Environmental Groups Challenge Trump Administration Order to Keep Florida Coal Plant Running

Advocacy groups said the order failed to establish an energy emergency. The Department of Energy partly attributed one to anticipated demand associated with data centers.

Share This Article

A view of the Stanton Energy Center, a coal-fired power plant in Orlando, Fla. Credit: Paul Hennessy/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images
A view of the Stanton Energy Center, a coal-fired power plant in Orlando, Fla. Credit: Paul Hennessy/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

Share This Article

The Trump administration is facing a new legal challenge over an emergency order keeping a Florida coal-fired power plant, which had been scheduled for retirement, in operation.

The motion, filed by the Environmental Defense Fund, Sierra Club and Earthjustice, on behalf of Florida Rising, a grassroots group representing communities of color, asks the Department of Energy to reconsider the order, arguing it fails to show that an emergency actually exists. The groups also say the order exceeds the department’s statutory authority and violates the National Environmental Policy Act.

The Department of Energy issued the order in June. The Orlando Utilities Commission (OUC) had planned to move one of two coal-fired plants at the Stanton Energy Center into a state of “extended cold shutdown” by the end of May, as part of a 2020 plan to transition to renewable energy and achieve net zero emissions by 2050. OUC said at the time of the emergency order that it would comply but declined to provide further comment for this article. It is the state’s second-largest municipal utility, serving more than 288,000 customers in Orange and Osceola counties.

“It’s a somewhat absurd idea that OUC needs to keep this plant operating,” said Bradley Marshall, senior attorney at Earthjustice. “We have some of the highest generation capacity reserves in the nation. Any kind of liability assessment generally puts Florida in the lowest category of priority, given how many power plants we already have in the state.”

Newsletters

We deliver climate news to your inbox like nobody else. Every day or once a week, our original stories and digest of the web’s top headlines deliver the full story, for free.

The order attributed an energy emergency in Florida to a shortage of facilities and anticipated growing demand from a burgeoning data center industry in the state. It also noted a February cold snap that strained OUC’s resources and forecasts for an especially hot summer. The order took effect June 4 and remains in place through Sept. 1.

“The Energy Department remains proud of it’s [sic] emergency orders that have saved lives and prevented blackouts during periods of peak electricity demand,” according to a statement provided to Inside Climate News.

But the advocacy groups say the continued operation of the coal-fired plant will increase air pollution that is harmful to those living around the facility on the outskirts of Orlando. The groups also say keeping the plant running will lead to higher energy costs for Floridians, further burdening underserved communities that are especially vulnerable to hotter temperatures, rising seas and more damaging storms as the global climate warms.

“There is also an affordability crisis too in the state, including in regards to electricity bills,” Marshall said. “The idea that low-income communities should be paying more to keep this uneconomical plant online as some kind of backup power for the investor-owned utilities is kind of nuts.”

The Trump administration faces similar challenges in Colorado, Indiana, Michigan and Washington, where emergency orders also have reversed plans to wind down coal plants. Although the orders are issued under a law designed for temporary emergencies such as weather events, the Trump administration has repeatedly renewed them, the advocacy groups say.

The advocacy groups say OUC’s financial reports indicate that in recent years coal has been its most expensive fuel per megawatt-hour, costing more than natural gas or solar. OUC had planned to replace the coal-fired plant with natural gas and solar resources.

“What is really striking about this particular order from the DOE, in contrast to some of the others, is that there was no justifiable need,” said Adam Kurland, attorney for U.S. Clean Energy at the Environmental Defense Fund. “This is just a way of kowtowing to an industry that for all intents and purposes is failing to operate within the marketplace, because it is more expensive, and most customers do not want coal power in their homes. They prefer clean energy sources.”

About This Story

Perhaps you noticed: This story, like all the news we publish, is free to read. That’s because Inside Climate News is a 501c3 nonprofit organization. We do not charge a subscription fee, lock our news behind a paywall, or clutter our website with ads. We make our news on climate and the environment freely available to you and anyone who wants it.

That’s not all. We also share our news for free with scores of other media organizations around the country. Many of them can’t afford to do environmental journalism of their own. We’ve built bureaus from coast to coast to report local stories, collaborate with local newsrooms and co-publish articles so that this vital work is shared as widely as possible.

Two of us launched ICN in 2007. Six years later we earned a Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting, and now we run the oldest and largest dedicated climate newsroom in the nation. We tell the story in all its complexity. We hold polluters accountable. We expose environmental injustice. We debunk misinformation. We scrutinize solutions and inspire action.

Donations from readers like you fund every aspect of what we do. If you don’t already, will you support our ongoing work, our reporting on the biggest crisis facing our planet, and help us reach even more readers in more places?

Please take a moment to make a tax-deductible donation. Every one of them makes a difference.

Thank you,

Share This Article