A blue and white ship at sea with LNG written on the side of it.

Credit: BNK Naval Photographer/Big Stock Photo

US–EU energy pact may entrench Europe’s fossil fuel reliance

Environmental campaigners warn that Europe’s plan to spend more than $750 billion on U.S. oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) over the next three years would derail the bloc’s climate goals and leave it vulnerable to price shocks.

Louise Osborne reports for Deutsche Welle.

In short:

President Donald Trump and Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen said the LNG-heavy accord would swap Russian supplies for “more affordable and better” U.S. fuel while averting a trade war.
Hitting the pledge would mean tripling annual imports to about €216 billion, yet analysts note Brussels cannot compel member states or companies to buy the gas, and reliance on a single supplier could expose the bloc to future price or supply shocks.
Researchers calculate that liquefaction, shipping, and regasifying U.S. LNG would boost methane leakage and push the EU off its 2040 pathway to cut greenhouse-gas emissions 90% from 1990 levels.

Key quote:

“This risks locking Europe into decades of fossil fuel dependence, volatile energy bills, and accelerating the wildfires and flooding already wreaking havoc across the continent.”

— Andreas Sieber, associate director of policy and campaigns at 350.org

Why this matters:

Liquefied natural gas is often promoted as a cleaner bridge fuel, but its climate footprint balloons once the methane lost during drilling, compression, and ocean transport is counted. Methane traps more heat than carbon dioxide in the near term, amplifying warming that is already driving Europe’s record wildfires, floods, and heat waves. Committing to long-term import contracts also diverts capital from wind, solar and efficiency upgrades that improve air quality and public health. By tying its energy system to distant shale basins, the continent would exchange one geopolitical vulnerability for another, potentially locking households and industries into volatile prices and delaying the shift to cleaner power for decades.

www.dw.com

US–EU energy pact may entrench Europe’s fossil fuel reliance

Data centers for AI could nearly triple San Jose’s energy use. Who foots the bill?

Nowhere to move: How climate change became the property market’s biggest nightmare

Extreme heat hampers children’s early learning

AI data center backlash: Public opposition to new projects is growing

As NOAA funding lags, a critical ocean weather system nears a breaking point

EU to ‘push back petrol car sales ban to 2040’

Dodging icebergs and storms on the hunt for an ocean tipping point

Multiple Houston-area oil and gas facilities that have violated pollution laws are seeking permit renewals

One facility has emitted cancer-causing chemicals into waterways at levels up to 520% higher than legal limits.

Pennsylvania health advocates say Trump’s first 100 days in office have caused “100 harms” to local communities

“They're terrorizing these scientists because they want to keep them silent.”

Regulators are underestimating health impacts from air pollution: Study

"The reality is, we are not exposed to one chemical at a time.”

Two years into his term, has Gov. Shapiro kept his promises to regulate Pennsylvania’s fracking industry?

A new report assesses the administration’s progress and makes new recommendations

An open letter from EPA staff to the American public

“We cannot stand by and allow this to happen. We need to hold this administration accountable.”

New evidence links heavy metal pollution with wildfire retardants

“The chemical black box” that blankets wildfire-impacted areas is increasingly under scrutiny.