Liberal Forum

President Donald Trump just signed a new executive order — directing the Department of War to prioritize long-term Power Purchase Agreements with coal-fired power plants. While the U.S. reopens the coal gates, the world is split on its energy soul. Who’s still burning coal (a lot):

• China – burns more coal than the rest of the world combined 
• India – still expanding coal capacity to meet runaway electricity demand
• Indonesia – one of the world’s top exporters
• South Africa – 80% of its grid is coal
• Australia – giant coal exports despite green pledges
• Russia – major supplier, especially to Asia
• Poland – still heavily coal-reliant in the EU
• Vietnam & Philippines – surging coal consumption for industrial growth

Even “green” Europe quietly imports energy from coal-backed grids.
Trump’s move is likely to:

• Lock in PPA deals spanning decades
• Boost coal-state economies (WV, PA, KY, WY)
• Challenge the EPA’s clean energy targets
• Ignite a global debate on energy realism vs. environmental idealism

Get used to it Slack-Jaws....MAGA is in charge.
 
 

MR-7 » 12 Feb 2026, 10:42 am » wrote: ↑

12 Feb 2026, 10:42 am

President Donald Trump just signed a new executive order — directing the Department of War to prioritize long-term Power Purchase Agreements with coal-fired power plants. While the U.S. reopens the coal gates, the world is split on its energy soul. Who’s still burning coal (a lot):

• 🇨🇳 China – burns more coal than the rest of the world combined 
• 🇮🇳 India – still expanding coal capacity to meet runaway electricity demand
• 🇮🇩 Indonesia – one of the world’s top exporters
• 🇿🇦 South Africa – 80% of its grid is coal
• 🇦🇺 Australia – giant coal exports despite green pledges
• 🇷🇺 Russia – major supplier, especially to Asia
• 🇵🇱 Poland – still heavily coal-reliant in the EU
• 🇻🇳 Vietnam & Philippines – surging coal consumption for industrial growth

Even “green” Europe quietly imports energy from coal-backed grids.
Trump’s move is likely to:

• Lock in PPA deals spanning decades
• Boost coal-state economies (WV, PA, KY, WY)
• Challenge the EPA’s clean energy targets
• Ignite a global debate on energy realism vs. environmental idealism

Get used to it Slack-Jaws....MAGA is in charge.
 
 

evolving will tell how that works out in logistical relative time charts.

CLEAN BEAUTIFUL COAL. IT'S A NATURAL RESOURCE.

PhiloBeddo » 12 Feb 2026, 11:22 am » wrote: ↑

12 Feb 2026, 11:22 am

CLEAN BEAUTIFUL COAL. IT'S A NATURAL RESOURCE.

It is decompose organisms so it is completely organic. Green energy. Promotes evolving in plain sight. yes it is sarcasm and accurate.

MR-7 » 12 Feb 2026, 10:42 am » wrote: ↑

12 Feb 2026, 10:42 am

President Donald Trump just signed a new executive order — directing the Department of War to prioritize long-term Power Purchase Agreements with coal-fired power plants. While the U.S. reopens the coal gates, the world is split on its energy soul. Who’s still burning coal (a lot):

• China – burns more coal than the rest of the world combined 
• India – still expanding coal capacity to meet runaway electricity demand
• Indonesia – one of the world’s top exporters
• South Africa – 80% of its grid is coal
• Australia – giant coal exports despite green pledges
• Russia – major supplier, especially to Asia
• Poland – still heavily coal-reliant in the EU
• Vietnam & Philippines – surging coal consumption for industrial growth

Even “green” Europe quietly imports energy from coal-backed grids.
Trump’s move is likely to:

• Lock in PPA deals spanning decades
• Boost coal-state economies (WV, PA, KY, WY)
• Challenge the EPA’s clean energy targets
• Ignite a global debate on energy realism vs. environmental idealism

Get used to it Slack-Jaws....MAGA is in charge.

Don't forget nuke plants.

Long ago an activist wanted to eliminate nuke energy plants...now he says he was wrong and that nuke plants are safe, and they're even better now. But that won't stop the leftist piglets from squealing.

Don't forget this either:

When announcing the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord in 2017, the Trump administration argued that the agreement was "costly and ineffective," claiming that staying in would cost the U.S. economy nearly $3 trillion in reduced output and over 6 million industrial jobs by 2040.

The administration also highlighted the following specific, immediate financial impacts of leaving:

Green Climate Fund: The U.S. ceased payments to the UN Green Climate Fund, avoiding a pledge of $3 billion that had already been made.

Regulatory Costs: The administration argued that scrapping the Obama-era environmental regulations that formed the basis of the U.S. commitment to the Paris Accord would save Americans $1.3 trillion.

Household Income: The administration claimed that its deregulatory efforts, including leaving the Paris Accord, would provide the average American household with an extra $3,100 every year.