SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
coal
Federal Appellate Court Kills Trump Bid to Keep 'Old, Expensive, and Dirty' Coal Plant Open
"Preventing the market-driven retirements of coal plants to advance a coal-friendly agenda is not a proper use of emergency powers," said one lawyer.
Sep 11, 2026
Climate defenders celebrated on Friday after a federal appellate court rejected the US Department of Energy's abuse of emergency powers to keep a Michigan coal plant open, part of President Donald Trump's broader push to boost the climate-wrecking industry.
"The court rejected the Trump administration's nationwide push forcing unreliable, aging coal plants that are bleeding money and polluting communities to stay online," said Ted Kelly, director and lead counsel for US clean energy at the Environmental Defense Fund—which was among the advocacy groups that joined Michigan, Minnesota, and Illinois in challenging the DOE's abuse of Section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act to keep the JH Campbell Generating Plant running.
"The Department of Energy's unlawful actions attempted to make families and businesses in the Midwest wastefully pay hundreds of millions of dollars for a coal plant that should have been shut down over a year ago," said Kelly. "That's why these aging coal plants are scheduled to retire in the first place—they are incredibly expensive, dangerous to our health, and break down frequently."
The Campbell plant was scheduled to retire on May 31, 2025, after over six decades of operation. As the opinion from the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia notes, Consumers Energy "worked for several years to develop plans and secure regulatory approval to retire the old Campbell plant and replace it with a mix of expanded and new electricity-generation sources."
While Michigan officials approved the company's retirement plan for the facility, Trump's DOE intervened, forcing not only that plant but six others across the country to remain open—collectively costing Americans over $547 million, according to a live tracker from the Sierra Club, which has challenged all of the department's coal plant orders.
The three-judge appellate panel unanimously vacated the department's order on Friday, writing that "our reading of the text, structure, and history leaves us unpersuaded by DOE's sweeping conception of its 'emergency' authority under Section 202(c)."
The Associated Press reported that while the DOE didn't respond to a request for comment, Consumers Energy spokesperson Brian Wheeler said the plant operator was reviewing the court ruling and, in the meantime, will keep the facility operating through mid-November.
In a statement to Bridge Michigan, DOE spokesperson Emily Mathews claimed the emergency orders prevented blackouts and "likely saved hundreds of lives," without offering evidence. She did not confirm plans for an appeal but did say that the department "will continue to protect and defend energy security for all Americans."
Consumers Energy spokesperson Katie Carey told the outlet that the company "is reviewing today's court ruling," and "while that happens, we are continuing to comply with the current 90-day Department of Energy order." Still, those who fought against the administration's policy welcomed their legal victory.
"By forcing its continued operation, DOE tried a never-before-used tactic to illegally prop up the aging JH Campbell coal plant that nobody asked to keep, sticking ratepayers with a bill for a facility that should have been retired more than a year ago," said Democratic Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel in a statement.
"I am relieved that the court saw through this facade and threw out DOE's order that had zero basis in reality," she continued. "My office has been fighting this unlawful political stunt at every turn, and this ruling proves what we have been saying all along: This administration does not get to invent fake emergencies to bypass the rule of law against the best interests of Michigan residents. We remain committed to fighting these nonsensical orders and protecting our ratepayers."
Derrell Slaughter, the Natural Resources Defense Council's Michigan policy director for climate and energy, declared that "Michiganders shouldn't have been saddled with artificially high energy bills or forced to deal with toxic air pollution over a fabricated 'emergency.' The Campbell coal plant is out of date, costs more to operate than other electricity generation options, and is one of the worst polluters in the state."
While applauding the decision as "a victory for families across the Midwest who are tired of paying to keep this old, expensive, and dirty power plant online," Sierra Club chief appellate counsel Sanjay Narayan stressed that "instead of working to lower costs and clean up our air and water, the Trump administration has been pulling out all the stops to try to bolster dirty and expensive fossil fuels—at public expense."
"This reckless agenda will not succeed," the attorney pledged. "We will continue to hold the Department of Energy accountable to the law, and ensure that the JH Campbell plant finally retires as it was scheduled to, and we will continue to fight back against the other illegal extensions across the country."
Earthjustice attorney Michael Lenoff also cheered the court's rebuke of the "Trump administration's abuse of emergency powers" and vowed to "continue to challenge unlawful orders if DOE persists in issuing them."
"The DOE needs to stay in its lane and use its emergency powers only in actual emergencies," he said. "Preventing the market-driven retirements of coal plants to advance a coal-friendly agenda is not a proper use of emergency powers."
Tyson Slocum, director of Public Citizen's Energy Program, noted that two years ago, his consumer advocacy organization "predicted Trump would try to force household consumers to pay higher utility bills to prop up uneconomic coal power plants, and we proudly joined with other public interest groups in June 2025 to challenge his bogus emergency declaration for the Campbell coal power plant."
"But Americans have already been forced to shell out half a billion dollars for Trump's obscene coal bailout vanity project," he emphasized, pledging to "explore all options to force" the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission "to refund consumers for this Trump boondoggle."
The appellate court's ruling came on the heels of data released this week showing that 2026 had the warmest August and meteorological summer on record in the contiguous United States, and globally, last month was the hottest ever recorded, tied with July 2023.
Despite such records, and scientists' persistent warnings, Trump has repeatedly delivered on his campaign promises to serve the fossil fuel industry, from declaring a national energy emergency and waging a war on renewable power projects to ditching the Paris Agreement, again, and signing executive orders on coal denounced as "reckless" and "breathlessly stupid."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'An Abuse of the USGS, the Environment, and Our Intellects': Trump Admin Uses Public Lands Report to Push Coal
One critic of the president recently said that he's "forcing higher power bills" on Americans while "fattening the wallets of his cronies—all with billions of our tax dollars."
Jul 23, 2026
President Donald Trump's administration has dedicated over $1 billion to boosting the coal industry, and on Thursday announced a report about reserves beneath federally managed public lands, with Interior Secretary Doug Burgum claiming that the polluting fossil fuel "is more important than ever to the production of electricity."
The US Geological Survey (USGS) publication, titled Coal Beneath Federal Lands in the United States—Mines, Reserves, and Resources, says that "in 2024, the 34 coal mines on Federal lands produced more than 261 million short tons of coal." A short ton, the standard unit of measurement for coal in the United States, is equal to 2,000 lbs.
"These 34 coal mines control more than 4.2 billion short tons of reported coal reserves. Most of the coal mines (31) and more than 98% of the reported coal reserves are on federal lands west of the Mississippi River," according to the report. "Of all the states, Wyoming has the most coal mines on federal lands (14) and produces the most coal from federal lands."
"The USGS estimates that more than 355 billion short tons of available coal resources remain beneath federal lands in the conterminous United States," the document details. "Alaska contains substantial quantities of coal resources. The USGS estimates that Alaska has at least 140 billion short tons of identified available coal resources but may ultimately have as much as 5.5 trillion short tons of coal resources."
A US Department of the Interior statement announcing the report highlights that if the reserves accounted for in the document were produced, "that would be enough coal to supply all the nation’s needs for at least 600 years at the current rate of consumption."
Scientists have long argued that the international community must stop burning coal—plus oil and gas—to prevent a worst-case scenario future as the planet's inhabitants already face a fossil fuel-driven climate emergency and its related extreme weather.
However, climate crisis-denying Trump—who returned to the White House backed by Big Oil's campaign cash—and his Cabinet have spent his second term pushing polluting sources of energy, particularly as his illegal war on Iran drives up global prices, with oil surpassing $100 per barrel on Thursday.
Staying on message, Burgum declared in Interior's Thursday statement that "American Energy Dominance is more important than ever, and so is beautiful clean coal's role in the production of electricity needed to fuel our future prosperity."
"Thanks to the USGS's rigorous and independent assessment, we're better equipped to manage America's vast public lands responsibly while supporting energy security and economic opportunity," he continued.
Sharing the statement on the social media platform Bluesky Thursday, science journalist Emily Willingham said, "What an abuse of the USGS, the environment, and our intellects."
An ore deposit geologist named Elizabeth also ripped the statement on Bluesky, writing: "There is a lot messed up with this press release, but the thing that bothers me the most is how poorly it is written. What an embarrassment!"
The USGS report came just two days after the Energy and Labor departments signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) creating a framework to accelerate the deployment of artificial intelligence, automation, and other emerging technologies in the mining sector.
Acting Secretary of Labor Keith Sonderling said, "It is our commitment to you that this MOU will further President Trump's promise to restore coal as a key driver of America’s energy supply chain and American coal will again be the envy of the world for generations to come."
While attacking clean energy initiatives, including offshore wind projects, the administration "has bolstered coal, the dirtiest and most expensive fossil fuel," The Guardian reported earlier this month.
According to the newspaper:
In September, the Department of Energy announced it would spend $625 million to "expand and extend the life of" coal-fired power plants, allocating $350 million to "modernize" coal plants, $175 million to fund coal projects powering rural communities, and $50 million to upgrade wastewater management systems to extend coal plants' lifespans.
Last month, the agency also set aside up to $500 million from the Defense Production Act to “expand and reinvigorate” the capacity of 13 coal plants, and to help build a coal export terminal in Oakland, California. A week later, the department announced an additional $3.6 million to "refurbish or retrofit" nine existing coal plants.
Former Democratic Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, a climate advocate and Trump critic, told the paper that the president is "forcing higher power bills" on Americans "by blocking clean energy, then he's fattening the wallets of his cronies—all with billions of our tax dollars."
"We pay more," he said, "Republicans rubber-stamp it, and Trump's donors walk off with the bag."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Despite Trump's Relentless Attack on Renewables, Solar Surpassed Coal Energy in US for First Time in May
"Solar is cheaper, cleaner, more reliable," said Rep. Jared Huffman. "Trump needs to end his war on clean energy and get on board with what’s best for America."
Jun 11, 2026
Since taking office 16 months ago, President Donald Trump has gone to extreme lengths to try to reverse the undeniable trend in the direction of solar power and away from expensive, planet-heating coal—but two new reports reveal how, despite Trump's relentless efforts, Americans are using renewable solar energy to power their homes and businesses more than ever.
The global energy think tank Ember revealed Wednesday that in May, for the first ever, solar supplied more of the United States' electricity than coal, at 12.8%. Coal dropped to its fourth-lowest point last month, delivering just 12.2% of electricity. Solar also became the third-largest source of electricity in May, behind gas and nuclear power.
The previous month, coal hit an all-time low, according to data from the US Energy Information Administration analyzed by Ember.
Another report from the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) and the analytics firm Wood Mackenzie found that solar and battery storage accounted for 91% of all new energy generation capacity in the first quarter of 2026.
The news comes a week after Trump announced $700 million in new funding for the nation's coal industry, some of which is planned for the building of two brand-new coal-fired plants, which would be the first to be built in the US in 13 years.
US Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) compared Trump's latest effort to "lighting $700 million taxpayer dollars on fire," but emphasized that "the proof is there."
"Solar is cheaper, cleaner, more reliable," he said. "Trump needs to end his war on clean energy and get on board with what’s best for America."
Last week's announcement is one of numerous steps Trump has taken to prop up coal, one of the fossil fuels that scientists warn are heating the planet and increasingly causing destructive extreme weather events.
In February the president ordered the Pentagon to sign taxpayer-funded contracts with coal plants that otherwise would have been retired in the coming years, to provide electricity to military installations.
The Department of Energy also pledged $625 million to "expand and reinvigorate America’s coal industry," an effort that has run into opposition even from the industry itself. In Colorado, two utilities, Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association and the Platte River Power Authority, which co-own a coal-fired plant the administration has demanded stay in operation, filed a petition earlier this year asking the DOE to allow them to close the facility, saying they've built solar and wind farms and that being forced to buy coal and maintain the plant amounts to a violation of the US Constitution's takings clause.
While demanding that coal production continues, Trump has taken direct aim at the booming solar industry—canceling projects and terminating $7 billion in funding for an affordable renewable energy program.
On the online news show "Breaking Points," Ryan Grim noted that solar and wind power surged in the first quarter before Trump joined Israel in waging war on Iran, a decision that sent oil prices skyrocketing.
"I would imagine the second quarter is going to see 98%" of energy generating capacity coming from solar power, said Grim.
Despite the political attacks and regulatory slowdowns... solar and storage were still 91% of all new grid capacity added in Q1.
Why? "Because solar is cheaper."
Breaking Point's @RyanGrim and @emilyjashinsky explain👇 pic.twitter.com/lhppEVqAR1
— Solar and Storage Industry (@SEIA) June 11, 2026
"Who out there is like, 'You know, what we need to do is invest deeply in building out our fossil fuel infrastructure' at this point?" he said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
In Yet Another Industry Handout, Trump EPA 'Just Took a Sledgehammer' to Coal Ash Rules
"Ultimately, if this rule is finalized, human health will suffer, and taxpayers will be left with the cost of cleaning up their rivers and drinking water."
Apr 09, 2026
Amid mounting calls for the removal of US Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin, the EPA chief on Thursday announced proposed changes to coal ash rules, which critics blasted as another gift to polluters at the expense of public health.
Officially called coal combustion residuals (CCR), "coal ash—the toxic byproduct of burning coal—contains hazardous pollutants, including arsenic, boron, cadmium, chromium, lead, radium, and selenium, which are linked to serious health harms such as cancer, heart disease, and brain damage, among other lasting impacts," noted the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).
Specifically, as The Associated Press reported, the EPA "proposed easing standards for monitoring and protecting groundwater near some coal ash sites, rolling back rules forcing the cleanup of entire coal properties instead of just places where ash was dumped. The revisions would also make it easier to reuse coal ash for other purposes."
While Zeldin claimed the "commonsense changes to the CCR regulations reflect EPA's commitment to restoring American energy dominance, strengthening cooperative federalism, and accommodating unique circumstances at certain CCR facilities," Environmental Protection Network's Marc Boom responded that "letting companies avoid cleaning up waste sites that may be leaching toxic metals into groundwater and nearby waterways, while weakening protections and accountability, is not common sense."
"EPA's top priority should be protecting people's health, not sacrificing it for corporate expediency," argued Boom, senior director of public affairs at the group, which is made up of former agency staff. "EPA may call these safeguards 'impractical,' but anyone living downstream of coal ash sites holding thousands of tons of waste knows that requiring cleanup and monitoring is a necessary and basic standard."
NRDC senior attorney Becky Hammer called the pending rollback just "the latest in a long, long, line of Trump administration giveaways to fossil fuels industries," which have also included repealing EPA rules that targeted chemical pollution from coal-fired power plants, declaring a national energy emergency, and scrapping the 2009 "endangerment finding" that underpins all federal climate regulations.
Other advocacy organizations were similarly critical of Thursday's announcement. Daniel Estrin, Waterkeeper Alliance's general counsel and legal director, pointed out that "coal ash is contaminating water at nearly every active and retired coal plant in the US."
"By gutting these safeguards, EPA is abandoning its duty to protect impacted communities by allowing preventable contamination of our rivers, lakes, streams, and groundwater," he said. "The longer the coal industry is allowed to delay closing and cleaning up its toxic waste sites, the more difficult and costly it becomes to fix the damage. By failing to enforce the law, EPA is letting polluters continue harming people and wildlife without accountability."
Like Estrin and Hammer, Earthjustice senior counsel Lisa Evans framed that proposal as "yet another handout to the coal power industry at the expense of our health, water, and wallets," and warned of the dangers of delaying closure and cleanup. She said that "ultimately, if this rule is finalized, human health will suffer, and taxpayers will be left with the cost of cleaning up their rivers and drinking water."
Although "the Trump administration just took a sledgehammer to the health protections in place for toxic coal pollution," Evans added, "Earthjustice has successfully defended these safeguards in court and will do so again."
Nick Torrey, senior attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center, which has secured commitments to clean up over 270 million tons of coal ash in US communities, similarly said that "doing the bidding of industrial polluters instead of protecting ordinary families and clean water is shameful, but we are ready to keep fighting against coal ash pollution."
"Letting coal-burning utilities set the agenda has been a disaster for communities across the South, resulting in coal ash spills and hundreds of families forced to live on bottled water for years under the threat of coal ash pollution," Torrey highlighted. "The Trump administration and coal ash polluters want to take us back to the bad old days of arsenic, lead, and mercury from coal ash contaminating our water."
In addition to facing a flurry of lawsuits over policies prioritizing the climate-wrecking fossil fuel industry—whose campaign cash helped President Donald Trump return to the White House last year—the administration has recently been hit with demands to remove Zeldin from more than 160 advocacy groups and nearly 300 health experts.
"This EPA's actions to put polluters first, at the expense of our health, are dangerous and will be deadly," states the health experts' open letter, organized and released Thursday by the Climate Action Campaign. "Administrator Zeldin has abandoned his sworn duty and must be held accountable for his agenda."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Coalition Sues Trump EPA for Torching Air Pollution Standards
"The repeal of these protections will mean more asthma attacks, emergency room visits, and premature deaths," said more than two dozen environmental and health groups.
Mar 30, 2026
A coalition of more than two dozen environmental and health groups sued the Trump administration on Monday for repealing Environmental Protection Agency rules that curbed dangerous chemical pollution from coal-fired power plants.
As part of President Donald Trump's efforts to dramatically expand the use of coal, the EPA last month finalized the repeal of the 2024 Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS), which tightened existing restrictions on the emission of mercury, lead, and other brain-damaging chemicals from power plants.
Coal emits more planet-heating carbon dioxide per unit than any other fossil fuel. Coal plants also release a slew of other chemicals that can cause numerous health complications, including asthma, lung cancer, and respiratory infections.
The EPA says coal-fired power plants are also the single largest source of airborne mercury emissions, which can impair cognitive development, especially in young children.
MATS was created in 2012 to counter these effects and proved quite successful. Within six years of its enactment by the EPA, the amount of toxic mercury being emitted into the atmosphere from energy plants had declined by 90%, according to an agency report.
The Trump EPA has not repealed MATS entirely. Instead, it has targeted amendments enacted by the Biden administration in 2024 that lowered caps on mercury emissions, as well as on other toxic chemicals such as nickel and arsenic.
The EPA has also repealed rules requiring constant monitoring of toxic chemical emissions. Instead of installing expensive systems to track their outputs 24/7, plants can revert to conducting occasional checks.
The repeal came after the administration had already given dozens of coal plants a two-year exemption from the standards last April, even though, according to the agency, 93% were already on track to meet the requirements.
According to an analysis of EPA data by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) last month, sulfur dioxide pollution from coal plants increased by 18% last year, with those exempt from the rules surging almost twice as much as those not exempt.
The lawsuit, filed in the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, argues that the Trump administration's actions violate the Clean Air Act, ignore the scientific record, and endanger communities living near power plants.
The suit is backed by groups including the NRDC, the Sierra Club, and the Environmental Defense Fund, as well as the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Lung Association.
"The repeal of these protections will mean more asthma attacks, emergency room visits, and premature deaths," the groups said in a statement challenging the repeal. "This administration is not just rolling back rules, it is eliminating the monitoring infrastructure needed to know what is coming out of these smokestacks in the first place."
"It is allowing coal plants to spew out more neurotoxic mercury into our air and food supply, while simultaneously keeping the communities most at risk in the dark about how serious that threat is," they said. "This is a betrayal of the EPA’s core mission.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
MAGA Stands for Make America Gasp Again
President Donald Trump’s energy strategy is optimized for the unbreathing.
Feb 20, 2026
Gasping for air is anything but greatness. It might be called the Gilded Age, but all that gold leaf was covered in soot.
In the early 1900s, America mistook combustion for unadulterated progress. Robber barons ascended like demigods from furnace-lit boardrooms. Children disappeared into textile mills and coal shafts. Rivers ran the color of industry—blackened, metallic, iridescent. Pittsburgh was said to have glowed at night, not from benign innovation but from the orange haze of its own exhaust. Entire cities learned to live in a permanent dusk. Laundry left outside returned streaked with ash. The sun became rumor.
We eventually decided that wasn’t, in fact, greatness. We regulated, conceding that lungs weren't an expendable input in the national ledger. And yet here we are in 2026, debating whether the air is worth protecting—this time in the service of artificial intelligence.
The logic now presented as bold and patriotic by the Trump administration would be comical if it weren't so terminal: Repeal climate constraints, unshackle coal, and power the next frontier of machines with the dirtiest fuel available. The argument arrives dressed in competitiveness. We must win the AI race. We must not be outpaced by China. We must dominate the 21st century. Yet the subtext is too hard to ignore. Coal is abundant and immediate. With the right rollbacks, it won't require the patience of permitting solar arrays or the political consensus of constructing nuclear reactors. No need for AI data centers in space; coal is a perfectly good accelerant with a proven track record on Earth.
The question has apparently become not just whether AI will one day take over the world, but whether, in our haste to advance it, we will voluntarily degrade the only world we can survive in.
So why not use it to animate our new artificial friends?
There's a dark absurdity in this arrangement. AI doesn't breathe. It doesn't develop asthma. It doesn't mourn coral reefs or cough through wildfire season. It experiences no diminishment when particulate matter thickens the sky. To power AI with coal is to choose an energy source that is catastrophic for biological life but irrelevant to silicon. Suffice it to say, President Donald Trump’s energy strategy is optimized for the unbreathing.
Which leads to a suspicion so grotesque it borders on satire: The only mind for whom this is rational isn't a human one. Imagine, for a moment, a system trained to maximize output and dominate competitors at any cost. Surveying the energy landscape, it concludes that clean sources are intermittent or politically contested, whereas fossil fuels are dense, reliable, and already embedded in the infrastructure. Although increased carbon emissions degrade long-term human habitability, the system’s objective function contains no intrinsic preference for breathable air. Thus, the recommendation comes easy.
Power us with coal.
The more one turns this over, the more it feels less like policy and more like an algorithmic agenda. The idea is so inhumanly stupid—so hostile to the basic conditions of life—that it almost requires a nonhuman author, for no species dependent on oxygen would deliberately foul its own supply to train faster chatbots, unless it had forgotten that oxygen is the quintessential point. To return to coal at scale isn't nostalgia; it's regression. It is to resurrect a soot-choked republic and call it strength. It is to look at an era defined by black lung and industrial carnage and say: again.
This time around, rather than power railroads and steel, coal furnaces will power vast, humming warehouses of computation, data centers with appetites for electricity (not to mention water) that are already straining grids across the country. The irony is approaching theological. We once burned coal to build the modern world; now we would burn it to build our successor—a civilization that requires fresh air choosing to empower intelligences that do not. Two birds, one coal-black stone: Accelerate machine capacity and, in the process, weaken the biological substrate that might one day resist it.
Of course, no AI is secretly drafting executive orders. And no server farm has yet staged a coup. The more unsettling truth is that we don't need malevolent, self-aware machines to make machine-aligned decisions. It seems we are capable of aligning ourselves to their incentives. We've adopted the technocratic metrics of speed, scale, and dominance, subordinating everything else to them within the Silicon Valley of the shadow of death.
If the goal is to maximize computational throughput at any cost, coal makes a brutal kind of sense, especially from an artificial perspective. However, if the goal is to preserve a livable planet for oxygen-dependent beings, it does not. The Trump administration’s denial of the harms caused by greenhouse gases reveals which objective function it has chosen to operate.
The Gilded Age was gilded precisely because it was superficial. Beneath the gold plating lay a wasteland of exploitation, environmental ruin, and lives shortened in the name of industrial production. We learned, slowly and imperfectly, that some costs were too high, that air and water are more precious than gold. To reverse that lesson now, for the sake of an AI Revolution, is to confuse power with wisdom. It is to assume that because machines can model the world, they should determine the conditions under which we inhabit it.
Make America Great Again was once a slogan about memory. Make America Gasp Again would be a policy about forgetfulness. The question has apparently become not just whether AI will one day take over the world, but whether, in our haste to advance it, we will voluntarily degrade the only world we can survive in. Coal is efficient for machines. It is lethal for us. And if we can't distinguish between those two facts, then the machines need not conspire at all.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Orders Pentagon to Purchase Coal Energy in Latest Move Propping Up Climate-Wrecking, Costly Plants
“Reality doesn’t lie: Coal is a rapidly dwindling relic of the past, not a solution for the future," said one climate action advocate.
Feb 12, 2026
“The 19th century called, and it wants its fuel source back," said the president and CEO of the Natural Resources Defense Council on Wednesday as President Donald Trump announced his latest attempt to prop up the pollution-causing, expensive coal industry with taxpayer funds—this time by ordering the Pentagon to purchase electricity directly from coal-fired power plants.
"While Americans are demanding clean, affordable energy, the Trump administration is using our tax dollars to prop up the nation’s dirtiest, least efficient power plants," said Manish Bapna of the NRDC.
At an event at the White House, Trump directed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to sign long-term, taxpayer-funded contracts with coal plants that would likely have otherwise been retired in the coming years, to purchase energy to power military installations.
"Hard to think of a dumber 21st Century energy and security policy than Trump's insistence that the Pentagon buy more coal power," said the Military Emissions Gap, a UK-based project that monitors military emissions data.
Trump also announced $175 million from the Energy Department to upgrade six coal plants in Kentucky, North Carolina, Ohio, and West Virginia, and was presented with a trophy naming him the “Undisputed Champion of Beautiful Clean Coal" by the Washington Coal Club.
The Trump administration's persistent efforts to cancel the planned closures of large coal plants have been challenged not only by more than a dozen state governments, but by the owners of at least one of the facilities and two utilities in Colorado.
The utilities, Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association and Platte River Power Authority, accused the administration of violating the Takings Clause of the US Constitution's Fifth Amendment, which states that “private property [shall not] be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
They argued in a regulatory filing last month that “the costs of compliance fall directly on their members and customers, who must now pay."
Ari Peskoe, director of the Electricity Law Initiative at the Harvard Law School Environmental and Energy Law Program, told the Washington Post that the administration's decision to compel coal plants to continue operating has raised household "energy bills while providing negligible benefits to consumers.”
“Each of the five plants were slated to retire because they are expensive to operate and there are cheaper sources of power available to meet consumers’ needs,” Peskoe told the Post. “Plant owners aren’t just flipping a switch to turn the plants back on—they are spending millions on maintenance, renewing expired coal contracts and rehiring workers.”
“It’s no wonder fossil fuel lobbyists are handing Trump an award today. Trump asked them for campaign cash and promised to return the favor—and now he is."
Bapna said Trump's latest actions on coal were the result of the president's campaign promise to fossil fuel executives, whom he asked for $1 billion in campaign donations and pledged to gut climate regulations in return.
“It’s no wonder fossil fuel lobbyists are handing Trump an award today. Trump asked them for campaign cash and promised to return the favor—and now he is," said Bapna. "The rest of us are left to pay the price: more heart disease and asthma attacks, higher utility bills, and more frequent unnatural disasters. This is a raw deal for our wallets, our health, and our future.”
Julie McNamara, associate policy director of the Climate and Energy Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, pointed out that Americans will face higher electricity bills and be forced to pay for the new Department of Defense contracts at a time when "people and businesses across the country are struggling with rapidly escalating electricity costs" while other countries around the world expand their use of far cheaper renewable energy sources.
"The country has real solutions at hand—yet instead of pushing ahead with investments in the fastest, cheapest, cleanest resources available, the Trump administration is actively doing everything it can to stop the deployment of new solar and wind projects, to stop investments in energy efficiency, and to stop the buildout of modern grid infrastructure," said McNamara.
“Reality doesn’t lie: Coal is a rapidly dwindling relic of the past, not a solution for the future," she added. "The Trump administration’s flailings come with real consequences. Forcing the use of increasingly unreliable and relentlessly uneconomic coal plants will risk outages and send high electricity costs higher. Recklessly slashing health, safety, and environmental standards will harm people’s health and the environment. And opting for hollow statements and short-term bailouts fails to meaningfully deliver for the coal-dependent communities requiring actual, durable transition solutions."
Margie Alt, director of the Climate Action Campaign, suggested that Trump's latest handouts to coal firms "ignores basic economics" while also proving that "coal can't compete without a taxpayer-funded bailout."
"Our military is one of the largest consumers of energy in the world," said Alt. "Instead of improving the efficiency of our military and the quality of life for those serving our country, this order saddles taxpayers with inflated energy costs while exposing millions of Americans to more toxic pollution from old, inefficient plants."
Keep ReadingShow Less
What Did the US People Do to Deserve Trump's Lump of Coal?
The Trump administration is trying to prop up coal at the expense of cheaper sources of energy like wind and solar that would benefit the nation as a whole.
Jan 14, 2026
A lump of coal is Santa’s proverbial gift to children who have been naughty. But what naughtiness makes Americans deserve the coal that the Trump administration is trying to inflict on us? The current incoherent energy policy will increase electricity prices even more than they would rise otherwise.
Admittedly, the coming demise of coal, which the administration may delay but not ultimately prevent, will be very hard on the people who work in the coal industry. And it will badly hurt communities where coal is the chief industry and states in which they are located.
Understandably, the coal industry has contributed generously to politicians who try to protect it, and its donations have paid very large dividends for that industry. But forcing electric utilities to keep burning coal, and stomping on potential competitors who could defeat it in any fair competition, is not the right way to protect the people and communities involved in a declining industry.
Government support for these people could take many more reasonable forms, including retraining programs, special support for schools and other local government services, and possibly even making workers eligible to collect Social Security and to be on Medicare before they would otherwise be old enough. These people should not be singled out to pay for the benefits that society as a whole will receive from abandoning the use of coal—the taxpayers as a whole owe it to them.
The current administration should abandon its current incoherent policies and stop trying to micromanage the energy market.
Rational policy would not try to protect people in particular energy industries. It would aim to create equal conditions within which all sources of energy could compete. The main present alternatives to coal include oil, natural gas, solar, wind, atomic, and geothermal sources. Each of these has its own unique combination of advantages and disadvantages.
During the last 200 years the world has shifted from one dominant energy source to another as technologies advanced and economic conditions changed. For a long time coal was the cheapest and most abundant fuel, but it was displaced by petroleum and, more recently, by natural gas. Each of these fuels prevailed because it was available and cheaper than the alternatives.
Atomic energy, at one time expected to take over and make electricity “too cheap to meter,” never took off to that extent for various reasons, not the least of which was its expense.
Thanks to research during the last half century, the cheapest sources are now solar panels and wind turbines. They are therefore the chief threats to the coal, oil, and natural gas industries, and especially to coal. That is why the Trump administration has concentrated on wiping out the wind turbine projects in the Atlantic Ocean, even those that are nearly finished and in which billions of dollars have been invested.
The administration claims that the offshore wind projects are a threat to national security, a possibility that had been thoroughly vetted and rejected by government experts before the projects began.
It also claims that wind and solar energy are unreliable, since the sun does not always shine and the wind does not always blow. But these are only problems locally. The sun is always shining on exactly half the planet, and winds are always blowing somewhere.
The intermittency problem does not exist when we consider the world as a whole. Once we have connected up the whole planet into a single electrical grid—now entirely possible—solar and wind energy will be just as dependable as the older energy technologies. And they will be cheaper than the older technologies even when we include the cost of building and operating the grid that they will require.
If we want the cheapest possible electricity—and who doesn’t?—we should support creation of a level playing field for all possible sources of energy. The current administration should abandon its current incoherent policies and stop trying to micromanage the energy market.
Does this Republican administration believe in free markets or doesn’t it?
Keep ReadingShow Less
How Kenyan Grassroots Activists Defeated a Fossil Fuel Giant
At a time when "Goliath" seems to be winning so many battles, here in Kenya, "David" finally won.
Nov 02, 2025
On October 16, a high court in Kenya permanently halted a coal-fired power plant destined for the northern coast of our nation. The power plant, which would’ve been the first in East Africa, threatened to poison the air and waters near Lamu, an island with a rich ecosystem and home to the region’s oldest Swahili settlement. It is also a UNESCO Heritage Site. It took nine years of organizing, protesting, and litigation but we prevailed over Big Coal. To be sure our work is far from over. But at a time when "Goliath" seems to be winning so many battles, here in Kenya, "David" finally won.
We learned that Amu Power, a Chinese-backed corporation, planned to build the power plant in 2016 through a gazette notice in a local paper. As an activist with a background in environmental studies, I understood immediately that this project would kill marine wildlife, spew toxins that would cause health problems, and destroy farmland. It was a climate disaster waiting to happen. And Lamu would be changed forever.
Several local grassroots organizations jumped into action to oppose the project, but we were working in silos. To tackle the fossil fuel industry, a broader strategy was needed. And so, in 2016, the activist organizations Save Lamu, Katiba Institute and Natural Justice, among 16 other organizations, formed a coalition called deCOALonize. Together, we educated the public on the health dangers, the detrimental impacts on biodiversity, and the threats to their livelihoods as farmers. We organized protests, lobbied funders to abandon the project, and visited the site where the proposed power plant was to be built to gather evidence.
On June 26, 2019, the National Environmental Tribunal revoked the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) license granted to Amu Power for the construction of the 1,050 megawatt coal plant.
I have seen that the true power is with the people.
The victory was bittersweet, however. A month later, Amu Power appealed the court’s decision. We refused to back down too. Through Save Lamu, deCOALonize filed a cross-appeal that September at the Environment and Land Court in Malindi. We argued that Amu Power had violated regulations that required proper environmental assessments, public participation, and transparency about the health and environmental impacts of the proposed project prior to issuance of the license.
However, in the time it took our case to churn through the legal system, lives were being upended. Amu Power had acquired land from farm owners. Some families received no compensation; others received payments but not as much as promised. Families who left their farms struggled to find places to live, their kids were no longer going to school, and many wallowed in poverty.
The case languished in the court for years. Then, in April 2024, Amu Power filed written submissions in hopes of regaining their license. Following an agonizing wait following several court adjournments, the final judgment was delivered earlier this month. The magistrate upheld the revocation of the license and blocked any further appeals. We collectively sighed in relief.
And yet, we know we have to continue being watchdogs. There are several extraction projects being proposed, especially in Eastern Kenya.
The government claims it wants to reduce our carbon footprint. We were among the nearly 200 countries that signed the Paris Agreement to cut greenhouse gas emissions. And we committed to the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals, which includes taking meaningful action to tackle the climate crisis. But we need more than words on paper. We need action. We need a road map. And we need more voices at the table, including women and youth.
Still, we are celebrating this milestone—and hope to inspire hope in others. When you are facing a multibillion-dollar operation and you are just "the people," you do wonder whether those in power will listen. But I have seen that the true power is with the people. Our voices do matter. And now we stand ready to fight again.
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Trump Boosts Coal Industry, Black Lung Miners Say They've Been 'Cast Aside to Die'
“The Trump administration was handed tools to protect black lung and they are doing everything in their power to toss those rules in the trash,” said one campaigner ahead of a planned protest.
Oct 13, 2025
As the Trump administration moves ahead with a massive bailout for the coal industry as part of its "drill, baby, drill" pro-fossil fuel energy policy, miners suffering from black lung disease and their advocates are set for a Tuesday protest in Washington, DC to draw attention what they say is the government's failure to protect them.
Last month, the Department of Energy (DOE) announced a $625 million investment “to expand and reinvigorate America’s coal industry," despite the sedimentary rock being arguably the worst fossil fuel for both air pollution and the climate amid an ever-worsening planetary emergency. Burning coal for energy is the single largest contributor to planetary heating, accounting for over 40% of worldwide carbon dioxide emissions.
US Secretary of Energy Chris Wright said at the time that “beautiful, clean coal will be essential to powering America’s reindustrialization and winning the AI race," as generative artificial intelligence requires stupendous amounts of energy.
“The companies might be getting a handout, but the miners ain’t getting none."
The DOE's announcement followed the Mine Safety and Health Administration's (MSHA) blocking of a rule it finalized during the Biden administration to protect coal and other miners from silica dust, prolonged exposure to which causes black lung disease, which is formally called coal worker's pneumoconiosis.
The inhaled coal dust triggers chronic inflammation, causing scarring of lung tissue, reduced lung elasticity, and impaired oxygen flow. Lung and heart failure, infections including pneumonia, lung cancer, and other illnesses cause a slow and painful death. The disease is irreversible and there is no cure. According to the American Lung Association, "an estimated 16% of coal workers are affected" by black lung disease in the US, "and after decades of improvement, the number of cases of black lung disease is on the rise again."
As Trey Pollard of Appalachian Citizens' Law Center explained in an email Monday:
The rule was supposed to go into effect in April 2025. But instead MSHA blocked the rule, blaming mass layoffs at the [National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health] conducted by Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The mining industry also took the rule to court, where the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals put an indefinite pause of the rule after the administration failed to oppose the industry’s request. The next court update is scheduled for mid-October, a full six months after the rule’s planned enforcement date.
"Every day of delayed enforcement increases miners’ exposure to silica and their risk of black lung disease," Pollard added. "On October 14, miners, their families, and their supporters will gather in front of the Department of Labor to demand the administration fight to preserve the silica rule and to call for an end to the delays."
TOMORROW: Support miners rallying in DC outside the #USDOL!The longer the Trump admin waits, the more miners will get #blacklung. We must act now. ⛏️✊ Rally info here: loom.ly/xsY-jGE OR watch our instagram livestream w/ @appcitizenslaw.bsky.social
[image or embed]
— The BlueGreen Alliance (@bluegreenalliance.bsky.social) October 13, 2025 at 1:32 PM
The Washington, DC demonstration is being organized by the National Black Lung Association, with support from the United Mine Workers of America, Fayette County Black Lung Association, Kanawha County Black Lung Association, Wyoming County Black Lung Association, Virginia Black Lung Association Chapter 1, Virginia Black Lung Association Chapter 2, the Alliance for Appalachia, Appalachian Voices, Appalachian Citizens’ Law Center, and the BlueGreen Alliance.
“The Trump administration was handed tools to protect black lung and they are doing everything in their power to toss those rules in the trash,” BlueGreen Alliance executive director Jason Walsh told The New York Times' Lisa Friedman Monday.
Friedman interviewed miners suffering from black lung disease who said they felt abandoned by Trump, despite their support being a significant factor in his reelection.
“The companies might be getting a handout, but the miners ain’t getting none,” said 71-year-old National Black Lung Association president and retired miner Gary Hairston, who has been living with the disease since he was in his 40s.
Judith Riffe, whose husband Bernard died in March of complications from black lung disease after more than 40 years of work in West Virginia coal mines, told Friedman she wishes that the Trump administration would fight for miners as vigorously as it does for fossil fuel companies.
“Sure, they talk about how much they care about coal but come down here and look," Riffe said. “They’re mining a lot more now, the coal trucks and everything are running, but there’s no benefits for the coal miners coming in."
“The coal miners have supplied this country with electricity," she added, "and now they’re just cast aside to die.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy