Chris Wright, the US Secretary of Energy, has expressed strong reservations about the European Union’s goal of achieving zero emissions by 2050. In a video conference held as part of a conference organized by the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship in London, Wright described this objective as “terrible.” From his perspective, this goal would lead to high costs and merely transfer pollution from one country to another, ultimately harming the growth of those transitioning to carbon neutrality.
The US government’s stance on hydrocarbons production
The US government, under President Donald Trump’s administration, has been clear in its opposition to international pacts related to decreasing emissions and mitigating climate change. Wright emphasized that the world’s production matrix is heavily dependent on hydrocarbons and that, for most uses of oil, gas, and coal, there are still no efficient substitutes. The US believes it is essential for companies in this sector to develop freely within the country. This stance was underscored by the recent approval of the export license for Liquefied Natural Gas to Commonwealth LNG of Louisiana, which had been paused since the Biden administration. Wright indicated that more approvals are forthcoming, as the US government aims to “get out of the way.”
Zero emissions and its potential to impoverish citizens
During the conference, Wright was critical of the zero emissions policy, suggesting that it could lead to the impoverishment of citizens. He argued that the “aggressive pursuit” of this goal has not brought any benefits to the country; instead, it has created the illusion that reducing emissions will automatically lead to a better world. Wright stated, “This is not energy transition. This is crazy. This is impoverishing their own citizens in an illusion that this will somehow make the world a better place.” The strategy of exchanging carbon units between highly polluting companies and those with lower impact or with environmental organizations constitutes, in Wright’s view, a form of hypocrisy, as it merely displaces emissions from one country or sector to another, leading to a reduction in energy-intensive investments.
Criticism of climate change objectives
Wright also criticized the objectives established for fighting climate change, which are often supported through subsidies and state interventions, imposing a cost on citizens. He criticized the energy policies of the British government, suggesting that wind farms should be eliminated and the gas and oil basins of the North Sea reopened. Additionally, Wright highlighted the fragility and impossibility of complying with the zero emissions objective and, more broadly, the goals set for mitigating climate change. This is not only due to the withdrawal of US participation but also because of the complexity of the goals countries have set for generating green, emission-free energy. The transition to clean energy may reduce emissions within a territory, but it does not guarantee that these emissions will cease to exist globally. In some cases, the costs of replacing and installing new clean energy plants could be higher, both economically and climatically, than continuing to use existing fossil fuel-dependent energy sources.