By Alyssa Jones

October 15, 2026 - Americans have grown accustomed to treating fossil fuels and environmentalism as mutually exclusive: you either care about resilient ecosystems, or you support industries such as coal mining. Today’s conservation isn’t about pretending that we can live without the resources that make daily life possible, from air conditioning and transportation to the device you’re looking at now. Responsible natural resource management is about implementing and enforcing environmental standards that allow society to advance while mitigating ecological harm.

I consider myself an environmentalist, but that does not mean I can defend coal’s history. Previous methods of mining and electricity generation have left workers dead or ill, damaged ecosystems, and emitted countless tons of CO?. Those consequences are profound, and acknowledging them is essential to any credible argument moving forward.

But acknowledging this history does not make the continued demand for coal disappear.

Coal still accounts for a significant share of domestic electricity generation and roughly a third of global electricity. Coal remains an affordable and reliable source of electricity in countries such as Botswana, India, and Mongolia, which depend on it for everyday energy needs. While some countries are reducing coal-fired generation, global demand remains substantial. If the U.S. announced a plan to phase out coal tomorrow, it would not eliminate that demand.

Just because coal has been managed irresponsibly in the past doesn’t mean there isn’t a better path forward. When people think of mining, they often picture the unethical extraction and dangerous labor practices of our great-grandparents’ time. Today’s domestic mining and electricity generation operate under labor laws and environmental regulations, using technologies unavailable to earlier generations. Reclamation, pollution controls, worker safety improvements, and emerging technologies deserve attention as we navigate coal’s future. These protections remain imperfect, but they demonstrate that coal management practices can evolve.

There have been powerful advancements to reduce environmental harm. Carbon capture technologies are being developed to reduce emissions from coal-fired facilities. Researchers are exploring coal-derived materials for energy storage. We can recycle coal ash into concrete, turn scrubber byproducts into drywall, and recover rare earth elements from mining waste. While some of these practices have existed for decades, continued innovation offers opportunities to reduce waste and improve resource efficiency.

Rather than withdrawing from the conversation, environmentalists should have a seat at the table. We must help shape the technologies, environmental standards, and resource management practices that determine how coal is produced and used. Innovation cannot erase coal’s environmental consequences, but it can improve how we extract, process, and use it.

All forms of energy production have an environmental footprint. Manufacturing renewable and nuclear energy technologies and infrastructure involves mining, materials, and resource-intensive processes that often rely on fossil fuels. These technologies can produce substantially fewer emissions than coal, but their environmental impacts do not disappear simply because we call them clean. Determining their impacts requires examining emissions, land use, and the broader consequences of production.

Coal remains globally important and unlikely to disappear anytime soon. That reality does not excuse its history or justify turning a blind eye to environmental costs. It demands that we continue improving production standards and developing technologies to use coal more responsibly. With continued global demand, advancements that reduce coal’s environmental impacts remain important to a climate-resilient future.

Environmentalism in an industrialized world cannot mean opposing production simply because it carries ecological costs. It means confronting these impacts and working to reduce them. When environmentalists refuse to engage with coal production, they risk surrendering influence over the decisions that determine its environmental consequences.

My commitment to improving current methods of resource production for the sake of a climate-resilient future is why I call myself both an environmentalist and pro-coal.

Alyssa Jones is the Principal of Hill & Haven, a digital production studio specializing in communications on natural resource issues. She also serves as a Content & Digital Associate at Red Bridge and is currently pursuing a Master of Natural Resources at Virginia Tech.