In a bold move to resuscitate the struggling U.S. coal industry, President Donald Trump is set to issue an executive order directing the Pentagon to procure electricity from coal-fired power plants. This initiative aims to leverage federal purchasing power to sustain coal operations, framing it as a matter of national security and energy independence. The plan includes agreements for the military to buy power directly from coal facilities, potentially injecting new life into a sector battered by competition from natural gas and renewables.
And this move comes alongside the repeal of the Obama-era climate rulings that have cost U.S. taxpayers billions. Trump Set to Repeal Landmark Climate Finding in Gigantic Regulatory Rollback
According to recent reporting, the order invokes the Defense Production Act to prioritize coal in military energy needs, with the goal of preventing plant closures and maintaining domestic fuel supplies.
This comes amid broader efforts by the Trump administration to roll back environmental regulations and support fossil fuels, including delays on coal plant retirements and emergency extensions for operations like Consumers Energy’s JH Campbell plant in Michigan.
Proponents argue it will stabilize the grid and protect jobs in coal-dependent regions, but critics highlight the higher costs of coal compared to alternatives like natural gas and renewables, which could strain federal budgets.
The Deeper Story: Challenges Beyond Policy Support
While the announcement has sparked optimism among coal producers, a closer look reveals significant hurdles. A compelling analysis from energy analyst Shanaka Anslem Perera on X highlights the real-world complications of reviving coal. Perera points to the Centralia coal plant in Washington, which was ordered to continue operations in December 2025 but remains idle due to a lack of skilled staff, buyers, and even coal supplies. This case exemplifies broader issues: an aging workforce, with 80% of utility firms having over 25% of employees over 55, and a drastic drop in mining jobs from 92,000 to 45,000 over recent years.
Perera argues that Trump’s aggressive intervention—invoking DPA 303 for Pentagon coal purchases—overlooks critical bottlenecks like exploded lead times for large power transformers (now 128-210 weeks) and the irretrievable loss of operational knowledge. Interestingly, he suggests the true value in coal plants lies not in burning coal but in their existing grid connections, which are prime real estate for conversions to data centers or other high-demand facilities. Examples include the 2,000 MW Conesville plant in Ohio, already being repurposed for data centers. With 120 coal plants slated for closure in the next five years, the opportunity is in “long the separation of asset from liability”—treating coal sites as infrastructure plays rather than commodity bets.
This perspective aligns with market realities: despite policy boosts, U.S. coal production is projected to decline to 520 million short tons in 2026 from 531 million in 2025, driven by rising renewable adoption and utility coal inventories.
Exports may see a marginal 1% uptick, fueled by metallurgical coal shipments, but overall demand for thermal coal in power generation is expected to drop to 16% of U.S. electricity share.
Key Coal Companies and Investment Potential
The policy could provide a short-term lift to major U.S. coal producers, particularly those with thermal and metallurgical operations. Here’s a rundown of prominent players, based on current industry data:
|
Company
|
Ticker
|
Focus
|
Key Operations
|
Market Cap (Approx., as of Early 2026)
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Peabody Energy
|
BTU
|
Thermal & Met Coal
|
Wyoming, Illinois Basin
|
$3-4B
|
|
Arch Resources
|
ARCH
|
Met & Thermal Coal
|
Wyoming, West Virginia, Colorado
|
$2-3B
|
|
CONSOL Energy
|
CEIX
|
High-BTU Coal
|
Pennsylvania, Exports to Asia/Europe
|
$3B+
|
|
Alliance Resource Partners
|
ARLP
|
Thermal Coal
|
Illinois Basin, Appalachia
|
$3B
|
|
Warrior Met Coal
|
HCC
|
Met Coal
|
Alabama (Blue Creek Mine)
|
$3-4B
|
|
Ramaco Resources
|
METC
|
Met Coal
|
Appalachia (Kentucky, West Virginia)
|
$1-2B
|
|
Alpha Metallurgical Resources
|
AMR
|
Met Coal
|
Appalachia
|
$4-5B
|
|
Hallador Energy
|
HNRG
|
Thermal Coal
|
Indiana
|
~$900M
|
|
Natural Resource Partners
|
NRP
|
Coal Royalties
|
Various U.S. Regions
|
$1-2B
|
These firms dominate U.S. production, with the “big three” (Peabody, Arch, CONSOL) accounting for over half.
Are they good investments? The answer is nuanced. Coal stocks have shown volatility, with gains up to 200% in 2025 tied to rare earths pivots and policy hype, but recent pullbacks reflect ongoing challenges.
Trump’s order has spotlighted miners like AMR, which could benefit from government support.
Producers express cautious optimism for 2026, with many filling sales books into 2027 amid regulatory rollbacks.
However, earnings estimates for the industry have declined 26% to $3.31 per share for 2026, signaling headwinds.
Low-cost met coal producers like Warrior Met (HCC), Peabody (BTU), and Ramaco (METC) are positioned to weather the storm better, thanks to export demand and expansions like Blue Creek.
Perera’s thesis suggests long-term alpha in real estate arbitrage over pure coal plays, as conversions to data centers could unlock value. Investors should weigh national security-driven demand against rising costs and the energy transition—coal remains more expensive than alternatives, potentially limiting sustained rallies.
This is not investment advice; consult professionals.
Job Locations and Economic Impact
The policy could preserve or create jobs in coal-heavy regions, where mining employs about 41,000 nationwide—a far cry from historical peaks but concentrated in key areas.
Half of U.S. coal jobs are in just 25 counties across nine states: Wyoming, West Virginia, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Alabama, Virginia, and New Mexico.
In these locales, miners often represent 5% or more of the workforce.
Active job hotspots include:
Wyoming (Powder River Basin): Gillette, Point of Rocks—home to large surface mines like Black Thunder.
West Virginia (Appalachia): Cameron, Morgantown, Eskdale, Cyclone—underground operations dominant.
Pennsylvania: Mahanoy City, Bailey Mine—focus on high-BTU coal.
Alabama: Brookwood, Jasper—met coal hubs like Warrior’s mines.
Utah: Orangeville, Salina—Sufco and other operations.
Illinois: Coulterville—Illinois Basin thermal coal.
Kentucky: Various Appalachian sites, including Ramaco’s expansions.
Companies like Wolverine Fuels (Utah), GMS Mine Repair (West Virginia), and Warrior Met (Alabama) are hiring for roles from miners to operators.
If the Pentagon’s purchases materialize, these regions could see job stability, but workforce shortages and training needs (2-5 years) pose risks, as noted in Perera’s analysis.
Looking Ahead
Trump’s coal revival push is a high-stakes gamble to “keep them alive,” but structural issues like talent gaps and grid economics may limit its success. For the energy sector, it underscores the tension between legacy fuels and modern demands. Stay tuned to Energy News Beat for updates on how this unfolds.
Sources: indeed.com, route-fifty.com, nasdaq.com, nasdaq.com, VectorVest,
Get your CEO on the podcast: https://sandstoneassetmgmt.com/media/
Is oil and gas right for your portfolio? https://sandstoneassetmgmt.com/invest-in-oil-and-gas/
Be the first to comment