I do not understand some of your points. Coal is projected to be, by our own administration (ref: EIA), the fastest growing fuel source in the developed world over the NEXT 20 years. That is just the lower margin thermal side. NatGas in Europe is ridiculous per MMBTu. What, $14? Here it is $3.81. Germany is buying ever crumb of thermal it can get and will gladly pollute the living tar out of the rest of Europe to make a buck. Pollution tax, they laugh at it. Go read up.
So, the US is leading the way in slowing CO2 emissions, mercury and the like. Big whoop as they say, we live in one large global bathtub. The US consumes right at 1B short tonnes a year; global consumption is 8B. This 8B is expected to increase to right at 9B in the next two years. US will fall to smaller percentage of an even larger number. Can't regulate those other countries, or can we?
From a strictly myopic, me centered thinking, yes, the US will impose more and more sanctions, regulations and the like. But isn't CO2, methane and mercury ...aren't they ... well in the atmosphere for all to share?
How about the met side?
The steel used to construct non-coal powerplants (NatGas for example) is made with met coal. Airplanes, cars, office building frames, shopping malls, you name it, met coal there Sir.
You have an alternative? Met is the most profitable and is a must based on it's carbon content for adding to the molten iron and also to keep the temperature high enough in the furnace. All ears here on how to make the steel infrastructure for the wind farms without coal.
Good luck out there with your agenda. I recommend you visit the now second largest coal consumer (India next to China) and press your case there. Let me know how far you get.