Utilities say they are clinging to coal because its abundance makes it cheaper than natural gas or nuclear power and more reliable than intermittent power sources such as wind and solar. Still, the price of coal plants is rising and consumers in some areas served by the new facilities will see their electricity bill rise by up to 30 percent.
Industry representatives say those increases would be even steeper if utilities switched to more expensive fuels or were forced to adopt emission-reduction measures.
Approval of the plants has come from state and federal agencies that do not factor in emissions of carbon dioxide, considered the leading culprit behind global warming. Scientists and environmentalists have tried to stop the coal rush with some success, turning back dozens of plants through lawsuits and other legal challenges.
As a result, current construction is far more modest than projected a few years ago when 151 new plants were forecast by federal regulators. But analysts say the projects that prevailed are more than enough to ensure coal's continued dominance in the power industry for years to come.
There is a great deal of reluctance on the part of financial institutions to back coal plants. There is still some financing that is getting done, but, like the nuclear plants this financing is enabled by regulatory mechanisms that make the ratepayers captive to bad decisions by power providers over the long term.
Any new or expanded coal plant is a bad choice, but the fact is the pace development for wind and natural gas already exceeds that of coal and given basic economics (even without carbon pricing) that trend is only going accelerate.