FRANKFORT, Ky. (Dec. 18, 2025) — A newly released study by national research firm Energy Ventures Analysis (EVA) estimates the cost of replacing existing coal-fired power plants with new renewable generation and finds that premature coal retirements would increase electricity costs while weakening grid reliability.
The report, “Understanding the True Cost of Replacing Existing Coal Plants with New Renewables,” concludes:
“Retaining and operating the existing coal fleet through the 2040s remains the most cost-effective pathway for maintaining grid reliability under current and expected market conditions. Fully replacing these plants with renewables, even under the most favorable policy incentives, would require significantly greater investment and would likely result in higher electricity costs for U.S. consumers.”
The Dependable Power First Kentucky coalition praised the study for properly framing the real-world impacts of what’s at stake in the debate over the future of energy policy.
“Kentucky families and businesses are already feeling the pressure of rising electricity costs, and this new analysis shows that retiring coal plants before reliable replacements are ready would be an expensive mistake,” said Katelyn Bunning, executive director of Dependable Power First Kentucky. “The study estimates that continuing to operate coal plants scheduled for retirement, rather than replacing them with new renewable generation, could save consumers billions every year nationwide.
“Even these cost savings do not fully capture the loss of critical reliability attributes provided by coal-fired generation, which renewable sources cannot replace,” she added.
The report’s findings indicate that while new renewable projects remain the least-cost options for new construction, continuing to operate the existing coal fleet is far more cost-effective than replacing it when measured on a 30-year average annual cost basis.
The average annual inflation-adjusted cost to operate and maintain the retiring coal fleet is approximately $6 billion. In contrast, even under the most favorable subsidy conditions, the lowest-cost replacement option — a hybrid wind-plus-battery project — would cost over $8.2 billion per year, or about $2.2 billion (37%) more. A standalone solar replacement, even at the same maximum subsidy rate, would cost more than $57 billion per year, nearly ten times higher than continuing coal operations.
“Coal has long been the backbone of Kentucky’s electric grid, providing dependable and affordable power for households, manufacturers, and growing industries,” said Bunning. “Keeping these coal plants online will protect consumers and support dozens of energy-intensive investments like data centers that require huge amounts of dependable power. Policymakers should take this study seriously to promote economic growth and prevent higher electricity costs and risks to reliability.”
The full EVA report is available on Dependable Power First Kentucky’s website at: bit.ly/EVAreport.
# # #
Dependable Power First Kentucky works to promote a reliable, resilient, and affordable electricity supply for all Kentuckians by bringing together diverse stakeholders from across the state to shift the conversation around reliability and support policies that achieve this goal. For more information, please visit DependablePowerKY.com.
Wow who would’ve thought that? Lol. Everyone knows that! Green energy is just a money funneling scheme! Depends on what crook is in office.