By supporting the coal industry, the Trump administration is not only contributing to pollution, fossil fuel emissions and the climate crisis, but is now clinging to a much more expensive energy production model than the supply of energy. renewable energies.
According to a new report from the Energy Innovation Renewable Energy Analysis Company, about three-quarters of the country's coal-fired electricity generation costs US households more than renewable energy sources, including wind, solar and solar energy. hydraulic.
Energy Innovation has based its study on the financial data of companies provided by the US Energy Information Administration (EIA). It revealed that coal has become more expensive due to rising maintenance and pollution control costs, while technological advances have made solar and wind energy cheaper.
These trends are expected to continue and the group predicts that by 2025, 86% of coal plants will produce electricity more expensive than renewable energy.
"America is officially entering the crossover cost crossover, where existing coal is becoming more expensive, compared to cleaner alternatives," reads the report.
Advocates of climate action applauded the findings of the report on social media.
Wind and solar are already cheaper! Goodbye to coal. Thank you for bringing us here, but something better takes your place. https://t.co/IKW4vN7Fql
– Mark Ruffalo (@MarkRuffalo) March 25, 2019
About 75% of coal production is more expensive than renewable energy. The costs could be exceeded by 2025. https://t.co/5g1l93z9Es
– Greenpeace USA (@greenpeaceusa) March 25, 2019
According to Energy Innovation, in January, half of US coal plants were shut down in the last decade, while renewable energy sources now account for 17% of energy production, double the amount of electricity supplied in 2008.
Monday's study provides the latest evidence that coal production is becoming an increasingly unrealistic method for creating the energy that fuels US homes.
"We have realized that we are at the point of" coal crossing "in many parts of the country, but it's actually more prevalent than previously thought," said Mike O & # 39; Boyle, co-author of the report and director of electricity policy for Energy Innovation. say it Guardian. "Wind and solar have huge potential to replace coal while saving people money."
The study calls for a complete reduction in the use of coal-fired power plants in the United States, but President Donald Trump wants to put his environmental policy in the hands of the EPA administrator and former coal lobbyist Andrew Wheeler; deregulate the coal industry to allow plants to pollute nearby water courses and soils; and imposing tariffs on solar panels to prevent the renewable energy sector from replacing the endangered industry, it is the states that have paved the way for the transition of fossil fuels.
California and Hawaii have announced in recent years their intention to switch to 100% renewable energy by 2045. The Governor of New Mexico, Michelle Lujan Grisham, signed on Monday a bill to make move state utilities to a sustainable source of energy by 2045, while lawmakers in Puerto Rico plan to vote. on the subject this week and a number of towns and villages across the country have voted to end their reliance on fossil fuels.
"It would be better if we had a coherent federal policy because not all states will take the initiative," Ole Boyle said. Guardian. "To get an affordable and clean energy system, we need the participation of federal and state actors."
Energy Innovation said in its report that replacing failed coal plants with renewable energy projects could be an immediate benefit for local economies.
"Any coal-fired power station that fails the cost-crossing test should be a warning to policy makers and local stakeholders that there is an opportunity for productive change in the immediate vicinity of this power plant," it says. The report.