President Trump on Thursday announced $700 million in new federal funding for the country’s struggling coal industry, including $185 million meant to build the first two new coal-burning power plants in the United States in more than a decade.
It was the latest in a series of extraordinary efforts by his administration to improve the fortunes of coal, the most polluting of the fossil fuels and a favored industry of the president’s.
In recent months, the Energy Department has ordered units at five aging coal plants to stay open instead of shutting down as planned. And Mr. Trump has directed the Defense Department to buy more electricity from coal plants to power military installations nationwide.
Flanked by Republican governors and cabinet officials in the Oval Office on Thursday, Mr. Trump said the move would help lower consumers’ energy bills, though experts say coal plants are more expensive to build and operate than gas plants and renewable energy.
“Today we’re taking historic action to bring down the price of energy and the cost of living for all Americans with the power of clean, beautiful coal,” the president said.
Of the roughly $700 million in total funding, $425 million would be used to upgrade and extend the life of 13 coal plants that otherwise might have closed in the coming years. To unlock this money, Mr. Trump invoked a Korean War-era law called the Defense Production Act, which gives the president sweeping powers to bolster domestic industries deemed essential to national security.
An additional $185 million would be awarded to companies to build the first new coal plants in the United States since 2013, one in Alaska and the other in West Virginia. Some of that money would also go to a power company that wants to restart a shuttered coal plant in Maryland.
The money for the new coal plants would come from funds that Congress originally designated for reducing carbon dioxide emissions from polluting industries.
The proposed new coal plant in Alaska, known as Terra Energy Center, would be built in the Matanuska-Susitna Valley, a region north of Anchorage known for its massive glaciers and world-class salmon fishing. The developers have argued that the coal plant could power existing gold mines or new data centers in the area, which is running out of natural gas from the Cook Inlet.
Terra Energy Center, an affiliate of Canada-based Flatlands Energy, does not appear to have a website, and it has shared few details publicly. Similarly, very little information is known about the project in West Virginia, which would be led by a company called TerraPurus.
Representatives for the developers could not be reached for comment.
Analysts said both projects could run into trouble if a future Democratic president cracked down on the coal sector.
“President Trump has been very pro-coal,” said Andy Blumenfeld, an analyst who tracks coal markets at the consultancy McCloskey by OPIS. “Now, what happens when the next administration comes in? Will they put a stop to it? I think that that’s an enormous risk.”
The United States has not built a new utility-scale coal plant since 2013, and many of the nation’s existing plants are more than 40 years old. Since 2010, 330 coal plants have retired and 60 others have announced plans to close by 2031, according to the Beyond Coal campaign at the Sierra Club, an environmental group.
“There is no coal renaissance happening in the United States,” said Holly Bender, the chief program officer at the Sierra Club.
Coal mining jobs have also dwindled over the past four decades. Roughly 40,000 people are employed in the industry today, down from about 173,000 in 1985, although employment levels have stabilized since 2020.
Experts say the phrase “clean coal” is misleading, noting that coal plants produce more harmful air pollutants and planet-warming carbon dioxide emissions than do gas plants, solar panels and wind turbines. Burning coal emits mercury and other heavy metals linked to an array of health problems.
Despite the unfavorable economics of coal, some proponents think the fuel could make a comeback if electricity demand from data centers continues to rise and the Environmental Protection Agency continues to relax pollution regulations that have significantly increased costs for operators.
Last year, after Mr. Trump returned to the White House, the amount of electricity produced by coal increased 13 percent, which in turn led to an uptick in America’s planet-warming emissions.
“People always ask me, you know, do you think we’ll actually see a new coal plant be built?” said Michelle Bloodworth, the president of America’s Power, a coal industry trade group. “But I am optimistic. The United States has a 400-year supply of coal, making it one of the most important resources for domestic energy security.”
The money to build new coal plants is coming from funds that Congress originally approved for carbon capture technology, which sucks carbon dioxide from the smokestacks of polluting facilities and stores it deep underground. Last year, the Energy Department issued a notice telling companies they could use the money for “reliability upgrades” in the near term and install carbon capture later.
Some experts and congressional Democrats have said this change amounted to a loophole that undermined the intent of the carbon capture program, which was created by the bipartisan infrastructure law of 2021.
“There are basically no guardrails or restrictions on when carbon capture has to be implemented,” said Danielle Lemmon, a former Energy Department official during the Biden administration.
Mr. Trump on Thursday also announced $75 million for a new coal export terminal in Oakland, Calif. City officials have tried for nearly a decade to block the terminal from being built, but courts have repeatedly sided with the developer, and the project is now set to move forward.
