By early July, Americans will have a better idea of how the Trump administration plans to keep coal plants operating in the face of consumer calls for affordable energy and decades of case law that could stand in the way.

In April, President Donald Trump issued an executive order (EO) declaring that current electricity supplies were becoming stressed by demand, driven in large part by artificial intelligence data center development, creating a national security emergency that gives federal officials permission to step into power-generation issues typically addressed at the state level. This could include forcing electric utilities and system operators to keep aging coal plants online that would otherwise be retired.

But, while the move is meant to boost waning coal industry fortunes, simple economics are pushing utilities to other resources. So, while the plan could keep some older plants running beyond their useful lives, it’s unlikely to lead to a coal renaissance of the size that would see mines reopening and new coal plants in the planning stage.

Defining an emergency

The April 8, 2025, EO makes the case that the current climb in electricity demand, largely driven by A.I. data centers and new advanced manufacturing plants now in planning stages or under construction, is happening faster than utilities can handle. As a result, the order states, “Lack of reliability in the electric grid puts the national and economic security of the American people at risk,” making the claim that the current situation constitutes a domestic emergency. 

Additionally, the EO points back to a Jan. 20 order declaring a national energy emergency. It then orders the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) secretary to investigate current reserve margins for the nation’s bulk power system to identify regions falling below acceptable levels. The secretary would then have the power to require existing plants in those regions to remain operating, even if the owner seeks to shut them down.

A report is expected by July 7 that outlines the DOE’s methodology for analyzing anticipated reserve margins in regions regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)—which is, essentially, the entire United States except Texas. Using the results of this analysis, DOE is required to:

Ensure critical generation resources remain available within at-risk regions.

Prevent any resource with nameplate capacity above 50 megawatts (MW) from leaving the bulk power system or from being converted to another fuel if the conversion would result in a net capacity reduction.

The order is based on Section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act, a law dating back to 1920 authorizing the Federal Power Commission—now FERC—to regulate interstate transmission, wholesale power sales and the reliability of electric service. Section 202(c) effectively overrides other federal, state and local environmental and energy laws for up to 90 days, as necessary, to address power shortages. Those emergency orders are renewable by the DOE, with no congressional input required.

In this case, the EO cites potentially low capacity reserve margins—that is, the amount of power available for dispatch above current needs in cases where demand spikes or other generators go offline—as a potential emergency.

Tilting at renewables

It’s not controversial that U.S. electricity demand is rising, or that additional generation supplies could be needed to support future needs. For example, a December forecast from energy consulting firm Grid Strategies estimates demand to rise by almost 16% by the end of 2029. But keeping planned coal plant phaseouts from occurring is unlikely to do much to meet this load growth.

Historically, coal was a primary generation source for U.S. consumers, accounting for 51.4% of the nation’s generation in 2000. By the end of 2023, though, that figure had dropped to only 16.2%, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). And aging coal plant infrastructure—the EIA says the average U.S. plant is now 45 years old—could soon push totals lower still. 

While retirement plans are slowing due to current demand growth, plant owners still expect to close plants responsible for one-third of current coal capacity by 2030, according to S&P Global reports. Those plants that are still running have an average capacity factor of 42.1%, meaning they’re only operating 42.1% of the time, when they’re primarily dedicated to peak demand operation.

One reason that capacity factor is dropping, beyond equipment age, is expense. Today, coal—the nation’s oldest generation resource—is also the most expensive. A February 2023 report from the consulting firm Energy Innovation found new solar production costs about a third per megawatt-hour than currently operating coal plants. The group also found that replacing 99% of existing coal generation with wind, solar and energy storage sited nearby would save ratepayers money.

Of course, wholesale replacement of coal with renewables and storage batteries could still take decades. In the meantime, utilities in some states are pausing planned coal plant shutdowns as a short-term means of maintaining adequate supplies as demand grows and new options come online. These include Duke Energy’s Gibson Generating Station in Indiana, where the utility is seeking a three-year extension, from 2035 to 2038, of two of the plant’s five units. Duke plans to co-fire those units with coal and natural gas. And in Emery County, Utah, PacifiCorp has proposed extending operations at one coal plant by 11 years and a second by four years.

Additional extensions are being pursued in Maryland and Wisconsin, among other states. Even with these delays, though, operators still plan to shut down 61 gigawatts of capacity between 2025 and 2030, equivalent to the more than one-third of 2024’s online capacity.

Power to the states

A difference between these plant extensions and those sought under the April EO is who makes the decision to keep a retirement--­ready coal plant kicking out kilowatt-hours. In all the cases above, state regulators are key participants in the process. That’s how the U.S. utility industry operates, with electric utilities established as regulated monopolies. Utilities and their regulators are expected to enable consumer access to the lowest-cost generation resources available, while maintaining reliability and meeting other regulatory requirements, such as renewable energy goals.

This EO would upend decades of legal precedents, especially if multiple 90-day emergency declarations were strung together to create a new status quo of federal control over what has always been a state-level responsibility. By forcing states and their utilities to keep aging and inefficient coal plants operating, this EO could also drive up electricity costs for consumers, without giving them recourse to less-expensive options, including natural gas, solar, wind or storage—or options like demand response and virtual power plants that require little or no new construction at all.

The order actually prohibits utilities from moving away from coal and toward less-expensive options if the alternatives don’t have the same capacity factor as the coal plant they’re replacing. Opponents of this plan could argue this is an irrelevant factor, given that many of today’s coal plants are so expensive to operate that they’re only used during the highest peak periods.

What happens next

In July, the DOE’s report will outline its method for analyzing future reserve margins, which could provide guidance on which regions will see more coal plants kept online. However, a legal fight is now underway that could complicate the Trump administration’s efforts. In early May, 15 states sued the administration over its January declaration of an energy emergency, stating that the emergency was nonexistent and that, as a result, bypassing environmental rules to expedite new drilling and mining permits was illegal. This logic would also incorporate April’s order in support of existing coal plants.

In the longer term, though, the economics of coal will have a hard time standing up to other generation options. Natural gas, which currently generates about half of U.S. electricity supplies, is both less expensive, thanks to advances in fracking, and cleaner-burning. Wind and solar combined, at 17%, have already surpassed coal as contributors to U.S. generating capacity. And these renewables’ contributions continue to grow—EIA figures show solar was 2024’s fastest-growing energy source, with capacity increasing by 27%, and wind energy climbed by 7%. That growth help support the U.S. grid through 2024, when generation reached a new peak, highlighting the ability of newer technologies to surpass coal’s power-production capabilities.

Chatchanan/STOCK.ADOBE.COM / Narak0rn/STOCK.ADOBE.COM