This commentary was originally published on <\/em>The Conversation<\/a>. It is reprinted under Creative Commons license CC BY-ND 4.0<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n As projections of U.S. electricity demand rise sharply<\/a>, President Donald Trump is looking to coal \u2013 historically a dominant force in the U.S. energy economy<\/a> \u2013 as a key part of the solution.<\/p>\n In an April 2025 executive order, for instance, Trump used emergency powers<\/a> to direct the Department of Energy<\/a> to order the owners of coal-fired power plants that were slated to be shut down<\/a> to keep the plants running.<\/p>\n He also directed federal agencies to \u201cidentify coal resources on Federal lands<\/a>\u201d and ease the process for leasing and mining coal on those lands. In addition, he issued orders to exclude coal-related projects from environmental reviews, promote coal exports<\/a> and potentially subsidize the production of coal as a national security resource.<\/p>\n But there remain limits to the president\u2019s power to slow the declining use of coal in the U.S. And while efforts continue to overcome these limits and prop up coal, mining coal remains an ongoing danger to workers: In 2025, there have been five coal-mining deaths<\/a> in West Virginia and at least two others elsewhere<\/a> in the U.S.<\/p>\n A long legacy<\/strong><\/p>\n Until 2015, coal-fired power plants generated more electricity than any other<\/a> type of fuel in the U.S. But with the rapid expansion of a new type of hydraulic fracturing<\/a>, natural gas became a cheap and stable source for power generation. The prices of solar and wind power also dropped steadily. These alternatives ultimately overcame coal<\/a> in the U.S. power supply.<\/p>\n Before this change, coal mining defined the economy and culture of many U.S. towns \u2013 and some states and regions, such as Wyoming<\/a> and Appalachia<\/a> \u2013 for decades. And in many small towns, coal-related businesses, including power plants, were key employers<\/a>.<\/p>\n Coal has both benefits and drawbacks. It provides a reliable fuel source for electricity that can be piled up on-site at power plants<\/a> without needing a tank or underground facility for storage.<\/p>\n But it\u2019s dirty: Thousands of coal miners developed a disease called black lung<\/a>. The federal government pays for medical care for some sick miners and makes monthly payments to family members<\/a> of miners who die prematurely. Burning coal also emits multiple air pollutants, prematurely killing half a million people<\/a> in the United States from 1999 through 2020.<\/p>\n Coal is dangerous for workers, too. Some coal-mining companies have had abysmal safety records, leading to miner deaths<\/a>, such as the recent drowning of a miner<\/a> in a sudden flood in a West Virginia mine. Safety reforms have been implemented since the Big Branch Mine explosion<\/a> in 2010, and coal miner deaths in the U.S. have since declined. But coal mining remains a hazardous job.<\/p>\n A champion of coal<\/strong><\/p>\n In both of his terms, Trump has championed the revival of coal. In 2017, for example, Trump\u2019s Department of Energy asked the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to pay coal and nuclear plants<\/a> higher rates than the competitive market would pay, saying they were key to keeping the U.S. electricity grid running. The commission declined<\/a>.<\/p>\n In his second term, Trump is more broadly using powers granted to the president in emergencies<\/a>, and he is seeking to subsidize coal across the board<\/a> \u2013 in mining, power plants and exports.<\/p>\n At least some of the urgency is coming from the rapid construction of data centers for artificial intelligence, which the Trump administration champions<\/a>. Many individual data centers use as much power as a small or medium city<\/a>. There\u2019s enough generation capacity to power them, though only by activating power plants that are idle most of the time<\/a> and that operate only during peak demand periods. Using those plants would require data centers to reduce their electricity use during those peaks \u2013 which it\u2019s not clear they would agree to do<\/a>.<\/p>\n So many data centers, desperate for 24\/7 electricity, are relying on old coal-fired power plants<\/a> \u2013 buying electricity from plants that otherwise would be shutting down.<\/p>\n Limits remain<\/strong><\/p>\n Despite the Trump administration\u2019s efforts to rapidly expand data centers and coal to power them, coal is more expensive<\/a> than most other fuels for power generation, with costs still rising.<\/p>\n Half of U.S. coal mines have closed<\/a> within the past two decades, and productivity at the remaining mines is declining<\/a> due to a variety of factors<\/a>, such as rising mining costs, environmental regulation and competition from cheaper sources. Coal exports have also seen declines<\/a> in the midst of the tariff wars.<\/p>\n The U.S. Department of the Interior\u2019s recent effort to follow Trump\u2019s orders and lease more coal on federal lands received only one bid \u2013 at a historically low price of less than a penny per ton<\/a>. But in fact, even if the government gave its coal away for free, it would still make more economic sense for utilities to build power plants that use other fuels. This is due to the high cost of running old coal plants<\/a> as compared to new natural gas and renewable infrastructure. <\/p>\n Natural gas is cheaper<\/a> \u2013 and, in some places, so are renewable energy and battery storage. Government efforts to prevent the retirement of coal-fired power plants and boost the demand for coal may slow coal\u2019s decline in the short term. In the long term, however, coal faces a very uncertain future<\/a> as a part of the U.S. electricity mix.<\/p>\n \t\t\t\t\t\t\t![](\"https:\/\/progressivereform.org\/wp-content\/themes\/progressive-reform\/images\/blue-arrows.svg\")
\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n