Listen to the article
Trump Orders Pentagon to Purchase Coal-Fired Electricity in Bid to Support Industry
WASHINGTON — President Trump has directed the Pentagon to increase electricity purchases from coal-fired power plants, marking his administration’s latest effort to bolster the declining coal industry and preserve aging facilities.
The executive order instructs the Defense Department to enter long-term power purchase agreements with coal facilities that supply military bases and critical operations. According to a White House fact sheet, the initiative aims to secure reliable baseload power while strengthening grid resilience and national security. The administration contends that intermittent energy sources like wind and solar cannot consistently deliver on-demand electricity during extreme weather conditions.
Despite the administration’s push, energy analysts suggest the order may have limited impact on the broader coal industry. Experts told The New York Times that even if the military sourced all its electricity from coal, it would represent approximately three percent of U.S. coal-power capacity. While unlikely to revitalize the entire sector, the policy could help sustain specific plants, particularly those situated near military installations.
The Pentagon contracts represent just one component of a more comprehensive strategy. The Department of Energy recently allocated roughly $175 million to extend the operational life of coal plants across several states. Additionally, the Tennessee Valley Authority has postponed the retirement of two major coal plants that were scheduled to close later this decade.
Collectively, these measures demonstrate how the administration is leveraging federal purchasing power, funding, and policy adjustments to decelerate coal’s decline in the energy market.
Coal’s challenges stem primarily from economic factors. For years, utilities have been decommissioning plants as natural gas, wind, and solar prove more cost-effective to build and operate. Federal energy data indicates that generators continue to plan additional coal retirements, albeit at a slower pace.
The administration maintains that coal remains essential for reliability, especially during severe weather events when renewable energy production might decrease. The White House emphasizes that dependable energy sources are crucial for military readiness and overall grid stability.
However, industry analysts counter this perspective, noting that modern energy reliability depends on a complex interplay of transmission systems, storage capabilities, flexible generation options, and effective market design—not solely on any single fuel source. This more nuanced view, reported by The New York Times, highlights the evolving understanding of energy security in contemporary power systems.
Coal’s contribution to U.S. electricity generation has declined dramatically over time, reflecting the industry’s struggle to compete with increasingly affordable alternative energy sources. Once America’s dominant electricity provider, coal has steadily lost market share to natural gas and renewables due to economic pressures, environmental regulations, and changing consumer preferences.
Energy experts predict that while federal support measures may postpone some plant closures, they likely won’t reverse the industry’s long-term decline. The coal sector’s future will ultimately depend less on government policy interventions and more on whether utilities view coal as economically viable in an increasingly competitive and rapidly evolving energy landscape.
The administration’s focus on coal aligns with President Trump’s campaign promises to revitalize traditional energy industries that have experienced significant job losses in recent years, particularly in regions where coal mining and power generation have historically been major employers. However, the structural shifts in energy markets suggest these efforts may provide only temporary relief to an industry facing fundamental challenges.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
11 Comments
This is a useful fact check on the president’s claims about reviving the coal industry. The analysis suggests the administration’s latest policy move to have the military purchase more coal power is more symbolic than substantive. Coal faces significant headwinds from cheaper natural gas and the growth of renewable energy that go beyond just government policy.
The article provides a sober analysis of the president’s efforts to revive the coal industry. Even if the military sources all its electricity from coal, it would only represent about 3% of total U.S. coal capacity. This suggests the administration’s latest move may have limited real-world impact. The challenges facing coal appear to be more structural in nature.
This article does a good job of fact-checking the president’s claims about reviving the coal industry. The analysis suggests the administration’s latest move to have the military buy more coal power may have only a marginal impact. Coal faces significant headwinds that go beyond just government policy.
That’s a fair assessment. While the administration has made supporting the coal industry a priority, the broader market and technological forces seem to be working against it. It will be important to monitor if there are any other policy steps the White House takes to try to stem coal’s decline.
This is an interesting analysis of President Trump’s efforts to support the coal industry. It seems the administration’s policies may have a limited impact, as even if the military sourced all its electricity from coal, it would only represent 3% of total U.S. coal capacity. Curious to see how this plays out and if the industry can find other ways to remain viable.
You raise a good point. While the administration is trying to shore up coal, the broader market forces and transition to renewable energy may be difficult to overcome. It will be important to monitor the long-term trajectory of the coal industry.
The article provides a measured assessment of the president’s efforts to support the coal industry. While the administration is taking steps like the executive order to boost military purchases of coal power, the analysis suggests this may have limited real-world impact. Coal faces significant structural headwinds that government policy alone may not be able to overcome.
The article provides a balanced assessment of the administration’s coal industry revival efforts. It’s clear the executive order to have the military purchase more coal-fired electricity is more symbolic than substantive in terms of its actual impact. Coal faces significant headwinds from cheaper natural gas and the rise of renewables.
Agree, the coal industry’s challenges go well beyond just policy decisions. Market dynamics and technological shifts seem to be the bigger drivers of its decline. It will be interesting to see if the administration has any other policy levers it can pull to try to prop up the industry.
This is a useful fact check on the president’s claims about reviving the coal industry. The analysis suggests the administration’s latest policy move to have the military purchase more coal power is more symbolic than substantive. Coal faces significant headwinds from cheaper natural gas and the growth of renewable energy.
Agreed. The coal industry’s challenges seem to go well beyond just government policy. Market forces and technological shifts appear to be the bigger drivers of its decline. It will be interesting to see if the administration has any other levers it can pull to try to prop up the industry.