Over the last two decades, utilities have closed hundreds of coal-fired power plants in favor of cheaper options like wind, solar and natural gas. The shift has cut U.S. carbon emissions and air pollution.

But since returning to office, the administration has issued emergency orders to keep eight coal units operating past their planned retirement dates, arguing that their closure would raise power bills and threaten grid stability. Environmental groups and several states have challenged the orders, saying the retirements are part of a planned transition, not a crisis.

Now, the administration is also facing pushback from two Colorado utilities, which say the federal government’s order is both unnecessary and unconstitutional.

  • Corporal_Punishment@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    Maybe I’m missing something, but what exactly is stopping the owners just, you know, not keeping it running?

    Give all the workers a 4 week paid holiday. Stop paying for coal shipments.

    If the government want to keep it running I’m sure they can find a few hundred people trained and qualified to keep a coal power plant operating…

    • MimicJar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Weirdly the law.

      The federal government may have some level of legal jurisdiction. If the power company stops running the coal plant, in potential violation, they may incur fines or worse. In your example it could be argued as criminal/willful negligence.

      Since the federal government is a powerful entity, the power companies have decided it is cheaper to just follow the potentially legal directive until the matter is settled on court. In fact their argument is that they have to charge their customers twice, so the cost for them is actually fairly minimal because they’re just directly passing the cost on.

      I don’t know the specifics of the language being used here, but as an example let’s say the law is, “In cases of emergency, the federal government may require power companies to keep their plants open.” A reasonable law. Except “emergency” isn’t defined. So we go to the courts to determine what is reasonable, which takes long time.

      • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        And the courts keep issuing rulings that skirt around what an “emegency” is. They just seem unwilling to touch it, it’s so ridiculous.