Adding Renewables (wind and solar) Increase Energy Poverty

The Green New Deal requires that solar and wind electricity production replace electricity produced by fossil fuels and nuclear reactors. The challenges that face those two “renewable” energy sources seem to make this impractical if not impossible. 

There is another issue, beyond the improbability of wind and solar replacing fossil fuels.  That is energy poverty.  Families must decide between food or electricity because they have limited income.  I had never come across a study that attempts to quantify the numbers of families that are in energy poverty until recently.  Nature Research Journal posted a study titled “Recognition of and Response to energy poverty in the United States” by Dominic Bednar and Tony Reames.  (click on underline and then page up until you reach the study.)

It begins by saying:

“Stark disparities exist in US energy burdens, the percentage of household income spent on energy bills. Urban and rural low-income households (defined as 80% of area median income or 150% federal poverty level) spend roughly three times as much of their income on energy cost as compared to non-low-income households (7.2% and 9% versus 2.3% and 3.1%, respectively)1,2. Moreover, low-income, African American, Latinx, multifamily and renter households are disproportionately impacted by high energy burdens1. Out of a total of 118.2 million US households, in 2015, the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimated that 17 million households received an energy disconnect/delivery stop notice and 25 million households had to forgo food and medicine to pay energy bills3.” 

Further on, they report that:

“However, after nearly fifty years of federal energy assistance, one in three US households (37 million), still experience energy poverty3”.

The Obama Administrations aims were to make the cost of electricity “skyrocket”.

Former President Obama goes on to say that the increased costs of his plan will be passed on to the utility customers.  He wants the customers to understand this and to know it is being done because he thinks it is necessary. 

We agree that forcing out fossil fuels as the source of electrical energy and replacing fossil fuels using wind and solar renewable energy will cause the price of electricity to skyrocket.  The following chart shows what happens to the price of electricity in those nations that have begun replacing fossil fuels with renewables.   




Leading the EU nations in renewables is Germany and note that they have the highest cost of electricity.  There are already 37 million households suffering from energy poverty, the effect of doubling the price of electricity will be a calamity.

What is purposely unmentioned by the peddlers of wind and solar, is the fact that you really must keep the fossil fuel electrical producers running as back up. The wind does not always blow and the solar, on average, is never available for more than 12 hours and in fact cloudy or rainy or snowy days reduce the 12 hours sometimes to zero hours.

This often means that the fossil fuels facilities are never really replaced. They continue to operate to prevent loss (brownouts or blackouts) of electricity to the public, the hospitals, the schools, the manufacturing plants, etc.


3 responses to “Adding Renewables (wind and solar) Increase Energy Poverty

  1. Not only does the anti fossil/nuclear power policy increase the cost, especially for poor people, it will not solve global warming!
    To all readers: Please look up the data available on websites, NOAA etc.
    – 25,000 healthy Polar bears and total silence now from environmentalists.
    – Arctic Ice “melting very rapidly in the Laptev Sea”; along Russia’s shore –
    No mention of the Canadian shore that never melted.
    Note the winter Arctic ice that is nearly back to pre warming levels.
    Note; East Antarctica has increased in ice total.
    – Hot spots ( 16 or 17 ); Can ‘miracle CO2″ focus energy?
    – Are all seas rising?? Or any? vs some land (islands) sinking?
    – 16 hot spots in the world in 1980; all but two cooled off by 2020!

    Arthur Krugler

  2. Thank you for this interesting analysis.

  3. Pingback: Biden Green Plan Costs $1.7 trillion and Reduces Global Temp 0.1C | Climate Change Sanity

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s