Researchers examining the nation’s largest regional power grid concluded that relying on wind, solar and batteries would require vast overbuilding, sharply higher electricity costs and storage capacity far beyond current levels.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
WASHINGTON — Building an electricity system around wind, solar and battery storage would be physically difficult, financially prohibitive and incapable of delivering emissions reductions at a reasonable cost, according to a new analysis of the PJM Interconnection grid.
The report released by researchers affiliated with the National Center for Energy Analytics examined whether batteries could compensate for the periods when wind turbines and solar panels are unable to generate enough power.
6a4e91b73d3febdaf5e4fb6b 2026 07 NCEA BatteriesandtheGrid LesserRolling by yourNEWS Media
Its authors rejected the argument that large-scale battery deployment provides a practical route to an electricity system dominated by intermittent renewable generation.
“This study demonstrates that a wind-solar-battery policy to meet electricity demand is physically implausible, cost-prohibitive, and unjustifiable on the basis of goals to reduce CO2 emissions,” the researchers concluded.
That finding contrasts with claims from renewable energy advocates who describe batteries as an increasingly important tool for replacing fossil fuels and reaching net-zero energy goals.
In a Friday commentary, Reuters Global Energy Transition columnist Gavin Maguire praised the growth of battery technology.
“In little more than three decades, batteries have moved from an afterthought in energy systems to one of the defining technologies of the transition away from fossil fuels,” Maguire wrote.
The commentary did not address the continued global rise in fossil fuel consumption, a long-running trend that has shown no reversal, or the limited amount of time current battery systems could support electricity demand.
Researchers Test Three Paths for the PJM Grid
Jonathan Lesser, a senior fellow with the National Center for Energy Analytics, and Mitch Rolling, research director at Always On Energy Research, based their analysis on PJM Interconnection.
PJM is the nation’s largest regional grid operator, supplying electricity to approximately 67 million people across 13 states and the District of Columbia.
The researchers modeled three different approaches for meeting future electricity needs.
The first would eliminate all coal- and natural gas-fired generation while retaining existing nuclear plants and relying on wind, solar and batteries for the remainder of the system.
The second would combine battery storage with existing and newly built natural gas plants, along with existing and new nuclear generation.
The third would use batteries more narrowly, adding storage to replace natural gas-fired power plants during periods of peak demand.
The renewable-only model produced by far the largest cost and infrastructure requirements.
To maintain reliable service through normal daily fluctuations, seasonal changes and extended periods with little wind or sunshine, PJM would have to install roughly 10 times as much total generating capacity by 2045 as would be required under the natural gas and nuclear scenario, according to a Just the News report on the findings.
The excess generation would be needed because wind and solar facilities do not operate continuously. Enough additional equipment would have to be available to generate surplus power when weather conditions are favorable and maintain service through prolonged periods of low production.
Ratepayer Cost Reaches Into the Trillions
The study estimated that PJM customers would have to pay approximately $4 trillion over 20 years to support the wind-solar-battery system without constructing additional nuclear plants.
That estimate already accounts for savings resulting from reduced purchases of fossil fuels.
The other two models were considerably less expensive, although both still imposed hundreds of billions of dollars in additional costs.
A system combining natural gas, nuclear generation and batteries would cost PJM ratepayers about $668 billion over two decades.
Using battery storage to displace gas-fired generation during peak periods would cost approximately $768 billion during the same timeframe.
The authors also measured the renewable-only model against the economic value assigned to avoiding carbon dioxide emissions.
They calculated that the annual cost of preventing emissions under the wind-solar-battery scenario would be $771 per ton.
By comparison, estimates of the social cost of carbon — the projected economic damage associated with releasing one ton of carbon dioxide — range from $180 per ton in 2025 to $320 per ton in 2045.
Based on that comparison, the researchers concluded that the costs of the renewable-only system would exceed the estimated economic benefits produced by its emissions reductions.
Existing Batteries Provide Minutes, Not Days, of Power
Battery installations have expanded rapidly in the United States, supported by federal subsidies and state climate requirements.
Even after that growth, grid-scale storage available at the beginning of 2026 could supply only about 15 minutes of average electricity demand nationwide, according to Lesser and Rolling.
California contains approximately one-third of the country’s battery capacity. The researchers estimated that the state’s batteries could meet about two hours of average California demand.
During periods of high electricity use, that capacity would fall below one hour.
The report also examined PJM electricity demand between 6 p.m. and 7 p.m. on July 29, 2025.
Providing enough battery storage to serve the grid for that single hour would require 50 percent more capacity than was installed across the entire United States, the researchers found.
Those figures illustrate the difference between using batteries for brief grid-balancing functions and relying on them to replace conventional power plants during extended shortages of wind or sunlight.
Fire Risks Add Another Unresolved Concern
The study focused on economic and operational feasibility and did not evaluate the safety risks associated with large battery-storage installations.
Those risks have become a growing concern for zoning officials and emergency responders after fires at battery facilities burned for days and released toxic gases and contaminated water.
Firefighter groups have warned that many local departments lack the training, equipment and personnel needed to manage large battery fires.
Such incidents remain unfamiliar to most fire departments, creating additional concerns for communities asked to approve utility-scale storage projects.
Study Warns of Higher Prices and Greater Land Use
Beyond the direct expense of building enough generation and storage, the researchers said a wind-solar-battery system would require extensive land development.
Large quantities of wind turbines, solar panels, transmission infrastructure and battery facilities would be needed to satisfy existing reliability requirements.
“The quantities of wind and solar generation and battery storage that are needed to meet existing reliability standards would cost trillions of dollars, cause electricity prices to skyrocket, and require vast amounts of land – all of which would adversely affect rural communities and agricultural production,” the report stated.
The findings challenge the claim that rapidly expanding battery capacity can by itself resolve the reliability problems associated with intermittent wind and solar generation.
While batteries may perform limited functions within the power system, the analysis concluded that using them as the foundation for a carbon-free grid would demand levels of spending, construction and land use that are not economically or physically practical.
Original article
Comments