Free cookie consent management tool by TermsFeed

States, enviro groups fight Trump plan to keep dirty power plants going

Jul 10, 2025
Written by
Jeff St. John
In collaboration with
canarymedia.com
States, enviro groups fight Trump plan to keep dirty power plants going

In late spring, the Department of Energy ordered two aging and costly fossil-fueled power plants that were on the verge of shutting down to stay open. The agency claimed that the moves were necessary to prevent the power grid from collapsing — and that it has the power to force the plants to stay open even if the utilities, state regulators, and grid operators managing them say that no such emergency exists.

More of these orders could be on the way. The DOE published a report this week, in response to one of the ​“Beautiful Clean Coal” executive orders issued by President Donald Trump in April, that lays out the case for Energy Secretary Chris Wright, a former gas industry executive who has denied there is a climate change crisis, to demand that more fossil-fueled plants remain open past their scheduled closures.

But state regulators, regional grid operators, environmental groups, and consumer groups are pushing back on the notion that the grids in question even need these interventions — and are challenging the legality of the DOE’s stay-open orders.

Last month, state utility regulators and environmental groups filed rehearing requests with the DOE, demanding that it reconsider emergency orders to force the J.H. Campbell coal plant in Michigan and the Eddystone oil and gas-burning plant in Pennsylvania to stay open through the summer.

The DOE claimed that the threat of large-scale grid blackouts forced its hand. But state utility regulators, environmental groups, consumer advocates, and energy experts say that careful analysis from the plant’s owners, state regulators, regional grid operators, and grid reliability experts had determined both plants could be safely closed.

These groups argue that clean energy, not fossil fuels, are the true solution to the country’s grid challenges — even if the ​“big, beautiful” bill signed by Trump last week will make those resources more expensive to build. Some of the environmental organizations challenging DOE’s orders have pledged to take their case to federal court if necessary.

“We need to get more electrons on the grid. We need those to be clean, reliable, and affordable,” said Robert Routh, Pennsylvania climate and energy policy director for the Natural Resources Defense Council, one of the groups demanding that DOE reconsider its orders. Keeping J.H. Campbell and Eddystone open ​“results in the exact opposite. It’s costly, harmful, unnecessary, and unlawful.”

Taking on the DOE’s grid emergency claims

The groups challenging the DOE’s J.H. Campbell and Eddystone stay-open orders point out that the agency is using a power originally designed to protect the grid against unanticipated emergencies, including during wartime, but without proving that such an emergency is underway.

“This authority that the Department of Energy is acting under — Section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act — is a very tailored emergency authority,” said Caroline Reiser, NRDC senior attorney for climate and energy. ​“Congress intentionally wrote it only to be usable in specific, narrow, short-term emergencies. This is not that.”

For decades, the DOE has used its Section 202(c) power sparingly, and only in response to requests from utilities or grid operators to waive federal air pollution regulations or other requirements in moments when the grid faces imminent threats like widespread power outages, Reiser said.

But the DOE’s orders for Eddystone and J.H. Campbell were not spurred by requests from state regulators or regional grid operators. In fact, the orders caught those parties by surprise.

They also came mere days before the plants were set to close down and after years of effort to ensure their closure wouldn’t threaten grid reliability. J.H. Campbell was scheduled to close in May under a plan that has been in the works since 2021 as part of a broader agreement between utility Consumers Energy and state regulators, and which was approved by the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO), the entity that manages grid reliability across Michigan and 14 other states.

“The plant is really old, unreliable, extremely polluting, and extremely expensive,” Reiser said. ​“Nobody is saying that this plant is needed or is going to be beneficial for any reliability purposes.”

To justify its stay-open order, the DOE cited reports from the North American Electric Reliability Corp. (NERC), a nonprofit regulatory authority that includes utilities and grid operators in the U.S. and Canada. NERC found MISO is at higher risk of summertime reliability problems than other U.S. grid regions, but environmental groups argue in their rehearing request that the DOE has ​“misrepresented the reports on which it relies,” and that Consumers Energy, Michigan regulators, and MISO have collectively shown closing the plant won’t endanger grid reliability.

Eddystone, which had operated only infrequently over the past few years, also went through a rigorous process with mid-Atlantic grid operator PJM Interconnection to ensure its closure wouldn’t harm grid reliability. The DOE’s reason for keeping that plant open is based on a report from PJM that states the grid operator might need to ask utility customers to use less power if it faces extreme conditions this summer — an even scantier justification than what the agency cited in its J.H. Campbell order, Reiser said.

As long as the DOE continues to take the position that it can issue emergency stay-open orders to any power plant it decides to, these established methods for managing plant closures and fairly allocating costs will be thrown into disarray, she said.

“We have a system of competitive energy markets in the United States that is successful in keeping the lights on and maintaining reliability the vast, vast majority of the time,” Reiser said. ​“The Department of Energy stepping in and using a command-and-control system interferes with those markets.”

Utility regulators from MISO states including Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin made a similar argument in their rehearing request to the DOE. ​“This expansive use of emergency powers sets a troubling precedent, enabling intervention in routine, state-approved planning decisions without an actual crisis,” they wrote. ​“Such preemptive action risks undermining the credibility of future emergency orders, distorting market signals, and eroding the statutory balance between federal and state authority.”

Dan Scripps, chair of the Michigan Public Service Commission, highlighted the years of work that went into enabling the J.H. Campbell plant to safely close, and the hundreds of millions of dollars that replacing it with fossil gas, solar, and battery resources would save.

“For DOE to substitute its judgment of what’s necessary for the work that’s done by the states and the regional grid operators is something that a large number of states of different political makeups find most troubling,” he said.

A double whammy on costs for utility customers

Forcing aging and expensive power plants to stay open past their long-planned retirement dates also threatens to drive up costs for utility customers at a time when energy prices are already set to rise due to GOP policies. Think tank Energy Innovation forecasts the megabill passed by congressional Republicans last week will lead to a 25% increase in wholesale electricity prices by 2030, as cuts to tax credits stifle investment in solar, wind, and battery projects and force power grids to rely on older, costlier resources.

This week’s DOE report ​“is another attempt to push the false narrative that our country’s energy future depends upon decades-old coal- and gas-plants, rather than clean renewables,” Greg Wannier, senior attorney at the Sierra Club, said in a statement. ​“The only energy crisis faced by the American public is the catastrophic increase in costs that the Trump Administration is forcing on the country’s ratepayers.”

Coal has fallen from nearly half U.S. generation capacity in 2011 to just 15% last year, and more than 120 U.S. coal plants are expected to close over the next five years. Coal industry groups and many Republicans blame state climate regulations for that trend. But energy experts agree that the primary driver is that coal plants are unable to provide power at prices that can compete with fossil gas or renewables.

Aging power plants like J.H. Campbell and Eddystone, which were built roughly 60 years ago, are among the most expensive to run — one of the main reasons why those two were both slated for retirement. Forcing them to restart and stay open for three months on the eve of their planned closures involves additional costs to secure new fuel contracts, undertake deferred maintenance, and rehire workers.

Utility customers in the Midwest and mid-Atlantic grid regions those plants are connected to will now bear all of those costs. While the total dollar amount has yet to be calculated, it could run into the tens of millions for each plant, or as much as $100 million for J.H. Campbell, Scripps told reporters in June.

Under its Section 202(c) authority, the DOE doesn’t have to deal with the costs its emergency orders incur, said Clara Summers, campaign manager for the Citizens Utility Board, an Illinois-based utility customer watchdog group. Instead, it gets to delegate the method of recovering those expenses to grid operators and regulators.

But the DOE has failed to show that keeping those plants open will benefit customers, which puts those entities in a bind.

“There is a standard in ratemaking that costs should be prudently incurred,” Summers said. ​“Since these costs are manufactured emergencies and are not prudently incurred, they are not just and reasonable.”

That’s the argument that environmental and consumer watchdog groups have made in filings with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the agency tasked with overseeing the U.S. power grid. The groups have asked FERC to reject plans to recover costs from DOE’s J.H. Campbell and Eddystone orders on the grounds that the DOE has failed to show how keeping the plants open will benefit consumers.

“What’s especially frustrating about that is that we already have capacity markets that are there to make sure that we have enough electricity, and consumers already pay for that,” Summers said. Those costs to utility customers are rising dramatically in PJM, where years of backlogged interconnection processes have prevented new solar, wind, and battery projects from coming online to help replace power plants being closed. MISO also saw prices spike in its most recent capacity auction.

The whole function of those markets is to ensure we have enough electricity — and those markets procure enough electricity,” Summers said. ​“This is something PJM agrees with, that MISO agrees with, that NERC agrees with.”

The DOE has 30 days from when the rehearing requests were filed to open a review of its stay-open orders, Reiser said. If the DOE doesn’t issue an order within that time, ​“it basically opens up the option for us to go to court.”

The DOE has never used its Section 202(c) authority in this way before, which means it has never been challenged in court on the issues at hand, Reiser said.

But ​“the fact that there are related executive orders kind of directing the Department of Energy to do these things doesn’t change the basic standards of how our legal system works and how courts interpret statutes,” she added. ​“No matter the reasoning, they still have to comply with the law.”

Recent News

Weekly newsletter

No spam. Just the interesting articles in your inbox every week.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
In collaboration with
canarymedia.com
>