the hidden cost is not limited to hailstorms. This fall, a tornado associated with Hurricane Milton destroyed much of the Lake Placid Solar Plant in Sylvian Shores, Florida. The facility had been operating for about five years. Onshore wind turbines are likewise exposed to tornado risks. And offshore wind facilities are in the direct path of hurricanes.
As a result of these risks insurance premiums for “renewables” are going through the roof. Some projects are being canceled because they are not insurable. The high premium costs, and the uninsured losses, are, of course, not free. They are passed on to us—the consumer.
These hidden costs—insurance premiums, uninsured rebuild costs, subsidies, and system duplication—deserve honest discussion. Fake news touting the marvels of wind and solar don’t jibe with what our own eyes see. Take another look at the snow-belt picture. The next time your neighbor or newspaper touts the affordability of wind and solar…engage.
Comments