President Trump’s Coal Industry Revival Efforts: A Fact Check

WASHINGTON — President Trump is ordering the Pentagon to buy more electricity from coal-fired power plants, part of a broader effort to slow the industry’s decline and keep some aging plants online.

The executive order directs the Defense Department to sign long-term power purchase agreements with coal facilities that supply military bases and critical operations. According to a White House fact sheet, the administration aims to ensure reliable, always-available electricity—commonly referred to as baseload power—while strengthening grid resilience and national security.

The administration contends that intermittent renewable energy sources such as wind and solar cannot consistently guarantee on-demand power during extreme weather conditions or emergencies, making coal necessary for military readiness.

Energy analysts, however, suggest the order’s practical impact may be limited in scope. Experts interviewed by The New York Times noted that even if the military sourced all its electricity needs from coal, this would represent only about three percent of U.S. coal-power capacity.

While the policy is unlikely to revitalize the industry as a whole, it could help specific plants remain operational, particularly those situated near military installations where proximity creates logistical advantages for power supply agreements.

The Pentagon contracts represent just one component of the administration’s multi-pronged approach to support coal. The Department of Energy recently allocated approximately $175 million to extend the operational life of coal plants across several states. Additionally, the Tennessee Valley Authority has postponed the retirement of two large coal plants that were scheduled for decommissioning later this decade.

These coordinated efforts demonstrate how the administration is leveraging federal purchasing power, funding mechanisms, and policy adjustments to slow coal’s market decline.

The challenges facing the coal industry are predominantly economic rather than regulatory. Utilities have been steadily retiring coal plants for years as natural gas, wind, and solar have become more cost-effective to build and operate. Federal energy data indicates that power generators still plan additional coal retirements in coming years, though the pace has slowed somewhat under current policies.

The reliability argument sits at the center of the administration’s justification. White House officials emphasize that dependable energy sources are essential not just for military operations but for overall grid stability. During recent extreme weather events, such as winter storms or heatwaves, the administration points to instances where renewable generation decreased while demand surged.

Energy security experts present a more nuanced view, however. Modern grid reliability, they argue, depends on a diversified approach that includes robust transmission systems, energy storage technologies, flexible generation capacity, and sophisticated market design—not reliance on any single fuel source.

Coal’s share of U.S. electricity generation has fallen dramatically over the past decade. In 2010, coal produced approximately 45 percent of the nation’s electricity. By 2023, that figure had dropped below 20 percent, reflecting the broader shift toward cheaper and lower-emission alternatives.

Looking ahead, industry observers believe federal support through Pentagon contracts and Department of Energy funding could delay some plant closures and preserve jobs in coal-dependent communities. However, these measures are unlikely to reverse the long-term market trajectory.

The industry’s future will likely depend less on federal policy interventions and more on whether utilities and investors view coal as economically competitive in an energy landscape increasingly dominated by natural gas and renewables. Technological advances in carbon capture could potentially improve coal’s prospects, but implementation costs remain high.

While the administration frames its coal support as essential for national security, the debate continues about the most effective and economical approaches to ensuring grid reliability and energy independence in a rapidly evolving sector.