Business & Economics
Feb 2026 Energy Crossroads: China’s Record Solar Build, EU’s Fossil Eclipse, and Trump’s Pentagon Coal Order
In the same week of February 2026, new data showed China’s emissions dipping amid a 610-km² mega-solar farm, the EU confirmed wind-and-solar overtook fossil power in 2025, while President Trump issued an executive order requiring the U.S. Defense Department to lock in long-term purchases from coal plants and touted fresh export deals.
Focusing Facts
- Trump’s 11 Feb 2026 executive order instructs Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to prioritise coal-fired electricity in Pentagon contracts, potentially propping up dozens of aging plants.
- Ember data show wind and solar supplied 30.1% of EU electricity in 2025, edging out fossil fuels at 29% and driving coal down to a record-low 9.2%.
- China’s Talatan project on the Tibetan plateau will deploy 7 million panels across 610 km², already helping 1H 2025 national solar additions hit 212 GW—more than total U.S. capacity.
Context
The rift echoes the 1880s race between Edison’s direct current and Westinghouse’s alternating current: rival visions of the grid jostling for permanence. Just as the 1973 oil embargo exposed vulnerabilities in fossil-fuel dependency, Europe is now betting that distributed renewables plus storage will insulate it from geopolitical price shocks, while Washington resurrects 1940s Arsenal-of-Democracy logic—this time for coal—to buttress ‘energy security’. China’s simultaneous solar boom and coal binge recall the Soviet Union’s 1950s “catch-up and overtake” campaigns: capacity first, efficiency later. Over a century scale, the week matters because procurement contracts and gigawatt-scale builds hard-code infrastructure lifespans: a 30-year Pentagon coal deal or a 7-million-panel plateau will still shape emissions— or the lack of them—when today’s newborns hit middle age. Whether the long arc bends to a post-carbon grid or a bifurcated one may hinge on how quickly grids, not just generation, modernise—an Achilles heel cited from Qinghai to Brussels.
Perspectives
Pro-coal US political and supportive media
e.g., Newser, The Manila Times — Portrays President Trump’s orders and trade deals as a renaissance for coal, arguing that buying coal-fired power for the Pentagon and boosting exports to allies will strengthen national and economic security. Echoes administration talking points while ignoring climate impacts and higher long-term costs, appealing to coal-state voters and industry donors rather than presenting independent data.
Mainstream international outlets focused on climate progress
e.g., AP News, Court House News Service — Frame the rapid expansion of solar and wind in China and the EU as evidence that a global clean-energy transition is underway and that emissions have begun to structurally decline. May over-celebrate early milestones and understate persistent dependence on coal, grid bottlenecks, and political reversals that complicate a straight-line path to carbon neutrality.
Coal industry trade press
e.g., Mining Weekly — Insists coal plants will remain critical to the US grid for decades, touting reliability during extreme weather and cost advantages over renewables while forecasting robust demand. Selective use of statistics and industry-funded analysis serves Peabody’s commercial interests and downplays regulatory, financial and environmental headwinds facing coal.