Section 202(c) – New emergency orders under a rarely used 1940s authority are being used to keep coal plants running—raising legal and reliability concerns for America’s power grid.
Coal is back in the spotlight, but the way it’s being supported is drawing sharp scrutiny from people who study electricity planning and power reliability.
The federal government has relied on a little-used emergency tool from the 1940s—Section 202(c)—23 times in the 1940s. then almost never in later decades.. In the first Trump and Biden administrations. the Department of Energy used that authority 12 times. typically in response to requests from utilities or grid operators that needed short-term permission to operate plants temporarily above emissions limits.
That pattern has changed since Trump returned to office in 2025.. The new wave of 202(c) orders. beginning in May 2025 with the JH Campbell plant in Michigan. appears to be aimed less at day-to-day emergency operations and more at preventing coal facilities from shutting down.. Importantly. the latest orders were described as not being sought by the plant owners—an indication that the emergency authority is being used in a different way than utilities and regulators normally would.
Misryoum reporting around the policy shift points to a core tension: electricity systems rely on long-term resource adequacy planning. transmission coordination. and state-level decisions about how to replace retiring plants.. When emergency powers are used to override that process. it can undermine the assumptions that grid planners. utilities. and regional transmission organizations build into multi-year decisions.. In Misryoum’s framing of the criticism. the argument is not simply about whether coal can operate. but about whether an emergency mechanism designed for urgent circumstances is being repurposed for strategic. longer-horizon outcomes.
A concrete example is JH Campbell, which Consumers Energy operates.. The utility had planned to close the plant and replace it with a combination of a natural gas facility and renewables already in service.. But the emergency orders shift that timeline and force the system to keep relying on a coal unit that was. according to the plant’s history and operating profile. already on a retirement path.
Misryoum’s comparison to everyday life captures the practical feeling behind the debate: it’s like being told you must keep driving an older car that runs less cleanly and costs more. even after you’ve bought a newer one.. For grid operators. the equivalent isn’t just environmental concern—it’s cost. reliability tradeoffs. and the complexity of scheduling generation. fuel. and transmission capacity.
JH Campbell began operations in 1960 and has a summer generating capacity of 1,331 megawatts.. In 2024. it emitted about 8.9 million tons of carbon dioxide. placing it among the highest-emitting coal plants in the country based on federal Energy Information Administration data.. Its fuel supply also ties the plant’s fate to major coal mining operations.. Regulatory filings describe that last year its coal came from two of the country’s largest mines—North Antelope Rochelle Mine and Black Thunder—both located in Wyoming and owned by Peabody Energy and Core Natural Resources. respectively.
That linkage matters because power-sector decisions rarely stay confined to a single smokestack.. Extending a coal plant’s life affects contracts, logistics, and the broader investment signals to utilities, developers, and equipment suppliers.. It can also shift how quickly states and regions can integrate low-carbon generation. because every additional year of coal operation competes with the schedule for retirements. upgrades. and new capacity.
Misryoum’s analysis of the grid planning implications is straightforward: long-term reliability depends on predictable transitions.. When emergency authority becomes a tool for extended operation—especially if it is not driven by the plant owner’s request—planners may lose confidence in the stability of timelines they use to assess risk.. That can ripple outward into fuel procurement decisions. maintenance scheduling. and the pace at which transmission and generation investments are justified.
There’s also a legal and governance dimension.. Section 202(c) is framed as emergency authority. and critics argue it was not designed to function as a substitute for the normal planning and permitting process.. If that interpretation holds. the administration’s approach could face legal challenges. not only over the specific orders but over how emergency powers are being interpreted for industrial policy goals.
Even for readers who don’t follow energy law. the bottom line is easy to understand: the electricity system can handle change. but it prefers change through established planning channels.. Misryoum suggests the central question now is whether the country is using an emergency lever for short-term fixes—or whether it is reshaping the long-term energy future with tools built for exceptional moments.
Artemis II crew endurance: 10 days together tested like an office job
Master of chaos wins $3M math prize for ‘blowing up’ equations
Artemis II crew completes record-breaking Moon tour and sees ‘unreal’ eclipse