President Donald Trump is set to sign an executive order on Tuesday that aims to revive the struggling coal industry by directing the federal government to list coal as a critical mineral and forcing some coal-fired power plants to remain operational. The move is being touted as part of an effort to increase electricity production to meet the growing demand from data centers.

However, experts say the executive order is unlikely to reverse coal's persistent decline in the power sector. Coal's share of electricity generation has been steadily decreasing since 2001, when it accounted for 51% of the country's electricity. Today, coal's share has dwindled to around 15%. The main drivers of this decline have been the low cost of natural gas and the increasing competitiveness of renewable energy sources like wind and solar.

Clean air regulations have also contributed to the closure of some coal-fired power plants, but the industry's problems run deeper. Coal is the dirtiest way to generate electricity, releasing more carbon dioxide per kilowatt-hour than any other fossil fuel. Its smoke is also laden with pollutants like sulfur dioxide, oxides of nitrogen, and fine particulates, which cause a range of environmental and health problems, including acid rain, ozone depletion, heart disease, and possibly even Parkinson's.

The Trump administration may have more success in designating metallurgical coal as a critical mineral, as it is often used in steel production. However, in the power sector, coal faces significant challenges. Existing power plants may get a temporary reprieve, but they will struggle to compete with solar and wind energy, which are becoming increasingly cost-competitive.

In fact, all but one coal-fired power plant in the US is more expensive to operate than building new renewable energy facilities. Moreover, renewables can be deployed faster than new fossil fuel power plants, making it even less likely that new coal plants will be built to cope with data center loads.

Industry experts say that the executive order may provide a temporary boost to the coal industry, but it is unlikely to alter the long-term trend towards cleaner, more sustainable energy sources. As the world transitions to a low-carbon economy, coal's days as a dominant energy source appear numbered.

The move has also been criticized for its potential environmental and health impacts. "This executive order is a step backwards for the environment and public health," said a spokesperson for the Sierra Club, an environmental advocacy group. "It's a desperate attempt to prop up a dying industry at the expense of our planet and our communities."

Despite the challenges, the coal industry remains a significant employer in many parts of the country, and the executive order may provide some temporary relief to workers in the sector. However, in the long run, it is clear that the industry needs to adapt to the changing energy landscape and transition towards cleaner, more sustainable energy sources.