The Last Stand for King Coal

Felicity Bradstock

Felicity Bradstock is a freelance writer specialising in Energy and Finance. She has a Master’s in International Development from the University of Birmingham, UK.

More Info

Premium Content

• The Trump administration has introduced sweeping measures to boost coal production, reduce royalties, and delay plant closures under its “energy dominance” strategy.
• Market dynamics – including cheaper natural gas, renewables, and battery storage – have eroded coal’s economic competitiveness.
• Decades of plant retirements, shrinking workforce numbers, and global export competition make a sustained U.S. coal revival improbable.

United States President Trump has been pushing for a return to fossil fuels, after the Biden administration spent several years increasing the country’s renewable energy capacity. Trump has signed several executive orders since his inauguration last January aimed at reversing the country’s most far-reaching climate policy, the Inflation Reduction Act, while making it easier for fossil fuel companies to increase the production of oil and gas. However, as Trump encourages coal firms to delay closures and continue producing coal, experts speculate that it may be too late for a total U-turn.

In September, officials from the Departments of Energy and the Interior, along with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), introduced several policies aimed at reinvigorating coal mining and delaying coal plant closures across the U.S. They said the move reflected the aims of Trump’s “energy dominance” agenda. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum announced the opening of over 13 million acres of public land for coal projects. Wells Griffith from the Department of Energy also unveiled $625 million in funding to increase the U.S. coal fleet, including $350 million to restart or refit existing plants.

Meanwhile, President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act reduced coal royalties from 12.5 percent to 7 percent, for new and existing leases, aiming to boost mining by making it more profitable. “President Trump promised to put American energy workers first, and today we’re delivering,” Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum said in September. “By reducing the royalty rate for coal, increasing coal acres available for leasing, and unlocking critical minerals from mine waste, we are strengthening our economy, protecting national security, and ensuring that communities from Montana to Alabama benefit from good-paying jobs. Washington doesn’t build prosperity, American workers and entrepreneurs do, and we’re giving them the tools to succeed,” Burgum added.

The Trump administration has justified its support for coal by saying it will help the U.S. win the “AI arms race” against China. “AI is going to change … every job, every company, every industry,” Burgum stated. “None of that happens without electricity. “We have to have a strong, powerful coal industry — not for five years, not for 10 years. It’s got to be here for decades.”

In January, the EPA announced a proposed rule that would allow 11 coal plants to dump toxic coal ash into unlined pits until 2031, a decade longer than stated in existing federal rules. This could lead to several coal plants – which would otherwise be forced to close under the current rules – to remain open for several more years. These 11 facilities have already exceeded the 2021 deadline to close following an extension introduced during Trump’s first term in office in 2020.

However, many energy experts believe it is simply too late for the United States to make a U-turn on its plans to curb coal production. After several years of demonizing the coal industry for producing the “dirtiest fossil fuel” and significant investment in the expansion of the country’s renewable energy capacity, there are currently no new U.S. coal plants under development.

The rise of cheaper and cleaner alternatives, such as wind energy, has forced a decline in investment in the coal sector in recent years. U.S. utilities are increasingly favouring cleaner energy additions, such as battery storage, gas, and nuclear power to new coal-fired capacity due to the lower cost and greater efficiency of such projects.

In addition, the U.S. coal industry has lost its competitive edge in recent years, with several Asian and Australian coal plant operators now capable of producing much cheaper coal than their U.S. counterparts. This means that U.S. coal producers appear increasingly less attractive to foreign importers. While Asian buyers account for more than half of all U.S. thermal coal shipments, growing this market share would be challenging as alternative exporters, such as Indonesia, now offer faster shipping times at a lower cost.

Around six times more coal power plants have been retired than constructed in the U.S. this century, totalling around 166,000 MW compared to 26,000 MW of capacity, demonstrating the movement away from the fossil fuel. This means that the strong coal workforce that once existed has dwindled in recent decades, from around 91,600 in 2011 to 45,500 in 2023, suggesting that a revival of the industry would need a new generation of workers to be trained to support the expansion of a dying industry.

Despite Trump’s many attempts to increase U.S. coal production, the industry does not appear to be biting. While some coal plants may remain open for longer than previously planned, adding new capacity is unlikely to be viewed as economically viable given the falling prices and increasing efficiency of both natural gas and renewable alternatives.

By Felicity Bradstock for Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com

• U.S. Attacks Alleged Drug Boats as Venezuela Oil Crackdown Escalates
• Libya Awards Fuel Supply Deals To Western Firms, Aims To Cut Russian Imports
• U.S. to Redirect Venezuelan Oil Royalties Into a Treasury-Controlled Fund

Download The Free Oilprice App Today