President Trump is looking to boost coal in the U.S. through directing the Department of War to enter into energy purchasing agreements. (Wen Ya/Getty Images )
What the War Department can do is direct its contracting offices to pursue agreements with coal-fired plants where feasible.
The military routinely enters into long-term electricity supply agreements to power individual installations, including projects at bases such as Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada and Fort Cavazos in Texas, where on-site generation has been developed through third-party contracts.
In theory, it could structure deals with nearby coal facilities if officials determine the contracts enhance grid reliability, fuel security or mission assurance — priorities outlined in the order.
"They have a great amount of flexibility," McGinn said, noting that energy sourcing decisions would depend on what is workable at individual installations.
That flexibility, however, operates base by base — not nationwide.
The War Department does not regulate regional electricity markets. It can sign contracts for power serving specific installations, but it does not set dispatch rules for grid operators or dictate fuel choices for civilian utilities.
Most military bases are connected to regional grids, where electricity from multiple sources — natural gas, nuclear, renewables and coal — is pooled together and dispatched according to market rules. Even if the Pentagon signs a contract with a specific coal plant, the electricity physically delivered to a base would still come from the broader grid mix.
An entrance to Fort Bliss is shown as reports indicate the military will begin to construct temporary housing for migrants on June 25, 2018 in Fort Bliss, Texas. The reports say that the Trump administration will use Fort Bliss and Goodfellow Air Force Base to house detained migrants as they are processed through the legal system. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Ultimately, the impact of Trump’s directive will depend on execution. Targeted contracts near specific installations could provide limited support to certain facilities.
A broader effort to use military purchasing power to sustain multiple commercial coal plants would likely require substantial funding, careful contract structuring and congressional backing.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/how-trumps-order-have-military-buy-coal-would-actually-work