Natural Gas - Leading Retirements, New Capacity

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


Over the past decade, the electricity producing fleet of power plants has begun to noticeably shift. While the country's nuclear and coal fleets continue to age, its natural gas power plants are getting younger and leaner. From 2000-2010, natural gas power plants topped the leader board for retirements and additions to the generation fleet. Over this decade, 64% of the power plants that were retired in the United States were natural gas-fired.

But, over the same period of time, natural gas represented 81% of the new power generation capacity additions in the United States. with a spike in new capacity installations in the early part of the decade.

The average age of these recently retired natural gas power plants was 48 years, with the oldest having been built in 1912. And, the majority of these retired plants were simple cycle steam turbines, making them markedly less efficient than their combined-cycle counterparts.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


While coal plant retirements were significant over this period, they were smaller in overall magnitude (and much less in terms of relative percentage of generation) compared to natural gas.

Photo credit:

1. All graphics courtesy of the U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe