A core misunderstanding fuels a recent lawsuit that has made headlines. The Republican attorneys general of Texas and 10 other states have accused some of the nation’s largest asset managers of “colluding” to harm coal companies, claiming falsely that the decline of coal is the result of some coordinated political vendetta rather than simple, demonstrable market economics.
With the Justice Department and Federal Trade Commission joining the conversation, it is important to delve into the details and consider market trends over the past few decades.
Coal’s decline in the U.S. did not start with asset managers or so-called “environmental, social and governance” or ESG investment policies. It started decades ago, with the shale gas revolution, when fracking technology unleashed an abundant, cheap and cleaner-burning alternative. U.S. Energy Information Administration data show that U.S. coal production was 1.13 trillion short tons in 2001, but by 2020 that number had declined to 535 billion short tons — its lowest level since 1965.
Natural gas outcompeted coal because it made economic sense. It has lower operating costs, fewer regulatory burdens and, perhaps most importantly, reduced environmental impact. Add in the drop in the cost of renewables, and coal’s decline was predictable. Asset managers saw the writing on the wall and adjusted their investments, as their fiduciary duty to their clients demands.
This is about economics, not ideology — business decisions, not politics.
Power utilities, manufacturers and even global markets have made decisions based on price, efficiency and reliability. We know this because coal’s decline happened in both public and private coal companies. Coal companies themselves have noted the decline in prior Securities and Exchange Commission annual reports. Capital flows based on competitive advantage, not political talking points.
What these attorneys general attempt to frame as “coal collusion” is, in fact, a textbook example of fiduciary responsibility and following industry direction.
Asset managers have a legal duty to evaluate long-term risks and returns for their clients. When coal projects increasingly face uncertain demand, regulatory headwinds and operational volatility, it is prudent investing to limit exposure. The lawsuit itself notes that coal production increased (incrementally) in 2021, the first year of the supposed “conspiracy.” This further shows the inconsistency of the argument, raising questions about whether the lawsuit is really about coal or about weaponizing an economic trend — a dangerous precedent to set.
We must be honest about what’s happening to coal, and to energy more broadly. Rather than distort reality for short-term political gain, let’s focus on developing solutions that respect our economic system, support innovation and ensure energy security.
The real conversation we should be having is about ensuring energy abundance through all means. Let’s talk about how to accelerate nuclear energy, streamline permitting for cleaner domestic production, invest in resilient grid infrastructure, and maintain American leadership in next-generation energy technologies. Allowing for a truly “all of the above” energy strategy enables investments in diverse, dependable and secure energy sources.
Climate, energy and market decisions are complex and intertwined. They deserve meticulous debate. It’s time to refocus the conversation on pragmatism and opportunity — not partisan politicking.
We should all care about America’s energy future, and to best do so, we have to stop pretending market evolution is sabotage. The decline of coal in the U.S. is simply capitalism doing exactly what conservatives have always trusted it to do: adapt and allocate capital where it best serves growth, stability and prosperity.
Benji Backer is the Founder and CEO of Nature Is Nonpartisan. He also serves as the executive chairman of the American Conservation Coalition and is the best-selling author of “The Conservative Environmentalist: Common Sense Solutions for a Sustainable Future.”