During a trip to Europe last week, US Energy Secretary Chris Wright — a Donald Trump appointee and founder/former CEO of fracking firm Liberty Energy — urged the International Energy Agency (IEA) to pivot away from clean energy and back toward fossil fuels. At a meeting at the IEA’s Paris headquarters, Wright labelled the IEA’s commitment to deep cuts in fossil-fuel emissions a “destructive illusion” and warned the United States might withdraw from the body if it did not abandon its energy transition goals within a year.
Wright’s department released a controversial climate report in July 2025 that downplayed the economic harms of CO2-driven warming, despite assessments that climate-fuelled extreme weather caused roughly $120 billion (€101 billion) in damages in 2025 alone. He argues that policies to phase out fossil fuels have damaged both the US and EU economies, calling the clean energy push a “climate cult” that reduced economic opportunities and energy freedom in Europe.
Critics say the claim that renewables have hurt the European economy is wrong. Sam Alvis, associate director for environment and energy security at the UK’s Institute for Public Policy Research, points out that more than 25% of the EU’s energy now comes from clean sources and that onshore solar and wind remain the cheapest forms of power in a region with limited domestic fossil reserves. Solar-panel costs have plunged about 90% over a decade, driven by growing Chinese manufacturing capacity, making large-scale solar the cheapest source of power globally, according to research cited in recent studies.
Fossil-fuel prices have been volatile — the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine sent European electricity and gas prices to record highs — prompting leaders to worry about dependency on liquefied natural gas imports, notably from the US, after losing Russian supplies. That shift has intensified calls across Europe for more domestic renewables investment to reduce reliance on volatile fuel markets.
Advocates of the clean transition say it also brings broader economic benefits. Julie McNamara, deputy policy director of the Climate and Energy Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, says forward-looking, competitive economies need abundant clean power and that US moves to boost fossil fuels undermine Europe’s strategic commitments to clean energy.
Spain is often cited as a success story: rapid deployment of wind and solar cut wholesale power costs dramatically. Ember, a global energy think tank, says Spain’s power became about 75% cheaper by 2025 compared with its standing as the EU’s most expensive electricity market in 2019. With green energy displacing coal and gas, Spain’s grid now has a much lower fossil-fuel share than Germany’s, which still relies more on gas.
Proponents of electrification argue it increases efficiency and productivity. Sam Alvis notes electrified technologies are roughly four times more efficient than burning fossil fuels, so electrifying transport and industry delivers an immediate productivity boost. He says Europe’s reduced opportunities stem not from renewables but from being slow to embrace electrified technologies, which lets faster-moving competitors — such as China’s dominant electric vehicle industry — take the lead.
Observers see Wright’s stance as aligned with the administration’s “American Energy Dominance” agenda. Bob Ward of the Grantham Research Institute says the US push to expand fossil-fuel exports aims to create greater global dependence on US supplies, with domestic and international climate policy viewed as obstacles to that goal.
The debate pits an industry-backed push to secure jobs and influence through fossil fuels against evidence that renewables can deliver cheaper, more stable power while supporting new industries. Whether the EU’s renewable build-out can outmuscle US oil and gas will depend on policy choices, investment, and how quickly governments and markets embrace electrification and scaling of clean technologies.
Edited by: Tamsin Walker