Yet despite the severity and duration of the storm, the national electric grid largely held. Hospitals remained open. Emergency services stayed online. Most homes stayed warm. That outcome was not accidental. It was the result of dependable, dispatchable generation — chief among it, coal.
During the coldest days of the storm, coal-fired generation across the Lower 48 surged, rising from roughly 70 gigawatt-hours per day to approximately 130. That additional generation represented a massive increase in available power at precisely the moment when electric heating demand spiked and system margins tightened. In practical terms, coal generation helped keep power flowing to tens of millions of households nationwide, sustaining heat and essential services during the most extreme conditions of Winter Storm Fern.
Coal plants responded exactly as they are designed to do: steadily, predictably, and at scale. In the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) region, coal supplied as much as 40% of electricity during peak hours. In PJM, coal accounted for roughly one-quarter of total generation. These were not marginal contributions — they were foundational to grid stability.
The contrast with weather-dependent resources was unmistakable. Wind generation declined as turbines iced over or were curtailed for safety. Solar output fell sharply as panels were covered by snow and daylight hours shortened. Hydropower faced limitations from frozen waterways and constrained inflows. Each of these resources plays a role in the broader energy mix, but Winter Storm Fern underscored their limitations during prolonged, widespread cold.

That lesson should sound familiar. After Winter Storm Uri in 2021, coal was often blamed for grid failures. Subsequent analyses showed the most significant disruptions stemmed from widespread natural gas system freeze-offs — not coal plant performance. In the years since, coal facilities invested in winterization, fuel access, and operational readiness. During Winter Storm Fern, those preparations paid off.
Federal policymakers recognized this reality in real time. The U.S. Department of Energy issued emergency orders under Section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act, temporarily allowing certain coal units to operate at higher output to maintain grid stability. Similar actions in 2025 prevented the premature retirement of coal plants in Colorado, Indiana, Washington, and Michigan — preserving more than 17 gigawatts of firm coal capacity that otherwise faced near-term shutdown.
These decisions were not ideological. They were driven by reliability.
Warnings from grid authorities reinforce the point. The Department of Energy and the North American Electric Reliability Corporation have both cautioned that continued coal retirements — without equivalent replacement by firm, dispatchable resources — increase the risk of outages, particularly during extreme winter conditions. At the same time, electricity demand is rising rapidly due to data centers, electrification, and industrial growth. The margin for error is shrinking.
Coal is not static. Modern coal plants operate with advanced emissions controls, improved efficiency, and increasingly sophisticated monitoring. Mining practices have evolved, and research into carbon management and advanced coal technologies continues. Coal also remains essential for steelmaking and other industrial uses, making domestic production a matter of economic and strategic importance.
Affordability matters as much as reliability. Regions that retired coal prematurely have often experienced higher electricity prices and greater exposure to fuel volatility. Coal's stable fuel costs and on-site inventory provide a measure of price certainty that consumers increasingly lack — especially during weather emergencies, when energy costs hit household budgets the hardest.
Winter Storm Fern delivered a clear message. When the grid was under maximum stress, coal did not merely contribute — it carried a substantial share of the load. A resilient energy strategy does not eliminate reliable resources before dependable replacements are ready. It builds a diversified generation portfolio that includes coal, natural gas, nuclear, and emerging technologies, each performing the role it does best.
America's energy future depends on reliability first. During one of the harshest winter tests in recent years, coal proved once again that it remains an essential part of keeping the lights on — and the heat running.






What a joke it all is...
~
Oh maybe I misunderstood my friend - more details regarding Cliffside:
Cliffside Steam Station, part of the James E. Rogers Energy Complex in North Carolina, is undergoing a phased shutdown as part of Duke Energy’s modernization and environmental compliance efforts. Original Units 1–4: These units were retired and demolished between 2013 and 2014 after being closed in 2011, following a 2012 legal settlement that made retirement plans enforceable. Unit 6 (Newest Unit): Opened in 2012, this state-of-the-art coal-fired unit is one of the cleanest coal plants in the U.S., featuring 99.9% acid gas reduction controls. It is expected to remain operational until 2048, according to Duke’s latest 15-year projections. Coal Ash Closure: The coal ash basins at Cliffside have been approved for excavation and relocation to a lined onsite landfill, under a closure plan approved by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) in April 2020. This process is part of a broader commitment to close all coal ash basins at Duke Energy facilities in North Carolina by 2029. Future Plans: While Duke has delayed retirements of some coal plants, including Cliffside, in recent filings, the final coal unit at the Rogers Energy Complex (Unit 6) is projected to be retired in 2048, marking the end of coal operations at the Cliffside site.
~
I was in opposition to construction of this site - and I doubt the statement it is so "clean" without proper monitoring, but whatever - glad the power stayed on - but contingencies are already being put in place. Without frequent testing verified - no way to be confident the acids are being controlled - and frankly tis a waste of coal to just burn it in combustion.