"The Clean Power Plan ended Texas coal." Not even close.
The political narrative around US power-plant carbon rules treats federal regulation as the prime mover: the Obama EPA tried to shut coal, the Trump EPA tried to save it, the Biden EPA tried again, the second Trump EPA is rolling it back. Texas coal capacity has fallen from ~17 GW in 2017 to ~12 GW in 2026, and the simple read is that federal climate policy is doing the work.
The Clean Power Plan never actually took effect. The Supreme Court stayed it in February 2016 before any compliance deadlines bound. Trump\'s Affordable Clean Energy Rule replaced it in 2019; the DC Circuit vacated ACE in January 2021. The Biden EPA\'s 2024 GHG Rule (90% CCS or shutdown by 2039) is now under rescission by the second Trump administration with litigation expected to extend through 2027 to 2028. The cumulative effective federal pressure on TX coal across 11 years is closer to zero than to the rules\' nominal targets.
The actual pressure has come from three places. Henry Hub gas at $3-4/MMBtu (vs $8-12 in the late 2000s) makes combined-cycle gas cheaper to dispatch than coal across the load curve. ~40 GW of ERCOT wind plus ~25 GW of solar regularly clears at $0/MWh or below in surplus hours, pushing coal off the dispatch stack. ~10 GW of battery storage absorbs scarcity-event revenue that coal plants used to capture. The cumulative effect is to erode coal capacity factor and revenue regardless of what EPA does.
The implication: even if the Trump EPA rescission of the 2024 GHG Rule succeeds, it will not save the majority of TX coal. The economics are the binding constraint. Read the rest of this page for the rule-by-rule history, the current ERCOT mix, and the 2026 to 2030 retirement outlook.
CPP, ACE and the 2024 GHG Rule, in three steps.
Three EPA rules, three legal outcomes, none of them binding on TX coal so far. The 2024 Rule may yet survive in some form; that is the next question.
Clean Power Plan (2015)
Issued August 2015 under Obama. State-by-state CO2 emission targets, requires ~32% reduction by 2030 from 2005 levels. Texas target ~21% from 2012 baseline. Stayed by SCOTUS February 2016, never took effect. Withdrawn 2019. Source: EPA CPP toolbox.
Affordable Clean Energy Rule (2019)
Issued 2019 under Trump. Replaces CPP with weaker plant-level efficiency improvements. Vacated by DC Circuit on 19 January 2021 as based on too narrow a reading of the Clean Air Act. Source: EPA ACE Rule.
2024 GHG Rule
Issued April 2024 under Biden. Existing coal plants must capture 90% CO2 by 2032 (long-term ops) or shut down by 2039. New baseload gas faces similar standards. Under rescission by second Trump administration as of May 2026; litigation expected through 2027-28. Source: EPA 2024 GHG Rule.
The detail that surprises most readers. The CPP was stayed by SCOTUS before any state had to file a compliance plan and before any plant had to actually do anything. The legal precedent (5-4 stay order, February 2016) was unprecedented at the time, and pre-dated the rule\'s own effective date. Texas led the multistate challenge but never had to draft a compliance plan in earnest. Coal capacity in TX continued to fall during 2016 to 2024 anyway, on economics.
Each rule\'s actual effect on TX coal capacity.
For each rule: the year, the legal status, the TX coal capacity nominally affected, and the actual binding driver of any retirements during the period.
| Rule | Year | Status | TX coal capacity | Actual driver of retirements |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CPP | 2015 | Stayed Feb 2016, never effective | Nominally ~17 GW (whole TX coal fleet) | Economic: gas + wind displacement |
| ACE | 2019 | Vacated Jan 2021 | Modest efficiency upgrades only | Economic: Big Brown, Monticello, Sandow retired 2018 |
| 2024 GHG Rule | 2024 | Under rescission 2025-26, litigation pending | ~12 GW current; mostly retirement before 2039 | Economic + GHG Rule as accelerant if it survives |
| RTC+B (ERCOT, not EPA) | Dec 2025 | Live | N/A directly, but reprices battery scarcity revenue | Indirect: battery scarcity capture erodes coal scarcity revenue |
| Cheap gas (Henry Hub) | 2014-26 | Sustained $2-5/MMBtu band | All TX coal | Direct: gas dispatch displaces coal |
| Wind + solar build | 2010-26 | ~40 GW wind + ~25 GW solar in ERCOT 2026 | All TX coal | Direct: zero-marginal-cost generation pushes coal off stack |
| Battery storage | 2020-26 | ~10 GW utility-scale in ERCOT 2026 | All TX coal | Direct: absorbs scarcity-event revenue coal used to capture |
! Read the right column, not the left
The federal-rule history matters for symbolic and longer-term reasons (precedent, signalling, finance), but the actual TX coal retirements since 2015 have been driven by the bottom three rows: gas, renewables and storage. EPA rule rescission under the second Trump administration may slow new gas-rule pressure, but it will not reverse the economic stack.
What the ERCOT mix actually looks like in 2026.
~155 GW of installed capacity to serve ~85 GW summer peak load. Four observations explain how that mix is shaped by economics, not climate rules.
A Coal: ~12 GW, falling 5 to 10% per year
Down from ~17 GW in 2017. Coleto Creek (Vistra), San Miguel (San Miguel Electric Co-op), and a handful of other plants face economic pressure through the late 2020s. Petra Nova CCS retrofit at WA Parish operated 2017-2020 then shut, demonstrating that retrofit is rarely the answer.
B Gas: ~70 GW, the marginal resource
Combined-cycle plants are the dispatch workhorse; peakers handle scarcity events. Henry Hub at $3-4/MMBtu makes gas cheaper than coal on a marginal basis for most hours. New gas build continues for capacity and reliability; aggregate capacity grows slowly.
C Wind: ~40 GW, ~20% of generation
Texas is the largest US wind-generation state. Most capacity in West TX (Panhandle, Sweetwater area) connected through CREZ transmission. Negative-pricing hours during low-load high-wind conditions push coal and gas off the stack.
D Solar + battery: ~25 + 10 GW, the fastest-growing
Solar absorbs midday load and feeds batteries; batteries dispatch into evening peaks. Combined they have eroded the scarcity-event revenue stream that gas peakers and coal plants relied on. RTC+B (Dec 2025) formalised battery pricing in ERCOT markets.
The takeaway: ERCOT in 2026 is increasingly a wind + solar + battery + gas system with shrinking coal as the legacy edge. Federal EPA rules accelerate the trend at the margin; they do not create it.
The four numbers that define the TX coal outlook.
Four anchor data points clarify how rule rescission and market structure interact through 2030.
TX coal 2026 (down from 17 in 2017)
~5 GW retired since 2017 (Big Brown, Monticello, Sandow). Coleto Creek + San Miguel under threat for 2027-29.
Henry Hub gas $/MMBtu band
Sustained 2014 to 2026. Makes combined-cycle gas cheaper to dispatch than coal across the load curve. Source: EIA Henry Hub spot.
2024 GHG Rule coal cutoff
Long-term coal must capture 90% CO2 by 2032 or shut by 2039. Rescission may extend or eliminate this. Most TX coal retires before 2039 anyway on economics.
ERCOT wind + solar + battery
~40 wind + ~25 solar + ~10 battery. Continues to grow at 8-12 GW/year. The compounding force on coal economics.
Three reads on the TX coal outlook
- A Most TX coal retires before any 2024 GHG Rule deadline binds. The 2032 capture-or-extend choice and the 2039 hard shutdown are 6 to 13 years out. Economic retirements scheduled 2026 to 2030 happen first regardless of EPA rescission.
- B The 2024 Rule rescission matters for new gas build, not for coal. If the rule survives, new baseload gas plants face emission standards too. Rescission removes that constraint and may accelerate new gas build, which paradoxically locks in more fossil capacity than the rule was designed to allow.
- C The binding constraint going forward is transmission, not generation. ERCOT can build wind, solar and battery faster than CREZ-equivalent transmission can move it. The conversation in 2026 to 2030 is about CREZ 2.0 / Permian Basin Reliability Plan, not federal CO2 rules.
Four reasons EPA rules matter less in TX than the headlines say.
ERCOT\'s structure makes federal environmental rules a smaller lever than they are in PJM or MISO. Four reasons.
ERCOT is energy-only, so no capacity revenue cushions coal
Unlike PJM and ISO-NE, ERCOT has no capacity auction. Coal plants recover fixed costs entirely from energy + ancillary services. When gas + renewables push coal off the dispatch stack, the plant loses revenue immediately. There is no capacity cheque to stabilise it. ACE Rule\'s nominal protection of coal was always weaker in ERCOT than elsewhere.
CCS for coal is not commercially viable at TX coal sizes
Petra Nova at WA Parish (TX) was the US showcase CCS retrofit; it operated 2017 to 2020 then was shut. Carbon capture for dilute flue-gas streams runs $80 to $150/tCO2, well above any realistic carbon price. Houston-area Permian-supplied industrial CCS is advancing but for refineries and chemicals, not for power.
TX state policy actively encouraged renewable build
The CREZ transmission projects (2006-2014) and a generally permissive renewable permitting environment let West TX wind and now solar build at scale. State policy was not motivated by climate, it was motivated by economic development. The result is a renewable fleet large enough to economically displace coal regardless of federal rule.
Data-center load growth changes the math
2024 to 2026 has seen data-center load growth in DFW, Austin and along the I-35 corridor outpace the rest of ERCOT load growth combined. That demand is 24/7 baseload and is being met by new gas + nuclear + storage, not by extending coal. The coal retirement schedule is robust to even substantial load growth.
The right read: EPA rule rescission under the second Trump administration changes the future of new gas baseload more than the future of legacy coal. TX coal\'s trajectory was set in 2014 to 2018 by gas and CREZ-enabled renewables; the next decade is about who builds the gas + nuclear + storage to meet data-center load.
Six things this means for TX households and businesses.
Do not price EPA rules into your retail decision
Whether the 2024 GHG Rule survives or gets rescinded, the TX coal economics are unchanged. Your retail plan choice should be driven by Power-to-Choose rates, contract terms and renewal protections, not headline rule news.
Use free-nights or TOU plans
Reliant Truly Free Nights, TXU Free Nights & Solar Days, Gexa Saver Free Nights map directly onto the ERCOT solar + wind surplus hours. Shift laundry, dishwasher and EV charging into the free window. Typical savings: 200 to 600 kWh/year.
If you have a battery, enrol in ERCOT Aggregated DER
Tesla, Sunrun, Sonnen aggregators bid Powerwall + equivalent batteries into ERCOT wholesale energy + ancillary services. Earnings: $300 to $1,000+/year. The RTC+B redesign makes battery scarcity capture more reliable.
Track ERCOT transmission build (CREZ 2.0)
The next 5 to 10 years of ERCOT investment is dominated by transmission, not generation. CREZ 2.0 / Permian Basin Reliability Plan filings at PUCT affect long-run wholesale prices in your part of the state. Source: PUCT.
Watch data-center siting decisions
DFW, Austin, San Antonio data-center build-out will absorb 5 to 20 GW of new load 2026 to 2030. Where those campuses land affects local transmission congestion and indirectly retail rates in nearby zones.
Engage at PUCT, not EPA
Federal CO2 rules will not move your TX bill significantly. PUCT decisions on transmission planning, capacity adequacy, retail consumer protection, RTC+B follow-on rules will. Public comment to PUCT and ERCOT stakeholder processes is the better leverage point.
Common questions about EPA rules and Texas.
No. The CPP was issued by EPA in August 2015 and stayed by the Supreme Court in February 2016 before any compliance deadlines hit. Texas had sued; the state's compliance plan never finalised. The CPP was formally withdrawn by the Trump EPA in 2019 and replaced with the Affordable Clean Energy Rule, which was then vacated by the DC Circuit in January 2021. Texas coal plants never had to comply with either rule. Source: EPA CPP toolbox, SCOTUS stay order.
EPA finalised the new rule in April 2024 to replace ACE. It requires existing coal plants operating long-term to capture 90% of CO2 by 2032 or shut down by 2039. New baseload gas plants face similar standards. The rule is structured around plant-level emission controls (Carbon Capture and Storage or shutdown) rather than the system-wide "generation shifting" approach the SCOTUS struck down in West Virginia v EPA (2022). Source: EPA GHG standards for power.
Under active rescission by the second Trump administration. As of May 2026 the formal rescission process is underway, litigation expected to extend through 2027 to 2028. In practice the rule's near-term enforceability is uncertain. Important context: most TX coal retirements scheduled for 2025 to 2030 are driven by economics, not federal rule, so a successful rescission would not save the majority of TX coal anyway.
As of 2026: installed capacity roughly 155 GW total, of which approximately 12 GW coal, 70 GW gas, 40 GW wind, 25 GW solar, 10 GW battery storage. Summer peak load 2024 was around 85 GW. Wind reached ~20% of generation in 2024; solar and battery were the fastest-growing categories. Source: ERCOT resource info.
Texas has retired about 5 GW of coal since 2017 (Big Brown, Monticello, Sandow). The currently-most-threatened plants include Coleto Creek (650 MW, Vistra) and San Miguel (391 MW, San Miguel Electric Co-op). Both are under economic pressure from gas + renewable competition. Vistra has signalled phased retirement plans through the late 2020s. Source: EIA Form 860 data.
Some yes, most no. CCS projects in the Houston Ship Channel + Permian Basin are advancing for industrial sources (refineries, chemicals, hydrogen) where high CO2 concentrations make capture cheaper. For dilute flue-gas streams at a coal plant the cost of 90% capture is currently $80 to $150/tCO2, well above any realistic carbon price. Petra Nova at WA Parish (TX) operated 2017-2020 then shut, illustrating the economic difficulty. CCS-retrofitted coal is unlikely to displace economic retirement for most plants.
Three drivers. Cheap gas: Henry Hub spot gas at $3-4/MMBtu (vs $8-12 in the late 2000s) makes combined-cycle gas cheaper to dispatch than coal. Renewables at scale: ERCOT has ~40 GW wind + ~25 GW solar, often pricing at $0/MWh or below in surplus hours and pushing coal off the dispatch stack. Battery storage: ~10 GW of TX storage absorbs scarcity-event revenue that coal plants used to capture, eroding capacity factor and revenue. Coal retirements are economic decisions; the 2024 EPA Rule was at most an accelerant.
Less than the policy headlines suggest. Coal retirements are already priced into ERCOT forwards. New gas + wind + solar + battery capacity is replacing coal at roughly equivalent or lower long-run wholesale cost. Bigger drivers of TX bills in 2026: RTC+B repricing (Dec 2025), data-center load growth in DFW + Austin, transmission build-out (CREZ 2.0 discussions). US average residential rate in March 2026 was 18.83 cents/kWh (EIA); TX is typically below the average. Source: PUCT.
Keep learning about US energy
Texas energy hub
ERCOT, retail providers, rate plans and the RTC+B redesign.
US wholesale electricity markets
Seven ISOs and the ERCOT energy-only model in detail.
The future of US nuclear
Vogtle 4, data-center PPAs, the SMR pipeline and TX nuclear (Comanche Peak, STP).
Tesla and grid-edge storage in 2026
Megapack and Tesla Electric in ERCOT, the battery story behind the coal retirements.
America\'s most efficient cities
Why Houston and Dallas rank low and what TX cities could do.
Earth Hour 2026
The symbolic hour vs the year-round demand-response program in ERCOT.
Distributed energy
Rooftop solar, batteries and EVs in the ERCOT context.
Electricity prices per kWh
EIA-verified state-by-state prices, May 2026.
Deregulated states map
State-by-state electricity retail choice in the US.