US coal just can't compete

 From US think tank Energy Innovation.

Coal generation is at a crossroads in the United States, or more precisely at a “cost crossover.” Due to rapid recent cost declines for wind and solar, the combined fuel, maintenance, and other costs of most existing coal-fired power plants are now higher than the all-in costs of new wind or solar projects.

In 2019, 239 gigawatts (GW) of coal capacity was online in the U.S. Our research finds that in 2020, 72 percent of that capacity, or 166 GW, was either uneconomic compared to local wind or solar or slated for retirement within five years. Out of the 235 plants in the U.S. coal fleet, 182 plants, or 80 percent, are uneconomic or already retiring.

These are their calculations for wind and solar LCOEs across different coal regions.  These are very low.  Lazard estimates average coal marginal (i.e., operating) costs at $41/MWh

And new-build wind or solar are cheaper than the operating costs of coal right across the nation.  

Wind tends to be better in the north and solar in the south, which is logical, except for wind in the "wind corridor" running north from Texas through Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska and the Dakotas.

Of course, just because a new-build wind or solar farm produces cheaper electricity than a local coal power station doesn't mean we can just build replacements for coal.  It's more complicated than that. For example, how much capacity is there in the grid to "borrow" or "lend" power from one region to another?  How much storage will be needed?  Is there enough peaking gas capacity?  But regulators and utilities will be keen to transition across to renewables because of the cost advantages of doing so.  The pressure on coal power stations will just keep rising.

In the USA and globally, coal is on borrowed time.