Coal country races to put up shields against climate plan

Coal’s slow downfall is gaining momentum across the U.S. as clean energy becomes cheaper and wins widespread support, but lawmakers in mining states from Wyoming to West Virginia are determined to fight back with a series of roadblocks to President Joe Biden’s plan to cut greenhouse-gas emissions.

Seeking to prolong the life span of an industry that’s vital to local economies, at least five states are seeking to pass legislation that would give them weapons such as bigger hurdles to shut coalfired plants, a war chest for potential legal battles, more power to state regulators over utilities, tax cuts and cheaper state insurance for power stations.

The race to shield coal country from an energy transition that Biden contends will generate jobs and wealth in everything from solar-panel manufacturing to wind-power generation highlights the political complexity of the shift to renewables. Even some Democrats in coal-producing states support the efforts to protect people’s livelihoods and the funding of schools and other public services in areas that derive income from the dirtiest fossil fuel. Meanwhile, utilities say the measures will drive up costs for ratepayers, while environmental groups say they’re only slowing, not stopping, the eventual move away from coal.

“It’s not planning for the future,” said Dennis Wamsted, an analyst for the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis. “It’s protecting the past.”

In Colstrip, a town in eastern Montana founded by the Northern Pacific Railway

in 1924 to provide coal for steam locomotives, a power plant supplied by local mines has long been crucial to the area’s economy. That’s why Mark Sweeney, a Democratic state senator, supports proposals aimed specifically at keeping it open. Even though he recognizes climate change is a serious issue and that his stance makes him an outlier in his party, he says he worries about the devastating impact of a shutdown to the community. If it shuts, “it’s a ghost town,” he said.

Sweeney, who hopes the Colstrip plant can run for at least another 10 years, also argues that few emissions are produced delivering coal from the nearby mine, and that’s much more efficient than shipping the fuel to power plants in other states or across the world.

“The last one that should be shut down is the one that’s sitting on a coal pile,” he said by phone. “We have a whole lot of coal.”

In Wyoming, the country’s biggest coal producer, the Republican-dominated Legislature is considering a bill that would require the Public Service Commission to assume that early retirement of coal-fired power plants isn’t in the state’s best interest, making it harder for utilities to shut facilities they’ve determined aren’t economic. Another proposal would set aside half a million dollars for legal challenges against other states that pass laws restricting the use of coal.

One of the goals is to protect mining jobs that underpin the local economy, said Eric Barlow, a Republican state representative who cosponsored some of the legislation. His district in the northeastern part of the state is in the heart of coal country, where output has plummeted in the past decade as utilities started using more renewables and natural gas.

“There’s no doubt we’re in a transition,” said Barlow, who raises cattle, sheep and yak on his ranch. “You can imagine what that does for jobs in this community.”

Republicans dominate the state’s government, controlling both chambers and holding the governor’s office. The effort is supported by the governor and at least some of the legislation is likely to become law, said Travis Deti, executive director of the Wyoming Mining Association.

“Wyoming is pulling out all the stops to try to save the coal industry,” Deti said.

The proposals don’t sit well with utilities, which typically seek to produce power at the lowest cost through a mix of generating assets. When a plant no longer fits into the equation — because maintenance costs go up at aging facilities, or another asset might have lower fuel costs or a coal site may need to install expensive pollutioncontrol systems — then closing it will help ensure ratepayers don’t pay unnecessarily higher costs.

That’s what’s likely to happen if the state assumes more control over this decision, said David Eskelsen, a spokesman for Rocky Mountain Power, a PacifiCorp utility that operates four coal-fired power plants in Wyoming. The company converted part of one of them to gas last year.

“Legislative attempts to force these plants to stay open does raise concerns about the price of electricity customers will have to pay,” he said.