Important News

Trump directs long-term coal power contracts to supply U.S. military installations

Interesting: 0/0 • Support: 0/0Log in to vote

Key takeaways

  • President Trump signed an Executive Order directing the Department of War, in coordination with the Secretary of Energy, to prioritize long-term Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) with coal-fired power plants for Department of War installations and mission-critical facilities.
  • The Order gives priority to projects that the administration says enhance grid reliability, blackout prevention, on-site fuel security, and mission assurance for defense and intelligence capabilities.
  • The Fact Sheet asserts that the administration declared a National Energy Emergency on Day One and took April 2025 actions to designate coal as a mineral, lift barriers to coal mining on federal lands, and provide regulatory relief for certain coal-fired plants.
  • According to the Fact Sheet, administration actions prevented the closure of 17 gigawatts of coal power and spurred new investments in baseload generation.
  • The administration renewed the charter for the National Coal Council (NCC) and convened its first meeting after the council had been terminated under the prior administration.
  • The Fact Sheet characterizes intermittent sources like wind and solar as vulnerable to extreme weather and positions coal-fired baseload generation as central to ensuring reliable power for defense operations.

Follow Up Questions

What is a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) and how would a long-term PPA work for federal military installations?Expand

A PPA is a long-term contract in which a power producer agrees to sell electricity to a buyer at agreed prices and terms; developers usually build, own, operate and finance the generation while the buyer pays for the energy over the contract life. For federal military sites, the Department of Defense already uses statutory authorities (e.g., 10 U.S.C. §2922a and FAR authorities) to enter multi‑year on‑site or off‑site PPAs—sometimes up to 30 years—to procure resilient, dedicated supply (the contractor supplies, operates, maintains the generator and the Service pays for energy or capacity per the agreement).

Why does the Fact Sheet refer to the "Department of War" instead of the Department of Defense, and what legal authority does that office have to enter energy contracts?Expand

The Fact Sheet uses the administration’s preferred secondary title “Department of War” (an executive‑branch rebranding authorized by a 2025 executive order) but the statutory legal name and authorities remain with the Department of Defense; only Congress can change the department’s legal name. The Department (regardless of title used) has existing statutory contracting authorities (e.g., 10 U.S.C. §2922a, FAR and DoD acquisition rules) to enter energy contracts and PPAs for military installations.

What does "designating coal as a mineral" change in practice for federal leasing or mining on public lands?Expand

Designating coal as a mineral for federal purposes makes coal explicitly treated as a mineral resource under federal mining and leasing statutes and can change which approvals and leasing and permitting rules apply on federal lands—potentially speeding leasing and removal under mineral‑entry statutes and altering environmental review/ royalty frameworks—but statutory specifics depend on the implementing rule and agency actions.

Which specific Biden-era restrictions does the Fact Sheet say were lifted, and what regulatory relief was granted to coal-fired power plants?Expand

The Fact Sheet states April 2025 actions ‘‘lifted barriers’’ to coal mining on federal lands and provided ‘‘regulatory relief’’ for certain coal plants; it does not list specific regulatory provisions in the Fact Sheet itself. Public documents from that period cite steps such as reclassifying coal access, revising leasing processes, and narrowing EPA or Interior actions that had limited some coal activity—but the Fact Sheet doesn’t identify exact rules or citations. (No specific rule citations are provided in the Fact Sheet.)

What is the National Coal Council (NCC), who serves on it, and how does it influence federal energy policy?Expand

The National Coal Council (NCC) is a federal advisory committee that provides industry and stakeholder advice to the Secretary of Energy on coal and related technologies; its membership typically includes coal company executives, utilities, labor, environmental consultants, academics and other stakeholders appointed by the Secretary. The NCC produces reports and recommendations that can inform DOE policy but has no rulemaking power—its influence comes through advising the Secretary and shaping options considered by the agency.

What independent evidence exists comparing the reliability of coal baseload plants versus wind and solar during extreme weather events?Expand

Independent analyses show coal plants provided continuous on‑site, dispatchable power during many extreme‑weather outages but have also failed in some events; wind and solar availability is variable and can be disrupted by weather and transmission issues, while combined solutions (coal or gas plus storage, grid upgrades, microgrids) are generally judged more resilient than relying on intermittent resources alone. Peer‑reviewed and government studies compare historical outage performance and show that dispatchable thermal plants typically supply steady baseload but can be vulnerable to fuel‑supply or cooling‑water constraints in extreme events.

How would long-term coal PPAs likely affect greenhouse gas emissions, local air quality near plants, and energy costs for military bases and nearby communities?Expand

Long‑term coal PPAs would likely increase coal generation committed to supply military loads, which would raise CO2 and other pollutant emissions compared with low‑carbon alternatives; local air‑pollutant impacts depend on plant emission controls but can worsen air quality near plants; electricity price impacts are uncertain—PPAs can lock in predictable energy prices (which may be higher or lower than market rates) and can impose costs on the Government while supporting plant operating revenues that may extend plant life.

Comments

Only logged-in users can comment.
Loading…