Latest News

Maguire: Key reasons why Trump’s efforts to save the US coal industry may fail.

The U.S. president's efforts to revive the coal industry in the United States tap into a powerful mix of energy policy, industrial policy, and electoral politics. But the data shows that coal's decline has been driven by structural factors that are unlikely ever to reverse.

This means that even if the administration allocates tens or hundreds of millions to coal producers and utilities, it is likely to result in a misallocation, increased emissions and higher electricity costs for consumers.

There are four reasons that efforts to support coal may ultimately fail.

1. ECONOMICS ARE STUBBORNLY UNFAVORABLE

Why subsidizing coal could backfire. Subsidizing the coal industry is contrary to market fundamentals. Taxpayers are left to support a non-competitive sector while power prices rise.

The share of coal in the U.S. electric generation fell from 60% in 2000 to 16% by 2025. Natural gas has become more popular, cheaper and more energy dense. It is also easier to transport.

The market tells a different story. Since the early 2000s, no U.S. utilities have attempted to build any new coal-fired plants.

During the same time period, many gas-fired power plants were built, reflecting a much stronger economics as well as operational advantages.

The difference is apparent in the levelized costs of energy. Lazard data shows that the cost of power from a new gas plant is about $64/MWh, compared to $115/MWh with a coal plant.

When utilities are focused on minimizing customer costs, they have little incentive to select coal.

The economics of existing coal plants are even worse due to their age, high maintenance costs and inefficiency. Government subsidies may prolong the operation of coal plants, but only if they extend?the lives of assets that are already obsolete economically.

2. CONSTRUCTION COMPLEX AND RISKY

This could be a bad idea: Because coal plants are slower and harder to build, they're more likely to experience delays and overruns in cost even with government support.

Construction of modern combined-cycle gas generator (CCGT?) plants is relatively fast and easy. By contrast, coal plants require large boilers, fuel handling systems and specialized infrastructure.

Gas plants can burn fuel without any pre-processing. Coal plants must handle large volumes of solid fuels, which require transport, crushing and storage yards. They also need elaborate combustion systems.

These systems also require expensive emissions-control technologies and ash disposal system, which adds to capital costs and regulatory complexity. The land requirements are also typically larger.

The industry has lost a lot of knowledge. Few utilities or contractors have experience in building coal plants after decades of prioritizing the use of gas. Execution risks are increased, increasing the possibility of delays and unanticipated costs.

These factors together make coal projects more costly, slower and less predictable. This is true even when the environment is favorable.

3. LOGISTICAL BURDENS

The heavy transport and handling of coal can cause local opposition and increase costs.

Gas is much easier to transport than coal. Gas can be transported continuously and cheaply via pipelines, while coal is hauled either by rail, truck or barge.

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), approximately 1.14 pounds coal is needed to produce one kilowatt hour of electricity. One gigawatt of coal can be used to generate around 9,000 metric tonnes of coal each day. This is the equivalent of 90 freight cars in a freight train.

A gas plant of the same size, on the other hand, would consume approximately 170 million cubic foot of natural gas per day, a volume which can be easily pumped through existing infrastructure.

In order to expand coal power, it would be necessary not only to build new plants, but also make significant investments in storage, handling, and rail systems. These extra requirements increase costs and can create bottlenecks.

Local challenges are also posed by these projects. The increased rail traffic, dust and noise can cause opposition in communities. This makes it harder for projects to be approved and sustained.

The logistical and social constraints that coal faces further reduce its competitiveness.

4. LIMITED EXPORT UPSIDE

This could be a disaster: Key overseas markets may not export coal because they produce it themselves or are moving away from it.

As part of the coal revival plan,?boosting export capability is included. This includes proposals for a Gateway linking Wyoming production to ports along the U.S. West Coast that are aimed at supplying Asia.

Asia dominates the global coal industry. China, India and Indonesia account for collectively more than 80% global coal supply. This region is also the leader in coal exports, which indicates a structural preference for supplying coal rather than importing it.

Although U.S. coal does reach Asian markets, India is a notable purchaser. These flows are driven more by short-term price dynamics than by long-term dependency.

India is heavily dependent on coal and investing in alternative sources of energy.

If demand does not materialize, then large-scale infrastructure for export could be underutilized or stranded. Projects backed by the public could generate limited returns and lock in significant upfront costs.

COAL CRUX

These factors, when taken together, point out a fundamental mismatch in policy ambitions and economic reality.

The government can intervene to slow the decline of coal, but cannot change the structural forces which have made it less attractive than other alternatives.

Subsidies instead risk prolonging the life of an aging infrastructure and encouraging expensive new projects that have uncertain returns. They also support export strategies which are unlikely to be sustained over time.

What appears politically appealing in the short-term could prove to be economically counterproductive.

These are the opinions of the columnist, an author for.

You like this column? Check out Open Interest, your new essential source for global financial commentary. Follow ROI on LinkedIn, X and X.

Listen to the Morning Bid podcast daily on Apple, Spotify or the app. Subscribe to the Morning Bid podcast and hear journalists discussing the latest news in finance and markets 7 days a weeks.

(source: Reuters)