The ongoing energy crisis in the United States traces its roots back to policies set in motion during the Obama administration. These were not mere missteps; they represented a concerted effort against coal, one of America’s foundational energy sources. Notably, coal once fueled around 52 percent of the nation’s electricity before the administration embarked on what many viewed as a war on this vital resource.
In Obama’s first term, federal initiatives sought to drive up the costs of coal through regulations. One major endeavor involved a cap-and-trade system, which many derided as “cap-and-tax.” This approach aimed to impose emissions credits on utilities to confront emissions limits. Despite Democratic control of Congress, the plan failed. Other measures, however, were more insidious. Regulations from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the Department of the Interior turned coal mining increasingly burdensome, effectively tightening the noose around an already struggling industry.
Particularly devastating were two rules: the Mercury Air Toxics Standard (MATS) and the Clean Power Plan (CPP). MATS, implemented in 2012, pressured utilities to invest in costly emissions control technologies to limit mercury, leading many to abandon coal in favor of natural gas. The CPP surfaced in 2015, specifically targeting carbon dioxide emissions. Although later challenged in the courts, the damage was already extensive; by the end of the Obama presidency, nearly half of the coal industry’s infrastructure had crumbled, and major companies had sought bankruptcy protection.
Despite efforts during his initial term, Trump was unable to resuscitate the coal sector. Unfortunately, the Biden administration continued to roll back any progress, reducing coal-generated electricity to below 20 percent. However, as the need for energy soars due to the rise of artificial intelligence and its accompanying demand for electricity-packed data centers, Trump has re-emerged with a pro-coal agenda just in time.
Recently, the Department of Energy ordered the continued operation of two Indiana coal plants that were on the brink of closure. These plants mark the third and fourth such facilities Trump has successfully prevented from shutting down—a small but significant victory in a long battle. However, the coal industry’s complete recovery will take time. Many critical infrastructures are still in ruins due to previous administrations’ actions.
This past week, Trump also took decisive action against the offshore wind industry, issuing stop-work orders on five projects, including a significant one off the coast of Virginia. These measures were based on national security concerns, noting that offshore wind installations could disrupt radar and sonar operations for aircraft and submarines. While litigation is expected, Trump’s administration can lean on the precedent set by a 2008 Supreme Court decision that ruled national security concerns supersede environmental arguments in similar contexts.
While these actions do not remedy the nation’s energy challenges entirely, they signify a shift toward addressing issues that have long hindered energy production in the U.S. and keep the coal plants operational for the time being. The steps taken by Trump promise a potential stabilization of the coal sector and challenge the expanding influence of alternative energy initiatives that may not adequately support national interests.
In summary, the historical context exemplifies how current policies and their roots in past administrations have significantly shaped the landscape of America’s energy sector. This ongoing journey to reclaim coal as a central energy source showcases an essential tension between emerging technologies and traditional energy practices. As these developments unfold, the importance of maintaining a diverse energy portfolio remains clear for both economic and national security concerns.
"*" indicates required fields
