We are burning our future to fuel the present

How many more wars will it take before we truly rethink our energy mix?

Ukraine yesterday, the Middle East today – and tomorrow? With every crisis, prices soar, dependencies are exposed, and our certainties waver. Yet, once the emergency has passed, we forget that it is fossil fuels, not renewables, that are dangerously intermittent, unreliable and expensive. As if nothing were ever going to change.

Worse still, certain recent developments run completely counter to what the situation demands. Just a few days ago, the German Minister for Economic Affairs and Energy, speaking at a conference on fossil fuels across the Atlantic, called on the EU to scale back its climate ambitions in the name of competitiveness. At the same time, the Trump administration forced TotalEnergies to abandon offshore wind projects in the United States in exchange for a billion dollars, conditional on equivalent investments in gas and oil projects.

These developments are not trivial: they reflect extremely serious strategic errors, at the very moment when the Strait of Hormuz is closing.

Every day, we strive to import fossil fuels. And what remains at the end of the day? CO2 in the atmosphere, smoke in our cities, and increased dependence. As if we were burning our future to fuel the present.

Conversely, when we import solar panels, wind turbines or build smart grids – even if their manufacture is still dependent on China today – we are not buying a resource that will disappear: we are investing in infrastructure that will produce clean energy for thirty or forty years, and above all, at a much lower cost. Once installed and creating local jobs, they work for us – without ever sending us a geopolitical bill. They are a lever for sovereignty and competitiveness.

But let’s be clear: renewables alone will not be enough to meet growing global demand. The key, in parallel – and at the risk of repeating myself – is energy efficiency: doing more with less. The cheapest energy is the energy we do not consume. Renovating, optimising, modernising – this immediately reduces our dependence without sacrificing comfort or value creation.

In this transition, we must also move beyond posturing. For many countries, nuclear power is a necessary step: a controllable, low-carbon energy source capable of ensuring the stability of the system. Provided we invest fully in safety and research, particularly regarding waste management.

And yet, our budgetary choices tell a very different story. The paradox is striking: whilst fossil fuels pollute, create dependency and are by nature finite – with oil reserves measured in decades – we continue to subsidise them to the tune of over $1.3 trillion a year – including nearly $60 billion in Europe – according to the IMF!

Let us redirect these resources: towards renewables, towards efficiency, towards innovation – hydrogen, storage, smart grids – and towards nuclear research. Let us invest in what makes us self-sufficient, not in what makes us vulnerable.

The end of fossil fuels is not a constraint. It is a triumph. This choice is far from being merely ecological. It is strategic. It is existential.

First published by EFE Verde, Le Matin Dimanche, Investir (LesEchos), La Repubblica (Green&Blue).