Verify any claim · lenz.io
Claim analyzed
Science“In most OECD member-country electricity markets, the levelized cost of energy for new utility-scale solar photovoltaic power and new onshore wind power is lower than the levelized cost of energy for new natural-gas combined-cycle power plants.”
Submitted by Vicky
The conclusion
Available high-quality evidence supports the claim's broad direction: new onshore wind, and often utility-scale solar, usually have lower project-level LCOE than new gas combined-cycle plants across much of the OECD. OECD cross-country data, plus recent U.S. and European studies, point the same way. The main limitation is incomplete OECD-wide coverage, and solar's advantage depends more on local sunlight and gas-price conditions.
Caveats
- Low confidence conclusion.
- Direct cross-country OECD evidence does not cover all OECD members, so the phrase "most OECD member-country markets" is somewhat broader than the strongest dataset directly proves.
- The comparison is about project-level LCOE only; it does not include grid integration, balancing, or other system costs that can change whole-system comparisons.
- Solar PV is not uniformly cheaper in every OECD market; local resource quality, financing assumptions, and gas prices can produce exceptions.
Get notified if new evidence updates this analysis
Create a free account to track this claim.
Sources
Sources used in the analysis
This report shows that onshore wind is expected to have, on average, the lowest levelised costs of electricity generation in 2025. Although costs vary strongly from country to country, this is true for a majority of countries (10 out of 14). Also solar PV, if deployed at large scales and under favourable climatic conditions, can be very cost competitive.
Unsubsidized utility-scale solar PV LCOE ranges from $38/MWh to $78/MWh and onshore wind from $37/MWh to $86/MWh. Gas Combined Cycle LCOE ranges from $48/MWh to $109/MWh. Renewables remain the lowest-cost new-build power sources in the US for the 10th consecutive year.
Unsubsidized utility-scale solar and onshore wind continue to remain the lowest-cost new-build power sources in the US for the 10th year in a row. The cost of building a new combined cycle gas turbine has reached a 10-year high.
Despite headwinds and macroeconomic challenges, renewables remain the most cost-competitive form of new-build generation on an unsubsidized basis in the U.S. Renewable energy will continue to play a key role in the buildout of new power generation.
In 2018 onshore wind LCOE were around €60/MWh... Meanwhile, despite the reduction of gas prices, LCOE of CCGT power plants have [remained higher, as renewables are cheaper than gas fired combined cycle gas turbines (CCGT)].
Solar PV LCOE is lower than natural gas combined-cycle LCOE on average and, in most regions, even without the tax credit.
Supporting data workbook for the joint IEA-NEA study comparing levelized costs of electricity generation across 24 different countries, including detailed LCOE comparisons for solar PV, onshore wind, offshore wind, and combined-cycle gas turbines across OECD member states.
The study shows that while solar PV and wind LCOE can be lower than gas CC in some OECD countries with optimal conditions, when including system integration costs for intermittency, gas combined-cycle plants often have lower total system costs in most scenarios.
NREL's 2024 Annual Technology Baseline shows utility-scale solar PV LCOE at $30-60/MWh and onshore wind at $35-70/MWh in the US, competitive with gas CC, but international applicability depends on local factors; no global OECD consensus stated.
Figure ES.2 shows the LCOE ranges for various renewable technologies – namely, the three categories of solar PV in the study (residential, commercial and large, ground-mounted) and the two categories of wind (onshore and offshore), compared against dispatchable generation such as nuclear, coal or combined-cycle gas turbines (CCGTs).
The LCOE for onshore wind turbines in 2024 is between 4.3 and 9.2 €cents/kWh... The results indicate that by 2024, the LCOE of large-scale renewable energy installations will be significantly lower than the operating costs of conventional power plants, especially for onshore wind and ground-mounted PV systems. The levelized costs of electricity (LCOE) for combined cycle gas turbine plants are projected to increase from 10.9 to 18.0 €cents/kWh in 2024.
In a growing number of cases, the LCOE of wind power and solar PV is close to, or even below, the LCOE of fossil or nuclear options. For example, the lowest currently reported costs for land-based wind are USD 30-35 per megawatt hour (MWh) (Morocco) and for solar PV are USD 49/MWh (Peru).
Unsubsidized utility-scale solar PV ranges from $38/MWh to $78/MWh and onshore wind $37/MWh to $86/MWh. Gas combined cycle varies from $48/MWh to $109/MWh. Solar and wind outcompete fossil fuels in US power generation costs for the 10th consecutive year.
In Europe (many OECD members), new wind and solar LCOE is below gas CC, but high gas prices in 2022-2024 skewed comparisons; with normalized low gas prices in 2025, the gap narrows and gas is cheaper in some markets without subsidies.
Between 2015 and 2025, levelized costs for utility-scale solar PV fell approximately 90% globally, and onshore wind costs fell approximately 70%, according to IRENA and IEA data. Over the same period, natural gas combined-cycle plant costs remained relatively stable or increased slightly when accounting for carbon pricing. By 2025, in the majority of OECD markets, new solar and onshore wind projects had lower LCOE than new gas-fired plants, particularly when carbon costs are included.
The cost gap between new renewables and the marginal cost of gas-fired combined cycles has narrowed due to low gas prices and a slight increase in renewable LCOE. Still, renewables continue to lead in economic viability, though onshore wind LCOE has increased for the third year in a row.
What do you think of the claim?
Your challenge will appear immediately.
Challenge submitted!
Continue your research
Verify a related claim next.
Expert review
3 specialized AI experts evaluated the evidence and arguments.
Expert 1 — The Logic Examiner
The supporting evidence shows (i) an OECD/IEA-NEA cross-country comparison where onshore wind is lowest LCOE in a majority of the countries assessed (10/14) and solar can be competitive (Sources 1,7), plus several jurisdiction-specific benchmarks (US: Lazard/EIA, Sources 2,3,6; EU: Commission/Fraunhofer, Sources 5,11) indicating solar/wind often undercut new gas CCGT on a project-LCOE basis, but it does not validly establish the quantified scope claim “most OECD member-country markets” because the only explicit multi-country count is a limited subset and much of the rest is US/EU-centric. The opponent's main refutation leans on system-integration/total-system-cost framing (Source 8), which is a metric shift from the claim's stated LCOE, so it doesn't logically negate the claim; overall the claim is directionally plausible but overgeneralized beyond what the evidence strictly supports.
Expert 2 — The Context Analyst
The claim is specifically about project-level LCOE for new-build plants, not total system costs including integration — the opponent's main counterargument (Source 8) conflates these two distinct metrics, which is a category error as the proponent correctly notes. The claim is well-supported by the OECD 2020 cross-country study (10/14 countries for onshore wind), Fraunhofer ISE 2024 data showing renewables significantly cheaper than CCGT in Europe, EIA 2025 data showing solar cheaper than gas CC in most US regions, and Lazard 2025 data for the US — however, the claim applies to 'most OECD member countries' broadly, and the evidence base is somewhat US/Europe-centric with limited coverage of all 38 OECD members; countries with low domestic gas prices (e.g., some with access to cheap LNG or domestic production) or poor renewable resource conditions may not fit the pattern, and Source 14 notes gas can be cheaper in some markets at normalized 2025 gas prices. The claim holds up well for the majority of OECD markets based on available evidence, but the framing omits that (1) the OECD 2020 study covers only 14 of 38 OECD members, (2) solar PV competitiveness is conditional on 'favorable climatic conditions' per Source 1, (3) the Lazard data is US-specific, and (4) some OECD markets with low gas prices or poor renewable resources may be exceptions — these caveats mean the claim is mostly true but slightly overstated in its universality.
Expert 3 — The Source Auditor
The most authoritative sources here are the OECD/IEA joint report (Source 1), the EIA's AEO 2025 (Source 6), Lazard's 2025 LCOE+ report (Sources 2-4), the European Commission study (Source 5), and Fraunhofer ISE 2024 (Source 11). Source 1 — a high-authority OECD/IEA joint publication — directly states onshore wind has the lowest average LCOE in a majority of assessed OECD countries (10/14), though this covers only 14 countries and dates to 2020. Source 6 (EIA, high-authority, 2025) confirms solar PV LCOE is lower than gas CC on average and in most U.S. regions. Sources 2-4 (Lazard, high-authority, 2025) confirm renewables beat gas CC in the U.S. for the 10th consecutive year. Source 5 (European Commission, high-authority, 2020) confirms renewables cheaper than CCGT in Europe. Source 11 (Fraunhofer ISE, 2024) shows CCGT LCOE at 10.9-18.0 €cents/kWh versus onshore wind at 4.3-9.2 €cents/kWh in Germany/Europe. Source 8 (OECD NEA, high-authority) raises the system integration cost caveat, but this conflates project-level LCOE with total system costs — the claim specifically references LCOE, not total system costs. Source 14 (Ember, lower authority, potential advocacy bias) notes gas may be cheaper in some markets at normalized 2025 gas prices, but this is a minority-of-markets qualifier, not a majority. The claim is specifically about project-level LCOE for new-build plants, and on that metric, multiple independent high-authority sources from 2020-2025 confirm renewables beat gas CC in most OECD markets. The Lazard and EIA data are U.S.-centric, limiting direct OECD-wide generalization, but combined with the OECD/IEA joint study and European Commission/Fraunhofer data, the weight of credible evidence supports the claim. The opponent's strongest point — that Source 1 covers only 14 OECD countries — is a legitimate caveat, but the convergence of multiple independent high-authority sources across different geographies makes the claim Mostly True rather than False or Misleading.
Expert summary
The arguments
Two AI advocates debated this claim using the research gathered.
Argument for
OECD's cross-country “Projected Costs of Generating Electricity – 2020 Edition” finds that onshore wind has the lowest average LCOE in 2025 and that this holds for a majority of the countries assessed (10 of 14), with utility-scale solar PV also “very cost competitive” under favorable conditions—directly supporting that, across most OECD markets, new wind and often new solar undercut new gas combined-cycle on an LCOE basis (Source 1, OECD; Source 7, IEA-NEA data file). This conclusion is reinforced by multiple independent, high-authority benchmarks showing new utility-scale solar and onshore wind LCOE ranges below new gas combined-cycle (Lazard's 2025 LCOE+ ranges, Source 2, and its summary, Source 3) and by government/official modeling that solar PV is lower than gas combined-cycle “on average” and “in most regions” (Source 6, EIA), aligning with EU analysis that renewables are cheaper than CCGT (Source 5, European Commission).
The Proponent's reliance on Source 1 is critically undermined by the fact that its 10-of-14 country finding covers only a narrow, non-representative subset of OECD members and explicitly excludes system integration costs — a gap that Source 8 (OECD Nuclear Energy Agency) identifies as decisive, noting that when intermittency costs are properly included, gas combined-cycle plants often hold lower total system costs across most scenarios. Furthermore, the Proponent's appeal to Lazard's 2025 U.S.-centric data (Sources 2, 3, and 4) and EIA modeling (Source 6) conflates a single OECD member's market conditions with a broad cross-OECD conclusion, committing a fallacy of hasty generalization, while Source 14 (Ember) explicitly warns that with normalized 2025 gas prices, gas is cheaper in some OECD markets without subsidies — directly contradicting the claim that renewables beat gas CC across 'most' OECD countries on a true unsubsidized, system-cost basis.
Argument against
The claim asserts that renewables have lower LCOE than gas CC in 'most' OECD member countries, but Source 8 (OECD Nuclear Energy Agency) directly refutes this by noting that when system integration costs for intermittency are included, gas combined-cycle plants often have lower total system costs in most scenarios — a critical omission from the supporting sources. Furthermore, the primary supporting data from Sources 1 and 5 dates to 2020, and Source 14 (Ember) acknowledges that with normalized lower gas prices in 2025, the cost gap narrows and gas is cheaper in some OECD markets without subsidies, undermining any broad claim that renewables beat gas CC across 'most' OECD countries on a true apples-to-apples basis.
The Opponent's argument commits a category error by substituting “total system costs including integration” (Source 8, OECD NEA) for the motion's explicit metric—project-level LCOE for new-build plants—on which OECD's cross-country comparison finds onshore wind lowest in a majority of countries (10/14) and solar PV often competitive (Source 1, OECD; Source 7, IEA-NEA data file). The Opponent also overgeneralizes from a hedged, non-quantified claim that gas is cheaper “in some markets” under lower 2025 gas prices (Source 14, Ember) while ignoring 2025-era benchmarks showing solar and wind LCOE ranges overlapping below gas combined-cycle and official modeling that solar is lower than gas CC “on average” and “in most regions” (Source 2, Lazard; Source 6, EIA).