President Donald Trump on Thursday announced a $700 million federal commitment to coal power infrastructure, invoking the Cold War-era Defense Production Act to channel funds toward preserving existing plants and constructing new facilities across the country, including in Tennessee.
Why It Matters
The announcement represents one of the most significant federal investments in coal energy in recent years, affecting power generation and energy employment across at least 10 states. Tennessee is among the states slated to receive a portion of the Defense Production Act funding, placing it at the center of an ongoing national debate over the future of domestic energy production.
The administration has pointed to rising utility costs — claiming an 18 percent increase during Trump’s second term — as justification for shoring up baseload power capacity through coal. With national gasoline prices averaging $4.24 per gallon as of Thursday, energy affordability has become a key pressure point for the White House.
What Happened
Trump made the announcement from the Oval Office, joined by Energy Secretary Chris Wright, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, and the governors of Wyoming and West Virginia, Mark Gordon and Patrick Morrissey, respectively.
The federal package is structured across two primary funding streams: $425 million in Defense Production Act allocations directed at coal plants in 10 states, and $200 million in Department of Energy grants for new coal development. An additional $75 million has been authorized for a coal export terminal in Oakland, California.
The administration stated the initiative is intended to preserve 13 existing power plants and fund construction of 2 new ones — one in Alaska and one in West Virginia. A shuttered plant in Maryland is also targeted for restart. Trump said the combined effort would protect roughly 14,000 coal-sector jobs.
The 10 states receiving Defense Production Act coal funding include West Virginia, Kentucky, North Carolina, Indiana, Tennessee, Arkansas, Arizona, Oklahoma, North Dakota, and Wisconsin.
By the Numbers
- $700 million — total federal coal infrastructure commitment
- $425 million — Defense Production Act funds for plants in 10 states
- $200 million — Department of Energy grants for new coal projects
- $75 million — funding for Oakland coal export terminal
- 45 — number of coal plants the administration says are currently operating that would otherwise have closed
- 14,000 — coal jobs the administration estimates the initiative will preserve
Energy Secretary Wright pointed to the administration’s broader energy record, saying, “If you look at our efforts across the whole government, so far 45 coal plants are open today that would not be open.” The administration attributed those results to actions taken over the previous 18 months.
Zoom Out
The announcement fits into a wider pattern of Trump administration efforts to reassert fossil fuels as a cornerstone of U.S. energy policy, reversing course from Biden-era priorities that directed federal spending heavily toward renewables and grid modernization. The Defense Production Act, typically associated with wartime manufacturing, is being applied here to frame energy supply as a national security matter.
Environmental groups pushed back immediately. Lena Moffitt of Evergreen Action called the expenditure misguided, arguing that the coal industry’s structural decline makes federal intervention futile. Opposition is expected to continue through regulatory and legal channels.
Tennessee’s inclusion in the funding map is notable given the state’s parallel push to expand energy infrastructure for growing industries. A recent Tennessee bill gives data centers the ability to self-power with limited regulatory oversight, reflecting how the state is navigating increased electricity demand from multiple directions. Meanwhile, southern and midsized cities have led national population gains between 2024 and 2025, adding further pressure on regional power grids.
What’s Next
Implementation of the Defense Production Act directive and the Department of Energy grant program will move through the relevant federal agencies. Environmental organizations have signaled opposition, and legal challenges are possible, particularly around the Oakland export terminal. Congress may also weigh in, as the administration’s use of emergency production authorities for energy policy has drawn scrutiny from members on both sides of the aisle.
State-level officials in the 10 recipient states are expected to coordinate with federal agencies on project timelines and permitting in the months ahead.