It's Official: Fossil Fuels Don't Cost Less

I recently slogged through 373 pages of a National Academy of Sciences' report released last October. Hidden Costs of Energy: Unpriced Consequences of Energy Production and Use is the most thorough cost accounting of energy sources I have ever seen. It shows how coal and other fossil fuels create enormous costs that the rest of us pay for. Whether we know it or not. Whether we like it or not.

According to the report, the damages from coal cost us 3 to 13 cents per kilowatt hour of electricity. That is about $62 billion a year and 25 to 100 percent of what we pay for electricity from coal. (The report did not even count any damages from climate change, water pollution from mining or dozens of other costly problems.)

If that sounds like a subsidy, it should. Because that is exactly what it is.

But still we hear that fossil fuels are cheaper:

  • Republican functionary Christopher Horner's new book, Power Grab, proclaims that renewable energy will "bankrupt" this country and is a "declaration of war against America's most reliable sources of energy ─ coal, oil, and natural gas."
  • Wall Street Journal editorial writer Stephen Moore agreed on the back of the book's cover, calling it a plot between Big Government and Big Labor.

Before I became a card-carrying member of this conspiracy, I studied for my MBA at the University of Chicago where I met and spoke with the great man himself: Milton Friedman.

He was an economist who always asked "What does it cost?" Not the price ─ that often hides the cost. You do not need a Nobel Prize to see the freshman mistake of those who say wind and solar are too expensive to compete with coal: They confuse price with cost.

The hidden costs of oil are even larger.

Energy analyst Blaine Townsend says "the web of direct subsidies includes billions in government sponsored low-cost construction loans and tax breaks like the Foreign Tax Credit. Last in, first out" accounting practices, special write-downs for core operations and royalty "relief" for leases in the Gulf of Mexico have robbed the federal coffers of billions more" ("U.S. Should Subsidize Green Energy, Not Big Oil," Dec. 24, 2009, San Jose Mercury News).

We have not even started counting the costs of what could be the biggest and most expensive oil spill in history.

And if you want to put a price on what it takes to send our bravest and best heroes into harm's way to protect our supply lines in faraway places, go ahead. Just make sure it starts with a "T."

Turns out, when you add up all the costs of all the different kinds of energy, solar and wind are often less expensive than fossil fuels. And the price of solar is going down, while the costs of coal and oil are going up.

The National Academy of Sciences says it is happening now and is real today.

Utilities get it ─ that is why more and more are doing everything they can to move away from coal in favor of cleaner and less costly alternatives.

For that, we owe a debt to the National Academy of Sciences and economists like Milton Friedman.

About the Author

Tom Rooney is president and chief executive officer of SPG Solar of Novato, Calif. Rooney holds an engineering degree from Cornell University as well as a master's in business administration from the University of Chicago. Formerly, he was a speaker and consultant in the clean-tech sector while also serving on a number of boards throughout Asia, Europe and North America. From 2003 to 2007, he was president and chief executive officer of Insituform Technologies.

Comments

Wed, Nov 10, 2010 Larry AZ

Gee I'm amazed that someone running a solar company came to this conclusion. Coal is by far the cheapest form of energy in the US and has been for decades. Oil would also be if our government would let us pump it. I've been in the Utility business for over 20 years and regardless of what the author thinks, electric utilities are going renewable because it's being forced upon them. The studies clearly show these renewable energy sources are far more expensive than fossil fuels. I personably don't buy the "climate change" myth and wonder why the government does. My conclusion is it's in the financial interests of those in charge to perpetuate it.

Sun, Nov 7, 2010 Marc Ohio

"LIFO accounting practices have robbed the federal coffers of billions more." Woooo-hooooo--watch that evil LIFO stuff! When I read this kind of thing, warning lights go on. [I'm also a University of Chicago grad]

Mon, May 17, 2010 Larry Arizona

This analysis would have more credability if the author didn't have a vested interest in the renewable energy field. Being in the Utility business for many years, I've seen the studies that clearly prove coal to be the cheapest source of electricity in the US, even with reasonable pollution technology. Since it is an abundant energy source in the US, it seems a ashame that some people want to increase the cost of energy just to make a few bucks!

Thu, May 13, 2010 James C. Houston

I appreciate the article, but there's certainly nothing "official" about the cost of fossil fuels compared to solar and wind energy. Mr. Rooney implies that the jury has reached a verdict, and now that it has been settled, all of the power companies are going to suddenly realize their folly and switch to solar and wind. I'll concede that Mr. Rooney is doing a good job promoting the industry that he works for.

Tue, May 11, 2010 jim martin los angeles

great article .. i went out and got the study and sure enough, everything he said was right on! i think i remember his article about water infrastructure in the la times a few years back as well.

Add your Comment

Your Name:(optional)
Your Email:(optional)
Your Location:(optional)
Comment:
Please type the letters/numbers you see above