As activists and politicians push Western society to give up reliable energy sources in pursuit of a renewable energy future, the Mackinac Center is testing whether alternative sources can take a primary role in powering the United States.
Northwood University’s McNair Center for the Advancement of Free Enterprise and Entrepreneurship partnered with the Mackinac Center to produce an energy report card that grades eight energy sources by how well they meet society’s needs.
We reviewed natural gas, coal, petroleum fuels, nuclear, hydroelectric, wind, solar and geothermal. We ranked each source’s reliability, environmental impacts, costs, technological innovation and market feasibility on a scale of 1 (lowest) to 10 (highest). From these, we derived a grade for each energy source.
Natural gas is the nation’s best energy source, earning an A for reliable performance, competitive cost and role in reducing emissions.
Nuclear follows closely with a B+, thanks to its rock- solid reliability and safety record, as well as minimal environmental impact. Nuclear energy’s higher cost and lower market feasibility are driven by deliberate policy decisions rather than inherent qualities.
Coal gets a B- for low cost, the availability of technologies to address its environmental impacts, and consistent reliability. Coal has higher environmental impacts, but its problems are primarily policy-based.
Petroleum fuels received a C- because they fill a niche market, have higher costs than gas and have little potential for growth.
On the “renewables” side, hydroelectric received a B-, thanks to consistent reliability and availability when needed. Hydro’s market is restricted by a limited potential for new developments.
Geothermal received a D+. While it is a clean energy source, its growth is heavily limited by cost and geography.
Wind and solar each received an F. Both require mining vast quantities of minerals and metals like lithium, cobalt, copper and rare earth elements. The industrial operations and energy sources required to build wind and solar capacity raise doubts that these sources should be considered “renewable” or clean at all.
A modern industrial society cannot replace conventional power plants with wind and solar without doing serious and potentially fatal harm to the electric grid. Premature plant closures and overreliance on wind and solar jeopardize electric reliability.
Policymakers should support the reliable and affordable power sources our society needs. Forcing an extreme renewable overhaul based on dubious claims of environmental benefits is a recipe for energy insecurity and economic hardship.
