The U.S. coal industry, already in decline, is poised for even steeper challenges.
The U.S. coal industry faces a confluence of headwinds. New environmental regulations from the Biden administration will increase operating costs for coal-fired power plants. Additionally, the industry is losing two key political allies in Congress with the retirements of Senators McConnell and Manchin. Finally, the recent collapse of a vital export route in Baltimore further restricts access to foreign markets, an area where coal demand has already been declining for the past twenty years.
Despite some ongoing congressional support, the coal industry’s economic role has been shrinking for years. Abundant and cheaper natural gas, along with the growth of renewable energy, have displaced coal as the preferred fuel source for electricity generation. This shift reflects both the pressure to address climate change and the rising cost of pollution control measures. Since its peak in 2008, the nation’s coal production has fallen by half.
The existing fleet of U.S. coal-fired power plants is aging and nearing retirement. This trend is likely to accelerate due to ongoing legal challenges from environmental groups, who welcome the stricter regulations from the Environmental Protection Agency.
Mary Anne Hitt, who led the Sierra Club’s campaign against coal plants, sees these new regulations as a significant turning point. Her efforts focused on preventing new plants and shutting down existing ones.
Although U.S. coal plants contribute a significantly smaller share of electricity compared to the past (16% in 2023 versus roughly 50% two decades ago), and with predictions of over 20% of existing plants closing by 2030 according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the coal industry still holds some political influence in Washington.
According to Hitt, this remaining political influence allows the coal industry to mount strong opposition to regulations like the ones recently proposed by Biden.
While acknowledging the coal industry’s remaining political influence in Washington, Hitt, a West Virginian who now leads U.S. initiatives at Climate Imperative, believes its power is waning compared to the past. She sees the industry as a force to be considered, but not the dominant player it once was.
The coal industry is expected to fiercely oppose the new EPA regulations. These include a stricter climate rule requiring a 90% reduction in carbon emissions from coal plants by 2039 for continued operation. Additionally, the EPA issued separate rules targeting hazardous air pollution, wastewater, and coal ash waste from these plants. Experts believe these regulations, if they withstand legal challenges, will significantly accelerate the retirement of coal-fired power plants.
The coal industry acknowledges its diminished role compared to the past but insists it retains significant backing from legislators.
Rich Nolan, head of the National Mining Association, expresses confidence in the industry’s future leadership. He highlights the emergence of a strong group of new leaders.
Senator McConnell, soon to step down as Republican leader, has been a staunch advocate for his home state’s coal industry. This included opposing climateregulations and securing federal funding for Kentucky. His influence on the judiciary, culminating in a conservative-majority Supreme Court, could be crucial for the fate of the new EPA climate rule. These conservative justices may hold the power to decide its legality.
Neither candidate vying for McConnell’s Republican leadership role hails from a major coal-producing region. While Texas, led by John Cornyn, consumes the most coal nationally, its own production is minimal. John Thune’s South Dakota doesn’t produce coal at all. Despite this, both candidates are seen as allies of the coal industry.
Senator Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, the top Republican on the Environment and Public Works Committee, criticized the EPA rules announced on Thursday, describing them as part of an “unrealistic climate agenda that jeopardizes affordable and reliable energy.” John Barrasso, the ranking member of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee and a candidate for the whip position, represents Wyoming, which is the nation’s largest coal producer by a significant margin.
Nolan highlighted the vocal support of GOP senators from major coal states, including Mike Lee of Utah, Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming, Kevin Cramer and John Hoeven of North Dakota, and even moderates like Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski. According to him, these lawmakers have advocated for issues such as grid reliability and the importance of an all-encompassing energy strategy.
Coal also has strong Republican advocates in the House
Former House Appropriations Chair Hal Rogers of Kentucky, still a high-ranking member, leveraged his position to secure substantial funding for mine cleanups and other coal-related initiatives. Rep. James Comer, also from Kentucky, has utilized his role as Chair of the Oversight Committee to oppose the Biden administration’s environmental policies.
“There remains a substantial constituency for coal in both chambers,” said Neil Chatterjee, a former energy aide to McConnell and former Chair of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission under the Trump administration. “Coal will continue to have a voice in Congress.”
However, in the last 15 years, that representation has shifted from being bipartisan to predominantly one-sided.
Charles McConnell, a former assistant Energy secretary for fossil fuels during the Obama administration, stated, “When it comes to Democrats and their support for coal, it’s uncertain if you’ll find anyone in favor.”
Manchin has consistently distinguished himself from other Democrats. In his initial Senate campaign in 2010, he gained attention with an advertisement depicting him using a rifle to shoot the party’s carbon cap-and-trade bill. As West Virginia increasingly leaned towards the Republican Party and the Democrats’ Senate majority dwindled, Manchin’s authority in shaping energy and climate legislation expanded, notably with the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022.
The comprehensive legislation seemed doomed due to Manchin’s resistance to additional climate-related expenditures until an unexpected revelation emerged: he had clandestinely brokered an agreement with Democratic leadership. The Inflation Reduction Act encompassed substantial funding for clean energy and climate initiatives. However, Manchin utilized his influence to stipulate that the legislation bolster and expand the 45Q federal tax credit for carbon storage, a provision favoring fossil fuels.
“Manchin acted independently,” remarked Charles McConnell, who currently serves as the executive director of the Center for Carbon Management in Energy at the University of Houston.
Several Democrats in Congress represent states with coal interests, but they do not possess Manchin’s extensive background and ties to the industry, nor his intense concentration on the matter.
Pennsylvania and Illinois rank as the third and fourth largest coal producers respectively. Pennsylvania’s steel industry heavily relies on coal for coke production, a crucial ingredient in metal manufacturing.
Both states are represented by Democratic senators. However, their political landscapes are significantly shaped by their urban areas, which restricts the cultural and economic sway that coal holds in states such as West Virginia.
Chelsea Barnes, director of government affairs and strategy at the environmental organization Appalachian Voices, sees Manchin’s departure as a chance for lawmakers from those states, especially Senators Bob Casey and John Fetterman from Pennsylvania, to assume the role of advocating on coal-related matters.
She emphasized that more crucially, it provides an opportunity to shift the Democratic narrative, as those legislators prioritize mine reclamation and advancing union labor over preserving coal as a primary fuel source.
Barnes stated, “In terms of how Democrats work on coal issues, I see Casey and Fetterman certainly caring about it a lot — but with, of course, much bigger focus on the workers themselves rather than the industry as a whole,”
In his re-election bid, Casey secured the support of the United Mine Workers, a crucial element for Democrats aiming to maintain control of the Senate. He is advocating for legislation aimed at improving healthcare services for miners afflicted with black lung disease.
Last month, he strongly criticized reports of the potential closure of a 550-worker bituminous coal mine located in the southwestern region of his state. (The mine’s owner, Iron Senergy, attributed the halt in production to heightened methane levels, and further extended the shutdown due to coal export complications arising from the bridge incident that disrupted shipments from the Baltimore port.)
Casey emphasized in a statement, “Pennsylvania’s coal miners have powered our nation for generations, risking their lives and their long-term health to power our factories and heat our homes”. “We owe it to them to provide them with the health care and compensation they deserve for putting their lives on the line year after year in the coal mines.”
Fetterman doesn’t possess the voting track record comparable to Manchin and Casey. However, last autumn, he collaborated with fellow Democrats in signing a letter urging the EPA to implement robust climate regulations for the power industry. A spokesperson affirmed that “John will always be in the corner of coal workers and communities, not the coal lobby.”
However, neither Casey nor any other remaining Democrat is engaging in pro-coal advocacy to the same extent as Manchin.
Though Casey initially expressed concerns about the effects of the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan on Pennsylvania, he eventually supported the regulation. In contrast, Manchin sided with Republicans in voting to dismantle it. Their differences resurfaced in 2019, as Casey voted in favor and Manchin voted against a resolution aimed at overturning the Trump EPA’s lenient climate regulation for power plants.
Even within the Republican Party, there has been a change in the language used when discussing coal.
The traditional cultural and economic rationale has been weakened as natural gas and renewable energy sources surpass coal in power markets. This has exacerbated the decades-long decline in coal mining employment caused by industry automation.
The University of Houston’s McConnell said “If you’re sitting in Washington trying to support the coal industry by running unabated coal plants and making the case for the way of life and jobs and all that kind of stuff — you know, I have a bit of sympathy for that, but not much. That’s just dinosaurs trying to hang on to the past. And I frankly don’t see that as thought leadership in any way.”
Today, the primary argument in favor of coal isn’t its cost but rather its reliability in maintaining the grid.
Wind and solar power generate electricity intermittently, dependent on factors such as sunlight and wind. With projections indicating that these renewable sources will surpass coal in electricity generation for the first time this year, and certain regions experiencing shortages in natural gas supply, the focus of much political discourse surrounding coal has shifted to ensuring consistent electricity supply.
Michelle Bloodworth, president and CEO of the coal industry organization America’s Power, noted that the discourse has evolved significantly during her seven-year tenure.
She said that it does not matter whether you’re a Republican or a Democrat. Obviously nobody wants the lights to go out.
Bloodworth highlighted alerts from nonpartisan grid specialists like the North American Electric Reliability Corporation. In its recent long-term projection, it cautioned that the United States might face electricity shortages in the near future due to the rapid retirement of fossil fuel facilities. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has also expressed concerns about grid reliability, as have several grid operators. Industry representative Nolan from the National Mining Association highlights potential electricity market shortages as a positive development for the coal industry
