Energy Transition, a Balanced Look at Global Approaches

Energy Transition, a Balanced Look at Global Approaches

Lately I’ve been feeling a growing frustration with all the noise surrounding energy transition, renewables, and carbon neutrality. So, I decided to put some thoughts together — not with the intention of writing a scientific paper or a deeply analytical piece, but simply to share my personal take on what I’m seeing and sensing when it comes these key topics– reflections, readings, and perspectives from where I stand.

The global energy transition is a multifaceted challenge, often muddled by competing narratives and oversimplified assumptions. Climate change demands action, and major economic blocs—US, China, and Europe—are responding with strategies shaped by their unique economic, geopolitical, and technological contexts. Too often, public discourse conflates these factors, obscuring the practical realities at play. Let’s cut through the noise, ground the conversation in facts, and explore what these approaches reveal about building a sustainable future.


1. Climate Change: (not) accounting for the full cost

Climate change is no longer a distant threat—it’s a present reality with tangible costs. Floods, wildfires, and extreme heatwaves are disrupting economies and communities worldwide, yet these impacts are rarely reflected in traditional energy pricing. Consider industries like tobacco or alcohol: their market prices don’t account for the healthcare burdens they impose on society. Similarly, fossil fuels—oil, gas, and coal—carry hidden externalities like pollution, medical costs, and lost productivity that distort their perceived affordability. Until carbon pricing or other mechanisms fully capture these costs, comparisons between energy sources remain incomplete, skewing the debate in favor of fossil fuels – even in a mature and encompassing carbon market scenario, estimates put carbon costs at ¼ to ½ of its real cost.


2. National agendas vs. Energy transition > US: both ways, cheap gas while integrating renewables

The US is sometimes criticized for its measured pace in transitioning to renewables, with its reliance on fossil fuels drawing scrutiny. However, this overlooks a key economic advantage: energy independence fueled by the shale revolution. In early 2025, US natural gas prices were around $2-3 per MMBtu, that equates to ca. $14.50 per barrel of oil equivalent (leveraged “net” wisdom for that: $2.50 × 5.8 MMBtu/barrel = $14.50) far below global oil benchmarks ($60-80). This cost advantage reduces the urgency for the US to shift aggressively away from gas.

Yet, gas alone isn’t sufficient. Aging coal plants are retiring, and electricity demand - fueled by AI, data centers, and electrification of heat/others - is surging. Gas infrastructure, while expanding, cannot keep pace with short-term needs.

Enter renewables: solar and wind that are bridging the gap. In 2023, utility-scale solar’s levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) averaged $49/MWh globally, and onshore wind hit $33/MWh (IRENA), often undercutting gas in certain US markets ($40-80/MWh, Lazard 2024). Meanwhile, emerging technologies like small modular reactors (SMRs) remain years from deployment due to regulatory and cost hurdles.

The US approach is pragmatic, not dismissive of renewables. Gas provides a cost-effective baseline, but renewables are essential to meet rising demand and replace retiring capacity.

 

3. National agendas vs. Energy transition > China: playing the long game, strategic push for energy independence and global leadership

China’s energy strategy contrasts sharply with the US. China imports significant portions of its fossil fuels. In 2023, approximately 70% of its crude oil consumption (11.1 million barrels per day out of 15.4 million b/d total demand) and 42% of its natural gas consumption (16.2 billion cubic feet per day out of 38.5 Bcf/d) came from abroad, based on data from the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) and China’s General Administration of Customs. Given this reliance, and associated risk, China is accelerating its renewable rollout to secure energy independence.

In 2024, it added 277 GW of solar capacity—a 45% increase from 2023—bringing its total to 887 GW, according to China’s National Energy Administration (NEA). China’s 277 GW of solar in 2024 isn’t just a national milestone—it’s a global game-changer, representing over 60% of the world’s new solar capacity. When paired with 80 GW of wind, 14 GW of hydro, 35 GW of thermal, and 3 GW of nuclear, it added 419 GW total, with renewables dominating at 88.5%. No other country comes close to this scale. The U.S. and Europe combined added less than half of China’s solar alone.

Beyond security, China’s growing “green” has a merit in itself projecting China to achieve global technological and cost leadership in various domains. China’s solar LCOE hit $31/MWh, 40-70% below Asia-Pacific peers (Wood Mackenzie), with China supplying over 80% of solar panels worldwide. By 2030, it could provide 50-60% of EVs, 70-80% of BESS, and 40% of wind turbines at a global scale. This positions China as the world’s green tech supplier, reshaping economics and geopolitics.

 

4. National agendas vs. Energy transition > Europe: ambition meets reality

Europe faces a more complex landscape. Without access to affordable, secure fossil fuels - Russia’s gas is unreliable, and US LNG is costly - renewables are a necessity. Yet, its deployment lags behind its potential due to structural barriers: permitting delays, grid constraints, and elevated financing costs.

Europe’s retail prices (€289/MWh) are significantly higher than the US’s retail ($176/MWh), and wholesale prices (€50-100/MWh vs. US $30-60/MWh) reflect a cost disparity, driven by Europe’s reliance on energy imports and higher taxes. These have far-reaching impacts in curtailing European industrial competitiveness and cost-of-living.

This has fueled a narrative blaming renewables for high costs, but the real culprits are under-investment in grids and poor planning. Renewables aren’t failing Europe—its infrastructure is. Europe must follow tight with its path towards renewables whilst navigating the full context:  

  • Faster Permitting: Streamline approvals for renewable projects, following Germany's lead in reducing red tape for wind projects;
  • Grid Upgrades: Increase annual grid investments by 40-70% (McKinsey) to support renewable integration;
  • Supply Chain Resilience: Scale up EU manufacturing for clean technologies (e.g., solar modules) to reduce 70% import dependency on China and address raw material shortages.
  • Clean Flexibility: Develop storage and demand response to balance variable renewable supply, as renewables already account for 47% of EU electricity (Ember 2025).
  • Affordability Support: Use subsidies and tax credits to make clean technologies accessible, protecting consumers from price volatility.


Solar, wind, and batteries offer compelling benefits vs. other generation sources

- Emissions Reduction: They deliver swift CO2 cuts

- Speed: A solar farm can be built in 6-12 months, versus 3-5 years for a gas plant. Global additions hit 1,000 GW in 2024—593 GW solar, 425 GW wind—outpacing gas (150 GW) and nuclear (5 GW) (IEA)

- Cost: Solar’s global LCOE fell to $49/MWh and wind to $33/MWh in 2023 (IRENA), often cheaper than coal ($60-100/MWh) and gas ($40-80/MWh) (Lazard 2024)

 

Their application varies by region:

- US: Complements cheap gas to meet demand.

- China: Drives energy security and global influence.

- Europe: Essential to its future independence and competitiveness but limited by infra and “speed” of deployment

 

Solar and wind—incl. offshore wind, with its immense potential—are central to this shift, but bottlenecks like grid delays and misinformation must be tackled. The goal isn’t to crown a single energy source but to craft balanced, practical strategies that leverage each region’s strengths.

 

What’s your perspective? How can your region optimize its energy future?

 


Article content
Renewables Deployment

 

Article content
Global Energy Mix


Article content
Global Energy Generation


Jochen Hauff

Think Resiliency! Protect land, lives & livelihoods by investing in regenerative land stewardship and renewable energy

5mo

Thank you for the succinct overview Miguel Fonseca. Agree that diversified and balanced strategies are needed. I would stress, additionally, that a new narrative is needed to overcome the fake news avalanche as well as the danger of political priorities in many countries shifting away from preventing climate change. This new narrative needs to pick up on some elements that you mention: Industrial policy to protect industrial value creating and thus livelihoods through the provision of low cost, domestic renewable energy. It also can use the security argument given the obvious advantages of distributed generation in meshed networks as long as we take cybersecurity seriously. And finally, the new narrative for renewables needs to include the synergistic relationship RES development can and should have with boosting agricultural and forest productivity and profitability. The food-water-energy nexus will greatly gain significance under accelerating climate change. We need to leverage this actively and leave the silo of an energy-policy-only debate. What do you think?

Justin Lim Wei Tze

Director, Business Development at EDPR APAC | Renewables | Solar PV | Regional Project Origination | RECs & VPPAs

5mo

You’ve raised a key point here - that there is no single, universal path. Instead, we must acknowledge local realities, optimise for regional strengths, and remain open to hybrid models (like the US gas-renewable combi or China's state-led scale-ups). However, the impact of global warming and "climate inaction" cannot be passed on to future generations. We are currently experiencing rising temperatures, extreme weather events, rising sea levels, reduced crop yields, and the list goes on. If we adopt US' strategy of a shale-centric baseline while adding renewables gradually, then the world won't be on track to avoid breaching the 1.5–2°C targets set by the Paris Agreement. I am more inclined towards China's strategy of the long game, and by doing so, also secure its energy independence and security. The Energy Transition is happening, and proponents of the Energy Addition (fossil fuel-dominant + incremental RE additions) - while sounding like a voice of logic and reason, are sitting on the fence.

Nathaniel Burola

AI & Environment Research Consultant | Master of Tech Policy (MTP) Student at the RAND School of Public Policy | Fellow at The Digital Economist

5mo

Miguel Fonseca A lot of what is written here also relates to what I've learned in class as part of the climate tech accelerator program that I'm currently in! Venture capital funding for climate is changing as more firms are choosy with what they choose to fund. The US is entering an intense period of environmental deregulation and also choosing to focus a lot on natural gas. China is increasingly looked as a world leader in renewables as they pour a ton of investment into the development of their sectors.

Francisco Carrillo Andrés

Director de Compras Europa & Asia - GIS Autopartes en Grupo Industrial Saltillo

5mo

Thanks for sharing your vision!

To view or add a comment, sign in

Others also viewed

Explore content categories