Political conflicts between environmental concerns and federal regulations are more than nebulous, philosophical debates. The concrete impact can be seen in a battle over a coal-fired electricity plant in Centralia.

At its core, the issue centers on President Donald Trump’s absurd desire to preserve and promote coal as a major source of electricity in the United States. “I call it beautiful, clean coal,” Trump said last year, echoing his many inaccurate statements about the fossil fuel. “I told my people, never use the word ‘coal’ unless you put ‘beautiful, clean’ before it.”

Apparently unencumbered by mountains of scientific evidence about the environmental costs of burning coal, Trump wishes to return American energy to the 1940s.

In 2011, state officials and power generation company TransAlta agreed to close the company’s Centralia facility at the end of 2025. It is the only coal-powered electricity plant in the state and conflicts with state laws designed to reduce carbon emissions.

In December, an agreement was announced to continue operating the plant while fueled by natural gas. Like coal, natural gas is a fossil fuel and requires extraction. But the burning of it produces far fewer carbon emissions than does the burning of coal.

Despite 14 years of preparation for the future of the plant, the Trump administration felt compelled to step in at the last minute. The U.S. Department of Energy issued an emergency order requiring the plant to continue being available for operations; environmental advocates and the Washington attorney general’s office filed challenges to the order.

The administration’s effort in Centralia comes at the same time it has essentially placed the value of human health at zero.

The Environmental Protection Agency this month revealed that it will stop tallying the dollar value of lives saved and hospital visits avoided by the enforcement of air pollution regulations. Under the Clean Air Act, courts have ruled that the government must consider the regulatory costs to companies and the benefits to public health. But rather than confront the cost of pollution or use it in formulating regulations, the Trump administration is opting for ignorance. What the people don’t know, apparently, can’t hurt them.

Except that it can. As Vox.com explains: “When it comes to things like ozone and tiny particles, there is robust evidence of the damage they can do, contributing to heart attacks and asthma attacks. Measured over populations, air pollution takes years off of people’s lives.”

Historically, the burning of coal is a major contributor to that pollution. And while U.S. coal production has declined by approximately two-thirds since 2008, Trump maintains a weird obsession with the substance. “They’re going to take out clean coal — meaning they’re taking out coal, they’re going to clean it,” he once said in a statement as ludicrous as it sounds.

Meanwhile, the latest studies show that the cost of producing wind or solar energy is about half the cost of coal production. Energy from renewable sources passed coal energy in 2022 and has since increased its lead.

Trump has frequently cited the environmental costs of wind energy — namely, birds killed by turbines — but has paid no attention to the human costs of burning coal.

It creates a juxtaposition that could be ignored as nonsensical ramblings. But as the situation in Centralia demonstrates, it has a real impact on our region.