Looking ahead at the months leading to November, Congressional Coal Caucus Chair Rep. David McKinley, R-W.Va., told S&P Global Market Intelligence that sector advocates need to pull together and defend the industry no matter the outcome of the election.

For too long, McKinley said, political and industry supporters of U.S. coal have presented a "disjointed" front against market and regulatory pressures — a situation he hopes to change as chair of the Congressional Coal Caucus in the months ahead.     

"I want to have one voice," McKinley said. "I want to make sure we can address a variety of issues both short-term and long-term for how we can re-energize the use of coal."

McKinley laid out a series of issues he hoped the caucus would focus on that would impact more than just those in West Virginia. "Our mission is to try to keep focused and make sure people always connect the dots with employment, jobs, impact," McKinley said.

"To focus on what's going to happen in southern West Virginia, what's going to happen in Indiana, what's going to happen in Illinois, in eastern Ohio, out West — what's going to happen to those people if we continue this 'war on coal.'

"This is my guy," he said, pointing to a life-sized portrait of a coal miner hanging on his office wall. "This is the guy I go to work for every day. It's my coal miner."

In practice, this means targeted legislation and addressing coal issues in coal-producing parts of the country far from his constituency.

After a recent decision by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers halting the permitting process for the proposed Gateway Pacific coal export project in northwestern Washington, McKinley said he traveled west to speak with stakeholders about what went wrong. According to McKinley, he met with the local mayor and Col. John Buck, the Seattle district commander for the Corps who announced the decision.  

Ultimately, the Corps decision remains intact, but McKinley said that sort of focus on even those coal issues beyond his own state is vital to moving the caucus forward and helping U.S. coal after years of consistent pressure and decline.

New administration, new opportunities

Looking ahead to November, McKinley echoed a growing number of industry leaders in support of the Republican's presumptive presidential nominee, Donald Trump, suggesting he might provide a "more friendly ear" for the industry in Washington.

Dismissing Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton as a viable ally for coal, McKinley said he was positive Trump could come through on campaign promises to "put miners back to work."

"It can happen through a variety of ways, including rolling back or modifying some of [the Obama administration's] regulations whether it's the new source performance standard or the [U.S. EPA's] Clean Power Plan or allowing them to export more," McKinley said.

That optimism puts the caucus chair somewhat at odds with some of this industry's most vocal supporters. In May, Murray Energy Corp.founder and CEO Robert Murray reported that he had told Trump to temper his promises to revive the ailing industry and put miners back to work.

 "He wants to bring the mines back and I told him that was not possible," Murray said. "I explained to him that mines are a living thing and that they cave in. They flood and you can bring a new mine back in that reserve, but now you have the capital cost that renders the mine noncompetitive in the energy mix."

McKinley brushed aside Murray's urge for caution, saying he was just "one voice in the industry."

However, McKinley did allow that a complete return to industry highs would be unlikely.

"We're not trying to get back to the '50s, but we need to think smart," McKinley said. "The rest of the world is going to burn coal, so why can't we use our capacity here and our technology to burn coal more cleanly and efficiently."

While calling for increased support for cleaner coal technology, McKinley said that carbon capture and storage projects would not be a priority for the caucus in the months ahead, suggesting that it was not cost-effective at this point in time.

Instead, McKinley cited advancements made at the Longview Power LLC plant as technology that could be applied elsewhere.

"It's very impractical to think that the U.S. is going to operate its base load on anything but coal and natural gas for some period of time so if we recognize that, let's address some of the environmental concerns that are out there and see how we can make energy more efficient, putting the research into it," McKinley said. "More Longviews."

Planning for all possible outcomes in November

Considering the possibility of a Clinton win in November, McKinley said the caucus would likely intensify its "priorities and the need to push back" on federal environmental and energy policies and "try to find more ways to convince people about energy efficiency, using the technologies that have used at Longview so we can continue to burn coal".

Already unpopular among coal advocates who viewed her as a likely continuation of Obama administration policies, Clinton became a target for the industry after remarks she made earlier this year in Ohio regarding the future of U.S. coal, which included the phrase, "we're going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business, right?"

After citing those same remarks, McKinley also largely dismissed Clinton's efforts to curry favor with the industry by promoting a $30 billion aid package aimed at those communities most impacted by the downturn.

"Donald Trump is making comments may be too positive, but she's promising something that costs $30 billion that's very unlikely and never going to happen. I want to be open to it, but how are you going to pay for it?" McKinley asked.

Still, the coal chair does see some role in federal assistance for coal communities, especially in cases where regulations can be directly tied to closures.

"If they could determine that it was a regulation that shut down an operation, then clearly the government has a role to step in and to remedy that situation," McKinley said. "But we have to understand — throughout these areas, coal mining communities don't have many other options so just throwing money at it to make someone sleep well at night isn't a solution."

McKinley added that if Clinton were to win, he would "work to make sure the [federal funds] help our communities", but remained unconvinced such funding could ever make its way through Congress.

For now, McKinley said the caucus will focus on legislative solutions, including efforts to push back on the impact of the U.S. Department of Interior Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement's Stream Protection Rule and to clarify what he sees as uncertainty surrounding the EPA's approach to coal ash.