This summer, just 10 days before Orlando’s coal-fired power plant—the Stanton Energy Center—was scheduled to retire one of its coal units, the U.S. Department of Energy issued an “emergency” order to keep it online. The kicker? Orlando ratepayers are on the hook for the cost of keeping the facility online, which is estimated to be racking up a $233,560 bill per day. At the same time, continuing to burn coal benefits no one but coal executives in other states. Orlando’s coal plant was being retired because it is a costly, dirty, outdated way to generate energy – and now ratepayers and residents will pay the burden of higher utility bills and polluted air. Just this past month, the Stanton facility received a second emergency order on September 1st, requiring another 90-day delay to the scheduled transition to cold shutdown.
With these orders, the Stanton coal-burning facility joins five other coal facilities located throughout the U.S. (in IN, MI, CO, and WA) – all of which were slated to retire in the last year and a half, and which have been forced to delay scheduled retirement under a series of subsequent “emergency” orders.
What does this mean for Floridians? Why is this happening? Who stands to benefit?
Let’s unpack this. First off, what is an “emergency order?”
Great question. This legacy federal power granted under the Federal Power Act allows for the U.S. Department of Energy to subvert conventional planning and operational procedures in periods of “acute emergencies”. Think natural disasters, extreme weather events, or even wars that require a facility that would not normally run to stay online in order to keep the lights on. On premise, the authority makes complete sense. In practice, the current administration has issued over 25 orders to exclusively soon-to-retire coal facilities, costing ratepayers across the U.S. well over half a billion dollars for dilapidated coal plants, many of which were non-functional for at least a portion of the duration of their orders.
So why is this happening? In 2017, Orlando City Commissioners unanimously pledged to transition the city’s municipal utility to 100 percent renewable energy by 2050, casting their historic votes as a packed room of residents erupted in cheers. Since then, the Orlando Utility Commission (“OUC”) has undergone intensive planning to transition the city’s power generation to cleaner, cheaper energy sources while living up to their reputation as “The Reliable One.”
So how does the DOE justify their blatant market interference into the long-term planning required to maintain stable power generation in our community?
1) The President’s declaration of a “national energy emergency” and vague concerns about grid reliability. (To be clear: there is no emergency).
2) Claims that AI data centers’ unprecedented and accelerating need for electricity creates a specific “reliability” risk.
Regarding the latter, the Stanton facility received a unique justification compared to other coal units who received “emergency” orders—the Department of Energy cites only one primary reason for the extension order: data centers (aka a total farce). While a federal FAQ touting the emergency order cites false claims that this order is in service to grid reliability, there is no evidence that forcing Orlando’s aging coal plant to continue operating would increase reliability for Orlando customers or elsewhere on the connected Southeastern power grid. The Stanton plant, along with the other coal facilities covered by this order, had been scheduled for retirement because they could no longer compete with newer, cheaper, and cleaner sources of generation.
In fact, the extension order undermines reliability by disrupting prudent long-term planning processes. Utilities such as OUC invest years developing resource strategies that balance affordability, reliability, and environmental goals. Sudden federal intervention creates uncertainty and makes it more difficult to execute those plans. If utilities cannot rely on established retirement schedules, they may hesitate to invest in replacement resources, transmission upgrades, or newer technologies that could strengthen reliability over the long term. In 2020, OUC worked hard to put together an Electric Integrated Resource Plan (EIRP) that resulted in setting retirement dates for Stanton Unit 1 & 2 for 2025 and 2027, respectively. DOE’s orders fly in the face of that diligent planning by OUC and its community partners.
The orders further spell out that the Stanton facility must delay its retirement based on “the need to provide power generation for new data centers in Florida” in order “to meet the unprecedented computing demands of generative artificial intelligence platforms.” AI data centers do, indeed, consume massive amounts of power as well as water – and ratepayers who live near these facilities can bear the burden through higher utility bills. That’s a key reason why communities across the country are battling expansion plans. But none of the eight prospective data centers referenced in DOE’s order to OUC are in or near Orlando. Moreover, the study that DOE relied on explicitly stated that “[l]arge industrial or commercial load additions, such as data centers, are not anticipated to create reliability risk in the subregion.” Why should Orlando residents pay for energy costs for data centers, period? And especially for data centers that are not even here?
Here in Florida, SB 484 was signed into law, a bill that empowers local communities to fight against these resource-intense projects. While this bill does not impact compliance with the extension order, it speaks to a sentiment that Floridians share–we should not be paying, in dollars, in health, or in resources–for data centers.
It’s also important to note that DOE does not cover costs incurred as a result of this order. Forcing the Stanton plant to remain online puts OUC, and ultimately its ratepayers, on the hook for the fuel expenses, maintenance requirements, and compliance costs needed to keep an aging facility operational. So this extension order will raise rates when the affordability of living in Orlando is already a pressing concern.
Keeping Stanton operational is not fiscally prudent and undermines, rather than supports, reliability. Capitulating to the DOE order would cost Orlando residents in another key way: through the continued pollution of our air and water for no clear gain. Coal-fired power plants remain among the largest sources of greenhouse gas emissions and other pollutants, including toxic coal ash, in the electric sector. OUC’s Stanton coal plant alone is responsible for an estimated 45 premature deaths per year according to Sierra Club’s study, Out of Control: The Deadly Impact of Coal Pollution.
What should happen now? The DOE orders are a crude misuse of federal emergency powers, and OUC should – like other utilities around the country facing orders to keep burning coal after plant retirement dates – stand up for our community and challenge them.
The five members of OUC’s governing board, including Mayor Buddy Dyer, have a duty to the utility’s customers and residents in the communities it serves. That duty includes questioning and fighting against policies that will increase costs, undermine prudent and well-established plans, and prolong dependence on outdated infrastructure.
The utility should insist that the federal government’s emergency powers remain reserved for true emergencies and should oppose efforts to use them as a long-term energy policy tool to keep a dying out-of-state industry on life support. The citizens of Orlando need our hometown utility to take a stand to deliver on their pledge for a cleaner, cheaper and brighter energy future.
Orlando residents request that OUC:
- Not run Stanton. The 202(c) Order requires that “Stanton Unit 1 is not placed in extended cold shutdown and is available to operate.” But the order does not order regular operation of the plant. OUC can and should protect ratepayers pocketbooks and lungs by not running Stanton when it isn't needed.
- Legally challenge DOE’s order. OUC should file a request for rehearing to protest the 202(c) order issued on September 1st. If denied, they should file a challenge to the denial within 60 days in the DC Circuit Court of Appeals.
- Evaluate and publish operational data on the Stanton Energy Center and Osceola Generating Station; make available for data transparency. Orlando residents deserve to understand if and when the facility is operating under the terms of DOE’s order. Offering clear data on operations is an easy step that OUC could take to improve transparency into the nature of the community impacts and cost of the facility’s delayed retirement.
Take action now! Tell DOE that the 202(c) orders are unlawful and we’re sick of them. Stanton and the other five coal facilities deserve to retire on schedule, and no ratepayers should continue to bear the burden of these unlawful delays.
Susannah Randolph is the Chapter Director for Sierra Club Florida, with 5,100 members in Orlando. Sara Isaac is a local small business owner and co-founder of the First Fifty, a coalition of Central Florida organizations committed to clean energy. Both women are city residents and OUC ratepayers.