# U.S. Coal Industry Trends

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/crs%3AR48587

## Record

- **Collection:** Congressional research report
- **Document type:** Reports
- **Published:** November 14, 2025
- **Citation:** R48587

## Text

U.S. Coal Industry Trends
Updated November 14, 2025

Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
R48587

SUMMARY

U.S. Coal Industry Trends
Since 2008, the U.S. coal industry has seen a decline in the amount of coal mined and
consumed—although mining efficiency has improved. The industry’s U.S. employment has
declined 92% over a century. U.S. coal consumption and production peaked in 2007 and 2008,
respectively. Coal’s decline is due in part to technological improvements in the production of
other fuels, which have led to more competitive commodity prices. The coal trends are true for
all coal, including steam coal used at electric power plants and metallurgical coal used for steel
production.

R48587
November 14, 2025
Lexie Ryan
Analyst in Energy Policy

Consumption, production, employment, exports, and other coal industry trends are largely driven by industry decisions based
on market conditions. Likewise, increases in coal production on federal lands largely depend on interest from coal
developers. Executive actions favorable to the coal industry in the first Trump Administration did not reverse coal power
plant retirements, increase employment in the coal sector, or increase coal production. It remains to be seen whether actions
taken by the second Trump Administration and the 119 th Congress will impact coal power plant retirements and U.S. coal
production.

Production and Demand Trends
U.S. coal production and reserves are concentrated in certain areas. Montana and Wyoming together account for 37% of
reserves. Three-quarters of coal production in 2023 took place in five states (in order, Wyoming, West Virginia,
Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Montana). Significant coal production in two of these top-producing states occurs on federal
lands: Wyoming, the top coal-producing state, produced all of the coal located within the state on federal lands, and Montana,
which produced the fifth-most coal, produced over one-third of the coal located within the state on federal lands. Power
generation is the primary market for coal in the United States, accounting for over 90% of total consumption. Coal is also
used to produce iron and steel. Coal consumption peaked in 2007; by 2024, it had declined by 64%. Decline in overall coal
consumption is largely due to retirement of aging coal-fired power plants and a shift toward increased use of natural gas and,
to a lesser extent, renewable energy sources to generate electricity. In the broader U.S. energy context, coal accounted for
23% of primary energy consumption (for all uses) in the United States in 2000. In 2024, coal accounted for 8% of primary
energy consumption. Coal-fired power plants are retiring at a higher rate than other electricity generators, and the U.S.
Energy Information Administration projected in 2025 that annual coal consumption will continue to fall through 2050.

Policy Context and Legislative Considerations
P.L. 119-21, the FY2025 reconciliation law commonly known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, made changes to coal
leasing on federal land, including by

•
•
•

setting time limits for agency reviews that are included in the leasing and application process (Sec. 50201);
decreasing the royalty rate for producing and new federal coal leases through FY2034 (Sec. 50202);
requiring the Interior Secretary to make available for lease certain coal resources of at least 4 million
federal acres in identified regions within 90 days of enactment (Sec. 50203); and

•

authorizing the mining of federal coal subject to a previously approved mining plan for federal coal that is
located adjacent to coal reserves in state or private land (Sec. 50204).
Two introduced bills would further facilitate coal production on federal lands: H.R. 4068 would direct the Secretary of the
Interior to identify categorical exclusions that may increase federal coal production, and H.R. 280 would mandate approval of
certain coal leasing applications.
Other measures considered by the 119th Congress would support coal mining and projects and could delay retirement of coalfired power plants. H.R. 3015, as passed by the House, would establish in statute the National Coal Council (NCC), an
advisory group to the Department of Energy. The Trump Administration reinstated NCC in June 2025, and H.R. 3015 would
remove NCC’s re-charter requirement. Legislation has been introduced to address retiring power plants; some say that such
bills may support existing coal-fired power plants. For example, supporters of H.R. 1651 have stated that the bill would
prevent premature retirement of coal-fired power plants. Other Members of Congress have supported legislation that would
limit coal development or that otherwise signal opposition to coal. S.J.Res. 10 would have terminated the national emergency
relating to energy declared by the January 2025 Executive Order (E.O.) 14156, “Declaring a National Energy Emergency.”
E.O. 14156 directs executive departments and agencies to prioritize coal production and use, among other provisions.
Congressional Research Service

U.S. Coal Industry Trends

Contents
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1
Steam Coal and Met Coal ......................................................................................................... 1
U.S. Coal Reserves .......................................................................................................................... 2
U.S. Coal Production ....................................................................................................................... 2
Demand for U.S. Coal ..................................................................................................................... 3
U.S. Coal Consumption............................................................................................................. 4
Coal Exports .............................................................................................................................. 6
U.S. Coal Mining Employment ....................................................................................................... 8
U.S. Coal-Producing Industry ......................................................................................................... 9
Coal Policy: Recent Activity ......................................................................................................... 10
Legislation in the 119th Congress ............................................................................................ 10
Trump Administration Executive Actions ............................................................................... 13

Figures
Figure 1. Average Annual Prices of Coal and Natural Gas, 1990-2023 .......................................... 4
Figure 2. U.S. Coal Production and Consumption, 2000-2024 ....................................................... 5
Figure 3. Primary Energy Consumption by Source, 2000 and 2024 ............................................... 6
Figure 4. Coal Exports and Imports, 2000-2024 ............................................................................. 7
Figure 5. Coal Mining Employment, 1900-2023 ............................................................................ 8

Tables
Table 1. Leading U.S. Coal Producers and Percentage of U.S. Coal Production .......................... 10

Contacts
Author Information........................................................................................................................ 14

Congressional Research Service

U.S. Coal Industry Trends

Introduction
The second Trump Administration has taken several presidential actions that aim to support the
coal industry in the United States by increasing or promoting coal production and use. These
include multiple executive orders and presidential proclamations on energy supply and energy
policy, including one specifically on coal, titled “Reinvigorating America’s Beautiful Clean Coal
Industry and Amending Executive Order 14241.”1 In President Trump’s executive order titled
“Declaring a National Energy Emergency,” coal is named as one of the energy sources that the
executive departments and agencies are to prioritize for production.2 See the section “Trump
Administration Executive Actions” for more about the executive actions.
The U.S. coal industry has been in decline for decades.3 This decline is due in part to
technological improvements in the production of other fuels that have led to more competitive
commodity prices. The first Trump Administration made clear that it wanted to help revive the
coal industry. To that effect, it rolled back or initiated the reversal of several coal-related
regulations finalized under the Obama Administration.4 Around this time, three of the largest coal
producers emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Despite its decline, coal is expected to remain an essential component in the U.S. energy picture.
How big a role it may play remains an open question, though. The decline in coal’s consumption
and production has persisted despite the first Trump Administration’s policies. Congress is
debating whether to support or oppose the current Trump Administration’s policies.
This report discusses the current situation of U.S. coal and examines data trends from 2000 to
2024 (with selected data from earlier years); recent policy activity, including executive actions
and legislation from the 119th Congress; and what impact these policies may or may not have on
the coal industry.

Steam Coal and Met Coal
Steam coal and metallurgical coal are different grades of coal that are identified by their end uses.
Steam coal, also referred to as thermal coal, is used to generate steam for electrical power plants,
while metallurgical coal, also referred to as met coal or coking coal, is used for steel production.5
Met coal can be used for the same purposes as steam coal, but due to the scarcity of met coal, it
generally commands a higher price than steam coal.6 Coal that can be burned to generate
electricity, however, may not be appropriate to use as coking coal. Met coal typically has a lower
ash and sulfur content than steam coal to avoid contaminating coke made by heating the coal.7
1 Executive Order (E.O.) 14261, “Reinvigorating America’s Beautiful Clean Coal Industry and Amending Executive

Order 14241,” 90 Federal Register 15517, April 14, 2025.
2 E.O. 14156, “Declaring a National Energy Emergency,” 90 Federal Register 8433, January 29, 2025. Also see
Secretarial Order (S.O.) 3417, “Addressing the National Energy Emergency,” February 3, 2025, https://www.doi.gov/
document-library/secretary-order/so-3417-addressing-national-energy-emergency.
3 For more on this decline in the context of broader energy supply and use, see CRS Report R47980, U.S. Energy
Supply and Use: Background and Policy Primer, coordinated by Brent D. Yacobucci.
4 For example, in 2019 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency repealed the Clean Power Plan and promulgated new
guidelines for coal-fired power plants in the Affordable Clean Energy rule.
5 For more on metallurgical coal, see CRS Report R48635, Metallurgical Coal: Frequently Asked Questions,
coordinated by Lexie Ryan.
6 Jonathan Church and Mark Morey, “Reasons Behind the Price Premium for U.S. Metallurgical Coal Exports,” Today
in Energy, April 24, 2024, https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=61924.
7 Coke is a solid carbon material made by heating coal with a specific set of properties in the absence of oxygen.

Congressional Research Service

1

U.S. Coal Industry Trends

However, if a combination of properties from multiple types of coal can yield an acceptable coke
product, steam coal might provide a portion of this combination in a process called blending.
Unless steam or met coal is specified, this report discusses all coal, including both of these types.

U.S. Coal Reserves
The United States has the largest coal reserves and resources in the world.8 The U.S. Energy
Information Administration (EIA) estimated in 2023 that there were about 11 billion short tons of
recoverable domestic coal reserves, down from 12 billion short tons in 2022 and 17 billion short
tons in 2001.9 EIA defines recoverable coal reserves as the quantity of coal that can be mined
from reserves at producing mines; this definition excludes coal that is unavailable due to land use
restrictions. Recoverable coal reserves differ from the demonstrated reserve base, which includes
coal identified in public data that is technologically minable.10 The total demonstrated U.S.
reserve base in 2023 was estimated at 469 billion short tons, down from 503 billion short tons in
2000.11
U.S. coal reserves are concentrated in certain areas. EIA statistics show that almost half of U.S.
reserves are located in Western states, with Montana and Wyoming together accounting for
37%.12

U.S. Coal Production
The majority of coal from states in the Western Region13 is produced from surface mines (93%),
while the majority of coal from those states identified by EIA as in the Appalachian Region and in
the Interior Region is produced from underground mines (79% and 70%, respectively).14
8 U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Coal Reserves 2023, https://www.eia.gov/international/rankings/

world?pa=264&u=0&f=A&v=none&y=01%2F01%2F2023&ev=fals. For something to be categorized a reserve, it
must be reasonably certain that it can be recovered in the future from known resources under existing economic and
operating conditions. It must also be able to reach a market. Reserves are a subset of resources, which constitutes a
broader category.
9 EIA, U.S. Coal Reserves, released October 30, 2024, https://www.eia.gov/coal/reserves/. A short ton, a measurement
of weight often used in the United States, is 2,000 pounds. A metric ton, commonly used internationally, is about 2,200
pounds (1,000 kilograms).
10 Definitions for recoverable coal reserves and demonstrated reserve base are provided in the notes for “Table 15.
Recoverable Coal Reserves at Producing Mines, Estimated Recoverable Reserves, and Demonstrated Reserve Base by
Mining Method, 2023,” in EIA, Annual Coal Report 2023, October 2024, pp. 23-24, https://www.eia.gov/coal/annual/
pdf/acr.pdf.
11 Data for 2024 are not available at time of publication. EIA, Annual Coal Report 2023, October 2024, p. 23,
https://www.eia.gov/coal/annual/pdf/acr.pdf; and EIA, Coal Industry Annual 2000, p. 48, https://www.eia.gov/coal/
annual/archive/05842000.pdf.
12 See demonstrated reserve base data in “Table 15. Recoverable Coal Reserves at Producing Mines, Estimated
Recoverable Reserves, and Demonstrated Reserve Base by Mining Method, 2023,” in EIA, Annual Coal Report 2023,
October 2024, pp. 23-24, https://www.eia.gov/coal/annual/pdf/acr.pdf.
13 The Western Region includes Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Utah, Washington,
and Wyoming. EIA, “Coal-Producing Regions,” Glossary, accessed April 21, 2025, https://www.eia.gov/tools/
glossary/index.php?id=Coal-producing%20regions.
14 “Table 1. Coal Production and Number of Mines by State and Mine Type, 2023 and 2022,” in EIA, Annual Coal
Report 2023, October 2024, pp. 2-3, https://www.eia.gov/coal/annual/pdf/acr.pdf. The Appalachian Region includes
Alabama, Eastern Kentucky, Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia. The Interior
Region includes Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, and Western
Kentucky.

Congressional Research Service

2

U.S. Coal Industry Trends

Like coal reserves, U.S. coal production is highly concentrated in certain areas. According to
EIA, 41% of U.S. coal in 2023 was produced in Wyoming, while 15% came from West Virginia.15
The top five producing states—Wyoming, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Montana (in
order by share of production)—accounted for 75% of U.S. coal production in 2023.16 Significant
coal production in two of these top-producing states occurs on federal lands: Wyoming, the top
coal-producing state, produced all of the coal located within the state on federal lands, and
Montana, which produced the fifth-most coal, produced over one-third of the coal located within
the state on federal lands.17
Coal production has declined in recent years and is projected to continue declining. U.S. coal
production reached its highest level in 2008 (1.17 billion short tons) and remained strong through
2014 (at or near 1 billion short tons per year). Production declined 49% between 2014 and 2024.
EIA projections from 2025 show coal production continuing to decline through the 2020s and
maintaining at around 300 million short tons through the 2030s.18

Demand for U.S. Coal
The softening of demand for U.S. coal has been attributed to several developments: (1) utilities
opting for natural gas after prices for natural gas fell in 2008 and for a few years after (see Figure
1); (2) declining costs and increasing uptake of renewable energy options; (3) increasing
regulatory costs associated with coal-fired power plants; (4) the aging of the coal fleet; and, until
2021, (5) lower demand for U.S. coal exports. Demand for coal exports rose in 2023 and 2024,
reaching the highest levels since 2018. In 2024, EIA projected long-term demand growth in the
Asian coal market, but long-term penetration of U.S. coal exports into this market remained
uncertain.19

15 “Table 1. Coal Production and Number of Mines by State and Mine Type, 2023 and 2022,” in EIA, Annual Coal

Report 2023, October 2024, pp. 2-3, https://www.eia.gov/coal/annual/pdf/acr.pdf.
16
Data for 2024 are not available at time of publication. “Table 1. Coal Production and Number of Mines by State and
Mine Type, 2023 and 2022,” in EIA, Annual Coal Report 2023, October 2024, pp. 2-3, https://www.eia.gov/coal/
annual/pdf/acr.pdf.
17 For more on coal production on federal lands, see CRS Infographic IG10076, U.S. Coal Production & Federal
Lands, by Lexie Ryan. Coal production on lands associated with federally recognized Tribes is outside the scope of this
report. Production and revenue data are available from the Department of the Interior (DOI), Office of Natural
Resources Revenue (ONRR), at https://revenuedata.doi.gov/query-data/.
18 “Table 15. Coal Supply, Disposition, and Prices,” in EIA, Annual Energy Outlook 2025, April 2025,
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/. Based on EIA’s reference case scenario.
19 Jonathan Church, “U.S. Coal Exports Account for Larger Share of a Shrinking Market,” Today in Energy,
January 29, 2024, https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=61323.

Congressional Research Service

3

U.S. Coal Industry Trends

Figure 1. Average Annual Prices of Coal and Natural Gas, 1990-2023
(price of fuel delivered to electric utility plants, nominal USD per MMBtu)

Sources: For 1990-2001, see “Table 4.5. Receipts, Average Cost, and Quality of Fossil Fuels at Electric Utilities,
1990 Through 2001,” in U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Electric Power Annual 2001, March 2003.
For 2002-2012, see “Table 7.4. Weighted Average Cost of Fossil Fuels for the Electric Power Industry, 2002
Through 2012,” in EIA, Electric Power Annual 2012, December 2013. For 2013-2023, see “Table 7.4. Weighted
Average Cost of Fossil Fuels for the Electric Power Industry, 2013 Through 2023” in EIA, Electric Power Annual
2023, October 2024. Electric Power Annual reports for all years are available at https://www.eia.gov/electricity/
annual/.
Notes: Fuel cost is one of many cost factors for power plants. The year 1990 is the earliest year for which the
table is included in EIA’s annual electric power report. MMBtu = million British thermal units.

U.S. Coal Consumption
Coal consumption in the United States was consistently near or above 1 billion short tons per year
from 2000 (peaking in 2007 at 1.128 billion short tons) until 2012, when demand fell to 889
million short tons. As shown in Figure 2, consumption has declined further since 2012, reaching
411 million short tons in 2024, a decline of 64% since 2007. EIA projects annual coal
consumption to fall below 200 million short tons by 2050.20

20 “Table 15. Coal Supply, Disposition, and Prices,” in EIA, Annual Energy Outlook 2025, April 2025,

https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/. Based on EIA’s reference case scenario.

Congressional Research Service

4

U.S. Coal Industry Trends

Figure 2. U.S. Coal Production and Consumption, 2000-2024
(million short tons)

Sources: For 2000-2009, “Table 6.1. Coal Overview,” in U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Monthly
Energy Review, January 2011, p. 83, https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/archive/00351101.pdf. For 20102024, “Table 6.1. Coal Overview,” in EIA, Monthly Energy Review, March 2025, p. 123, https://www.eia.gov/
totalenergy/data/monthly/archive/00352503.pdf.
Note: U.S. coal production peaked in 2008 at 1,171.8 million short tons.

Electric power generation is the primary market for coal in the United States, accounting for over
90% of total consumption. Other end uses for coal include production of iron and steel.21
Demand for coal in the United States is experiencing a structural shift as natural gas and (to a
lesser extent) renewables replace coal for power generation. In 2016, natural gas overtook coal as
the number one energy source for power generation. This shift can also be seen by comparing the
data on primary energy consumption of fuels more broadly in 2000 and 2024 (see Figure 3).22
Coal-fired power plants, which are often older than other electricity generators, are retiring at a
higher rate than other kinds of plants, with 4.7% of the U.S. coal fleet planned for retirement in
2025 (compared to 0.5% of the natural gas fleet).23 This structural shift may mean long-term
reduced capacity for coal-fired electric generation.24 Thus, coal could make up a declining portion
of total U.S. energy consumption for years to come.

21 “Table 6.2. Coal Consumption by Sector,” in EIA, Monthly Energy Review, March 2025, p. 124,

https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/archive/00352503.pdf.
22 Comparing primary energy across different sources can be challenging due to assumptions and calculations that may
vary based on different technologies and applications. See CRS Report R48270, How Is Primary Energy Defined and
Used?, by Morgan Smith.
23 Office of Energy Statistics staff, “Planned Retirements of U.S. Coal-Fired Electric-Generating Capacity to Increase
in 2025,” Today in Energy, February 25, 2025, https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=64604.
24 The costs of modernizing older power plants to meet new regulatory requirements can be relatively high. EIA
projects many more U.S. coal-fired plants will be retired and replaced with natural gas and renewable energy facilities
as coal plants become too expensive to maintain or upgrade. Another consideration is the capacity factor (utilization) of
coal plants. As they are used less regularly (because renewables and natural gas outcompete them on cost), their
revenue and profits decrease. Operators may choose to retire an underutilized plant rather than maintain it.

Congressional Research Service

5

U.S. Coal Industry Trends

Figure 3. Primary Energy Consumption by Source, 2000 and 2024
(percent of total)

Source: “Table 1.3. Primary Energy Consumption by Source,” in U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA),
Monthly Energy Review, April 2025, p. 7, https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/archive/00352504.pdf.
Notes: These data are across all sectors, not only electricity generation. Petroleum is predominantly used in
transportation. Totals may not equal 100% due to rounding.

Coal Exports
The U.S. coal industry is trying to expand its overseas coal markets, particularly for steam coal to
Asia, to compensate for declining domestic demand.
U.S. coal is predominantly exported from seaport terminals. Norfolk, VA, exported the most U.S.
coal in 2024 (41.636 million short tons), followed by Baltimore, MD (25.709 million short tons);
New Orleans, LA (15.168 million short tons); Mobile, AL (12.440 million short tons); and
Seattle, WA (6.807 million short tons).25
All coal exports have risen each year since 2020 (see Figure 4), reflecting increasing exports to
countries in South America, Asia, and Africa. In 2024, the top five importers of U.S. coal were
India (23% of total U.S. coal exports), China (12%), Japan (8%), Brazil (8%), and the
Netherlands (7%).26 U.S. steam coal exports to Europe, which was the top regional destination for
U.S. coal exports until 2017, rose temporarily in 2022 and the first half of 2023, due to sanctions
on Russian coal—but in the first half of 2024, U.S. exports to Europe fell relative to the same
period in 2023.27

25 “Table 13. U.S. Coal Exports by Customs District,” in EIA, Quarterly Coal Report: October-December 2024, April

2025, https://www.eia.gov/coal/production/quarterly/.
26 “Table 7. U.S. Coal Exports,” in EIA, Quarterly Coal Report: October-December 2024, April 2025,
https://www.eia.gov/coal/production/quarterly/.
27 Jonathan Church, “U.S. Thermal Coal Exports to Asia and Africa Surge as Shipments to Europe Fall,” Today in
Energy, September 4, 2024, https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=63004.

Congressional Research Service

6

U.S. Coal Industry Trends

Figure 4. Coal Exports and Imports, 2000-2024
(million short tons)

Sources: For 2000-2009, “Table 6.1. Coal Overview,” in U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Monthly
Energy Review, January 2011, p. 83, https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/archive/00351101.pdf. For 20102024, “Table 6.1. Coal Overview,” in EIA, Monthly Energy Review, March 2025, p. 123, https://www.eia.gov/
totalenergy/data/monthly/.
Note: Includes both steam coal and metallurgical coal.

EIA forecasts coal exports to decline to 104 million short tons in 2025, before rising to about 122
million short tons per year by 2050.28 Exports to the Asian market are expected to increase, but
there are potential bottlenecks such as infrastructure (e.g., port development and transportation)
that could slow export growth. Tariff policy may also impact exports of U.S. coal.
Several key factors are likely to influence how much coal will be exported from the United States
in the future. One factor is whether new export terminals are built, particularly for coal from the
Powder River Basin (PRB) in Wyoming and Montana. Wyoming and Montana together
accounted for 46% of U.S. coal production in 2024, but Western export terminals accounted for
only 8% of exports in 2024.29
Another major factor is the level of global demand for met coal. Historically, met coal has
represented the majority of coal exported by the United States, accounting for as much as twothirds of exports in some years.30 Some PRB coal, which is predominantly steam coal, is exported
from Canadian terminals at Roberts Bank (near Vancouver, British Columbia) and Ridley
Terminal at Prince Rupert, British Columbia. PRB coal is transported to both facilities for export
via railway.
PRB coal producers have sought to export via the Pacific Northwest to supply the growing Asian
market, but with little success. For example, three port terminal projects for exporting coal in

28 “Table 15. Coal Supply, Disposition, and Prices,” in EIA, Annual Energy Outlook 2025, April 2025,

https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/. Based on EIA’s reference case scenario.
29 These include terminals in Anchorage, AK; Great Falls, MT; Los Angeles, CA; Nogales, AZ; San Diego, CA;
San Francisco, CA; and Seattle, WA.
30 See the data set “Quantity & price of coal imports & exports” in EIA, Coal Data Browser, https://www.eia.gov/coal/
data/browser/.

Congressional Research Service

7

U.S. Coal Industry Trends

Washington and Oregon had permit applications before state regulators and the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (USACE), but none of the permit applications were approved.31

U.S. Coal Mining Employment
Coal mining employment in the United States peaked in 1923 and declined 92% in the century
that followed (see Figure 5). According to data from the Department of Labor, the number of
U.S. coal miners declined from a peak of about 863,000 in 1923 to 69,000 in 2023.32
Figure 5. Coal Mining Employment, 1900-2023
(thousands)

Source: Employment from Department of Labor (DOL), “Coal Fatalities for 1900 Through 2023,” accessed May
2, 2025, https://arlweb.msha.gov/stats/centurystats/coalstats.asp. Coal production peak from “Table 6.1. Coal
Overview,” in U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Monthly Energy Review, January 2011, p. 83,
https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/archive/00351101.pdf.
Notes: According to the DOL source, office workers are included in the coal mining employment data starting
in 1973.

Most of this decline occurred as production grew, while output per mine and output per worker
increased. Over time, the average mine size has increased and coal mining processes have
become more efficient. For example, the number of coal miners declined 83% from 1923 to 2008,
yet coal production peaked in 2008; this means that coal miners in 2008 were producing more
coal per miner than their counterparts nearly a century earlier. EIA data, which are available only
from 1993 on, show a similar pattern for the number of coal mines: The number of coal mines

31 A permit from USACE is needed for work that discharges dredge or fill material in waters of the United States or

wetlands, pursuant to provisions in Section 404 of the Clean Water Act; and for the construction of any structure in,
over, or under navigable waterways of the United States, including excavation, dredging, or deposition of these
materials in these waters, pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. The proposed port projects in
Washington and Oregon would involve such activities and must obtain either a Section 404 permit or a Section 10
permit, or both in many circumstances, from USACE before construction of a project can proceed. Discussion of
USACE permit requirements is beyond the scope of this report.
32 Department of Labor, Coal Fatalities for 1900 Through 2023, accessed May 2, 2025, https://arlweb.msha.gov/stats/
centurystats/coalstats.asp.

Congressional Research Service

8

U.S. Coal Industry Trends

declined by 77% from 1993 to 2023 (from 2,475 to 560).33 Additionally, production has shifted
from underground mines in the Eastern United States to Western surface mines, such as in
Wyoming and Montana, which require less labor to produce the same amount of coal.

U.S. Coal-Producing Industry
The U.S. coal industry is highly concentrated, with a handful of major producers. In 2023, the top
five coal mining companies were responsible for 51% of U.S. coal production, led by Peabody
Energy, with 18%, and Arch Resources, with 13.2% (see Table 1). Other major producers include
Navajo Transitional Energy Company, ACNR Holdings, and Alliance Resource Partners.
In 2015 and 2016, three of the top five coal producers (2015 rankings) filed for Chapter 11
bankruptcy protection: Alpha Natural Resources, in August 2015; Arch Coal, in February 2016;
and Peabody Energy, in April 2016. The latter two together accounted for nearly 33% of U.S. coal
production in 2016. Other producers—such as Patriot Coal, Walter Energy, James River Coal,
Armstrong Energy, and FirstEnergy Solutions—have filed for bankruptcy as well over the last
decade.
Arch Coal, Peabody Energy, and Alpha Natural Resources (which became two companies, ANR
Inc. and Contura Energy)34 emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy with plans to move forward, all
three shedding substantial debt. At the time, opponents were critical of these plans and questioned
the long-term viability and reliability of the U.S. coal industry.35 Arch Resources (formerly Arch
Coal) and Peabody Energy have been the top two U.S. coal producers in every year from 2016 to
2023. ANR Inc. and Contura Energy merged under the name Contura Energy in 2018;36 in 2021,
Contura Energy changed its name to Alpha Metallurgical Resources.37 Alpha Metallurgical
Resources was the 10th leading U.S. coal producer in 2023.38

33 Data for the number of coal mines are available only for 1993-2023. EIA publishes the number of mines each year in

its annual coal report. For 1993-2000, see “Table 3. Coal Production and Number of Mines by State and Mine Type,”
in EIA, Coal Industry Annual, reports for each year available at https://www.eia.gov/coal/annual/archive/. For 20012023, see “Table 1. Coal Production and Number of Mines by State and Mine Type,” in EIA, Annual Coal Report,
reports for each year available at https://www.eia.gov/coal/annual/.
34 Alpha Natural Resources emerged from bankruptcy in 2016 as two distinct entities: ANR Inc. and Contura Energy
Inc. Greg Johnson, “Alpha Out of Bankruptcy—and the PRB,” Gillette News Record, July 27, 2016,
https://www.gillettenewsrecord.com/news/local/article_cd19a553-6729-506a-8fed-6c84e4501a7f.html.
35 Heather Richards, “Does the Sale of Contura Coal Mines Herald a Change in the Northeast Wyoming? Depends on
Who You Ask,” Casper Star Tribune, December 16, 2017, https://trib.com/business/energy/does-the-sale-of-conturacoal-mines-herald-a-change-in-the-northeast-wyoming-depends/article_2322fa81-d1b7-5c0b-8de9-d048156fa255.html
(link requires paid subscription).
36 Mining Engineering Online, “Contura Energy, Alpha Natural Resources to Merge, Creating Largest U.S. Met Coal
Producer,” April 30, 2018, https://me.smenet.org/contura-energy-alpha-natural-resources-to-merge-creating-largest-us-met-coal-producer/; MarketScreener, “Contura Energy, Inc. Completed the Acquisition of Alpha Natural Resources
Holdings, Inc. and Alpha Natural Resources Inc.,” November 8, 2018, https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/
ALPHA-METALLURGICAL-RESOU-42845044/news/Contura-Energy-Inc-completed-the-acquisition-of-AlphaNatural-Resources-Holdings-Inc-and-Alpha-N-34517527/.
37 Contura Energy, Inc., “Contura Energy Announces Upcoming Name Change to Alpha Metallurgical Resources,
Inc.,” PR Newswire, January 22, 2021, https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/contura-energy-announcesupcoming-name-change-to-alpha-metallurgical-resources-inc-301212979.html.
38 “Table 10. Major U.S. Coal Producers, 2023,” in EIA, Annual Coal Report 2023, October 2024, p. 15,
https://www.eia.gov/coal/annual/pdf/acr.pdf.

Congressional Research Service

9

U.S. Coal Industry Trends

Major challenges for the U.S. coal mining industry include obtaining the level of financing
needed for new or expanded projects and maintaining profitability in a market with declining
domestic demand.
Table 1. Leading U.S. Coal Producers and Percentage of U.S. Coal Production
2023
Producer

2010
Percentage
of Total

Producer

2000
Percentage
of Total

Producer

Percentage
of Total

Peabody Energy
Corp.

18.0%

Peabody Energy
Corp.

17.7%

Peabody Coal
Co.

13.1%

Arch Resources,
Inc.

13.2%

Arch Coal, Inc.

16.0%

Arch Coal, Inc.

10.1%

Navajo
Transitional
Energy Co.

7.9%

Cloud Peak Energy

8.6%

Kennecott
Energy

9.9%

Alliance Resource
Partners

6.0%

Alpha Natural
Resources

7.4%

CONSOL
Energy, Inc.

6.9%

ACNR Holdings,
Inc.

5.6%

CONSOL Energy,
Inc.

5.7%

RAG

5.9%

Sources: “Table 10. Major U.S. Coal Producers, 2023,” in U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Annual
Coal Report 2023, October 2024, p. 15, https://www.eia.gov/coal/annual/pdf/acr.pdf. “Table 10. Major U.S. Coal
Producers, 2010,” in EIA, Annual Coal Report 2010, https://www.eia.gov/coal/annual/archive/05842010.pdf.
“Table 15. Major U.S. Coal Producers, 2000,” in EIA, Coal Industry Annual 2000, https://www.eia.gov/coal/annual/
archive/05842000.pdf.
Notes: In 2020, Arch Coal, Inc., changed its name to Arch Resources, Inc. EIA refers to “Peabody Energy”
starting in Annual Coal Report 2007; EIA refers to “Peabody Coal” in reports prior to 2007.

Coal Policy: Recent Activity
Legislation in the 119th Congress
Legislation passed by the 119th Congress addresses leasing, royalties, and production of coal on
federal lands. P.L. 119-21, the FY2025 reconciliation law, made changes to coal leasing on
federal lands (Title V, Subtitle B).39 These changes include
•
•
•

setting time limits for agency reviews that are included in the leasing and
application process (Sec. 50201);
temporarily decreasing the royalty rate for producing and new federal coal leases
until September 30, 2034 (Sec. 50202);
requiring the Interior Secretary to make available for lease certain coal resources
of at least 4 million federal acres in Alaska and west of the 100th meridian in the
48 contiguous states no later than 90 days after enactment (Sec. 50203);40 and

39 For more information about coal production on federal land, see CRS Infographic IG10076, U.S. Coal Production &

Federal Lands, by Lexie Ryan.
40 As of November 2025, the Interior Secretary has identified over 13 million acres available for coal leasing. See DOI,
Bureau of Land Management, “Lands Made Available for Coal Leasing,” accessed November 13, 2025,
https://www.blm.gov/programs/energy-and-minerals/coal/lands-made-available-coal-leasing.

Congressional Research Service

10

U.S. Coal Industry Trends

•

authorizing the mining of federal coal subject to a previously approved mining
plan for federal coal that is located adjacent to coal reserves in state or private
land (Sec. 50204).

According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), these provisions are estimated to impact
direct spending:
•

•

Leasing and royalty rate changes (Sec. 50201, 50202, and 50203) are estimated
to increase direct spending by $269 million from FY2025 to FY2029, while
decreasing federal spending by $237 million when accounting for offsetting
receipts and sequestration for the period FY2025-FY2034.41 In an estimate on an
earlier version of the bill, CBO clarified that these spending numbers come from
“bonus bids, rents, and royalties.”42
Authorizing the mining of federal coal (Sec. 50204) is estimated to save $42
million by increasing net royalties from FY2025 to FY2029. CBO estimated that
this provision would have no impact in direct spending from FY2030 to
FY2034.43

Two introduced bills would further facilitate coal production on federal lands: H.R. 4068 would
direct the Secretary of the Interior to identify categorical exclusions that may increase federal coal
production, and H.R. 280 would mandate approval of certain coal leasing applications and nullify
Secretarial Order 3338, which placed a moratorium on most federal coal leasing until the Bureau
of Land Management had conducted a programmatic review of the coal leasing program. The
provision about Secretarial Order 3338 was included in H.R. 1, as initially passed by the House in
May 2025, but was not included in the final version of the bill, enacted as P.L. 119-21.
Legislation has been introduced to address retiring power plants; some say that such bills may
support existing coal-fired power plants. For example, supporters of H.R. 1651 have stated that
the bill would prevent premature retirement of coal-fired power plants.
Congress has considered programs that may support the construction of new coal projects,
especially given the challenge for new coal projects in obtaining financing. H.R. 1 (Title VII,
Subtitle A, Sec. 41005), as initially passed by the House, would have established the De-Risking
Compensation Program within the Department of Energy (DOE). This measure was removed
from the final version of the bill, enacted as P.L. 119-21. The program would have “provided
compensation to sponsors, with respect to covered energy projects, that suffer unrecoverable
losses due to qualifying Federal actions.” Covered projects would have included “the
development, extraction, processing, transportation, or use of coal,” among other energy and
mineral sources. H.R. 1 proposed appropriating $10 million through FY2034 for the program.
CBO estimated the program would result in a decrease of $1,235 million in direct spending from
FY2025 to FY2029, while estimating a net increase of $210 million in federal direct spending
from FY2025 to FY2034.44
41 See “Subtitle B. Mining” in “Title V – Committee on Energy and Natural Resources” in CBO, Estimated Budgetary

Effects of P.L. 119-21, to Provide for Reconciliation Pursuant to Title II of H. Con. Res. 14, Relative to CBO’s January
2025 Baseline, July 21, 2025, https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2025-07/61570-pl119-21-2025Recon-CLB.xlsx.
42 CBO, Reconciliation Recommendations of the House Committee on Natural Resources, May 19, 2025,
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61415.
43 See “Subtitle B. Mining” in “Title V – Committee on Energy and Natural Resources” in CBO, Estimated Budgetary
Effects of P.L. 119-21, to Provide for Reconciliation Pursuant to Title II of H. Con. Res. 14, Relative to CBO’s January
2025 Baseline, July 21, 2025, https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2025-07/61570-pl119-21-2025Recon-CLB.xlsx.
44 See “Sec. 41005” in “Title IV – Energy and Commerce” in CBO, Estimated Budgetary Effects of H.R. 1, the One Big
Beautiful Bill Act, June 4, 2025, https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2025-06/HR1_HousePassed_6-4-2025.xlsx.

Congressional Research Service

11

U.S. Coal Industry Trends

H.R. 3015, as passed by the House, would direct the Secretary of Energy to reestablish the
National Coal Council (NCC), an advisory group to DOE. According to NCC’s website, “the
principal activity of the NCC-FACA [NCC Federal Advisory Committee] is to prepare reports for
the Secretary of Energy.”45 NCC was established by DOE in 1984 (not by statute) and ceased
operations in 2021 when the Department of Energy did not renew the charter, as required every
two years. The bill would remove this re-charter requirement and establish NCC in statute. In
June 2025, DOE reinstated NCC.46 In light of NCC’s reinstatement, some Members of Congress
have argued that the legislation’s purpose has already been fulfilled.47 On the other hand,
supporters of the bill have argued for the continuation of the Council’s decades advising on issues
related to the coal industry.48
Some Members of Congress have expressed concern about retiring power plants, including coalfired plants, amid high consumer energy prices and an expected rise in demand for electricity
from new demand sources such as artificial intelligence (AI) computing centers.49 Legislation has
been introduced on electric reliability, but not coal specifically, including the following:
•

•

•

•

•

H.R. 3616 (Reliable Power Act), as reported, which would require the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to review regulations that may affect
reliability of the bulk power system;
H.R. 1047 and S. 465 (GRID Power Act), which would direct FERC to reform
the interconnection study process to prioritize “new dispatchable power
projects”;
H.R. 3632 (Power Plant Reliability Act of 2025), as reported, which would
require owners and/or operators of generating facilities to provide notice of
planned retirements;
H.R. 3843 (Baseload Reliability Protection Act), which would prohibit
retirements of baseload power plants in regions at risk of electricity supply
shortfalls; and
H.R. 1651, which would nullify the final rule issued on May 9, 2024, by the
Environmental Protection Agency relating to “New Source Performance
Standards for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from New, Modified, and
Reconstructed Fossil Fuel-Fired Electric Generating Units; Emission Guidelines
for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Existing Fossil Fuel-Fired Electric
Generating Units; and Repeal of the Affordable Clean Energy Rule.”

Some say that bills such as these may also support existing coal-fired power plants; for example,
supporters of H.R. 1651 stated that the bill would prevent premature retirement of coal-fired
power plants.50
45 National Coal Council (NCC), “The National Coal Council,” accessed June 26, 2025,

https://nationalcoalcouncil.energy.gov/ncc/national-coal-council. NCC studies are available at
https://nationalcoalcouncil.energy.gov/ncc/studies-national-coal-council.
46 U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), “National Coal Council,” 90 Federal Register 26045, June 18, 2025.
47 U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, National Coal Council Reestablishment Act, report to accompany H.R.
3015, 119th Cong., 1st sess., H.Rept. 119-185, July 2, 2025.
48 U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, National Coal Council Reestablishment Act, report to accompany H.R.
3015, 119th Cong., 1st sess., H.Rept. 119-185, July 2, 2025.
49 For more on electricity reliability and power plant retirements, see CRS Report R47521, Electricity: Overview and
Issues for Congress, by Ashley J. Lawson.
50 Rep. Carol Miller, “Miller, Colleagues Introduce Bill to Nullify Biden Plan to Retire American Power Plants,” press
(continued...)

Congressional Research Service

12

U.S. Coal Industry Trends

Other Members of Congress have supported legislation that would limit coal development or that
otherwise signal opposition to coal. In the 119th Congress, S.J.Res. 10, which failed a Senate floor
vote, would have terminated the national emergency relating to energy declared by Executive
Order (E.O.) 14156.51 E.O. 14156 directs executive departments and agencies to prioritize coal
production and use, among other provisions.

Trump Administration Executive Actions
In addition to declaring a national emergency relating to “precariously inadequate and
intermittent energy supply, and an increasingly unreliable grid,” E.O. 14156 also directs executive
departments and agencies to support aspects of the domestic coal industry to ensure supply and
infrastructure of coal (and other types of energy) meet future needs. This includes coal production
(including on federal land); coal transportation and use in the United States; and coal exports to
international allies.52
Other executive orders support the coal industry in the United States by increasing or promoting
coal production and use, particularly in power generation. The E.O. titled “Reinvigorating
America’s Beautiful Clean Coal Industry and Amending Executive Order 14241” directs agencies
to “prioritize coal leasing and related activities” on federal lands; evaluate existing regulations
and programs and consider rescinding those that “seek to transition the Nation away from coal
production and electricity generation”; promote exports of U.S. coal; and support coal use to
generate electricity for data centers. The E.O. also directs the Secretaries of Energy and the
Interior to consider designating metallurgical coal as a “critical material” and “critical mineral,”
respectively.53 In response to the E.O.’s directive, DOE designated metallurgical coal as a critical
material in May 2025, and the Department of the Interior designated metallurgical coal as a
critical mineral in November 2025.54
E.O. 14260, titled “Protecting American Energy from State Overreach,” declared that the second
Trump Administration is committed to the removal of “illegitimate impediments to the
identification, development, siting, production, investment in, or use of” specific domestic energy
resources, including coal.55 The order specifically indicated that impeding state and local laws,
regulations, and policies are to be identified.

release, February 28, 2025, https://miller.house.gov/media/press-releases/miller-colleagues-introduce-bill-nullifybiden-plan-retire-american-power.
51 E.O. 14156, “Declaring a National Energy Emergency,” 90 Federal Register 8433, January 29, 2025; and S.O. 3417,
“Addressing the National Energy Emergency,” February 3, 2025.
52 E.O. 14156, “Declaring a National Energy Emergency,” 90 Federal Register 8433, January 29, 2025; and S.O. 3417,
“Addressing the National Energy Emergency,” February 3, 2025.
53 E.O. 14261, “Reinvigorating America’s Beautiful Clean Coal Industry and Amending Executive Order 14241,”
90 Federal Register 15517, April 14, 2025.
54 DOE, “Critical Material List; Addition of Metallurgical Coal Used for Steelmaking,” 90 Federal Register 22711,
May 29, 2025, https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/05/29/2025-09607/critical-material-list-addition-ofmetallurgical-coal-used-for-steelmaking; and DOI, U.S. Geological Survey, “Final 2025 List of Critical Minerals,” 90
Federal Register 50494, November 7, 2025.
55 E.O. 14260, “Protecting American Energy from State Overreach,” 90 Federal Register 15513, April 14, 2025.

Congressional Research Service

13

U.S. Coal Industry Trends

Among other measures, E.O. 14262, titled “Strengthening the Reliability and Security of the
United States Electric Grid,” directs the Secretary of Energy to develop a protocol to identify
generation resources that are critical to system reliability.56 The protocol must “include all
mechanisms available under applicable law, including section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act, to
ensure any generation resource identified as critical within an at-risk region is appropriately
retained.” Further, the protocol must prevent, “as the Secretary of Energy deems appropriate and
consistent with applicable law,” identified resources from “leaving the bulk-power system” or
converting fuels in such a way that reduces their accredited capacity. An example of fuel
conversion that could reduce accredited capacity is replacing a coal-fired power plant with a solar
farm.57 As directed by E.O. 14262, the Department of Energy has issued Section 202(c)
emergency orders under the Federal Power Act requiring several fossil fuel-fired power plants to
remain available for operation, including one coal-fired power plant.58
A presidential proclamation titled “Regulatory Relief for Certain Stationary Sources to Promote
American Energy” delays by two years the implementation of a regulation making certain
emissions standards for power plants more stringent.59 Following the publication of the
proclamation, the Administration published a list of facilities/sources that received exemptions
from the more stringent standards.60
Coal consumption, production, employment, and exports are largely driven by industry decisions
based on market conditions, rather than executive or legislative direction. Likewise, increases in
coal production on federal lands largely depend on interest from coal developers. Favorable
executive actions in the first Trump Administration did not reverse coal power plant retirements,
increase employment in the coal sector, or increase coal production. It remains to be seen whether
actions taken by the second Trump Administration and the 119th Congress will impact coal power
plant retirements and U.S. coal production.

Author Information
Lexie Ryan
Analyst in Energy Policy

Acknowledgments
Amber Wilhelm, Visual Information Specialist, prepared the graphics for the report.

56 E.O. 14262, “Strengthening the Reliability and Security of the United States Electric Grid,” 90 Federal Register

15521, April 14, 2025.
57
For more information, see CRS In Focus IF12991, Federal Power Act: The Department of Energy’s Emergency
Authority, by Ashley J. Lawson.
58 The coal-fired power plant directed to remain open is the J.H. Campbell Power Plant in Michigan. For a list of DOE
Section 202(c) emergency orders, see DOE, “DOE’s Use of Federal Power Act Emergency Orders,” accessed
November 13, 2025, at https://www.energy.gov/ceser/does-use-federal-power-act-emergency-authority.
59 White House, “Regulatory Relief for Certain Stationary Sources to Promote American Energy,” presidential
proclamation, April 8, 2025, https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/04/rregulatory-relief-for-certainstationary-sources-to-promote-american-energy/.
60 See “Annex I Stationary Sources List” at “U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Presidential Proclamation –
Regulatory Relief for Certain Stationary Sources to Promote American Energy,” April 14, 2025, https://www.epa.gov/
stationary-sources-air-pollution/presidential-proclamation-regulatory-relief-certain-stationary.

Congressional Research Service

14

U.S. Coal Industry Trends

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service

R48587 · VERSION 3 · UPDATED

15

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/crs%3AR48587. Public record. Not legal advice.