A controversial directive from the Trump administration to keep an ageing coal-fired power plant in Michigan online has saddled American taxpayers and ratepayers with a staggering $113 million bill, according to estimates from the plant's operator and regulators.
The Costly Directive
In May, the US Energy Department ordered utility giant Consumers Energy to continue operating the 63-year-old JH Campbell coal plant in West Olive, Michigan, just as the company was preparing to retire it. This intervention, made under the president's contentious national energy emergency executive order, has now been extended, with a further directive last week commanding the plant to remain open for another 90 days.
The financial burden is being spread across households serviced by the northern and central regional Miso grid, which spans from eastern Montana to Michigan and includes nine other states. Gary Rochow, CEO of Consumers Energy, confirmed to investors that the federal order explicitly stated that ratepayers should shoulder these costs and provided a clear path to cost recovery for the company.
Mounting Opposition and Environmental Impact
The decision has provoked fierce criticism from consumer advocates and environmental groups, who label the plant as both prohibitively expensive and a significant source of toxic pollution. Utility filings reveal the order is costing customers approximately $615,000 per day.
Michael Lenoff, an attorney with the environmental law organisation Earthjustice, which is suing over the order, condemned the move, stating, "The costs of unnecessarily running this jalopy coal plant just continue to mount."
Michigan's Attorney General, Dana Nessel, has filed a motion for a stay in federal court, alleging the administration's latest order is arbitrary and illegal. The JH Campbell plant is one of two in Michigan the Trump administration is fighting to keep open; together, they emit roughly 45% of the state's greenhouse gas pollution.
Beyond air pollution, the plant's environmental toll includes coal ash ponds that leach dangerous substances like arsenic, lead, lithium, radium, and sulfate into local drinking water and the Great Lakes.
Questionable Necessity and Legal Challenges
Critics argue the order is not only costly but entirely unnecessary. Regulatory data from Miso and the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) over the past six months shows the grid had excess power far above what the Campbell plant provided during peak summer demand. Furthermore, the plant often operated below full capacity, suggesting its power was not needed, yet ratepayers still bore the cost.
This contradicts the Energy Department's initial justification in May, which claimed that retiring the coal plants "would jeopardize the reliability of our grid systems." The department did not respond to requests for comment on the data undermining its position.
Dan Scripps, chair of the MPSC, had warned in May that the order would increase power costs for homes and businesses in Michigan and across the Midwest, a prediction that the latest financial figures have proven correct. Consumers Energy had been planning the plant's closure since 2021, a move that was projected to save state ratepayers about $600 million by 2040.
The legal battle continues as multiple lawsuits challenge the use of the emergency energy order, which has also been used to keep gas plants near Baltimore and Philadelphia operational.
