Coal Use Declined in Almost Every State from 2007 to 2015

Coal may still represent 33% of electricity generation in the US - but its use is on the decline.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


According to data released by the Energy Information Administration, the demand for coal in the power sector has fallen in nearly every state since 2007. Alaska and Nebraska were the only exceptions.

All told, consumption of coal for electricity generation in the U.S. electric power sector fell from a peak of over 1 billion short tons to an estimated 0.7 billion short tons between 2007-2015. At the same time, natural gas consumption rose across a number of states, including many of those with the steepest coal declines.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


In Ohio and Pennsylvania, coal use for power generation decreased by 49% and 44%, respectively. In the Southeast, coal consumption dropped by half in Georgia, North Carolina, and Alabama. Four states – Idaho, Vermont, Rhode Island, and the District of Columbia – do not use coal for power generation within their state borders, according to the EIA.

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Electric Power Annual

 

 

 

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe