US trade deal could lock the EU into fossil fuel dependency

Environmental groups have criticized a new trade deal that could see Europe spending more than $750 billion (€700 billion) on mostly fossil fuel imports from the United States over the next three years, warning it could undermine the bloc's climate targets. 

"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," said Andreas Sieber, associate director of policy and campaigns at climate group 350.org, in a statement. 

As part of an agreement that US President Donald Trump dubbed the "biggest deal ever," EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said US energy would replace Russian oil and gas, "which we do not want anymore."

Instead, Europe would purchase "more affordable and better" liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the US, said von der Leyen. 

The deal, which helped avert a trade war, includes a 15% tariff on key EU exports like cars. But critics said it represented an "about-turn" in Europe's climate policy. 

"The new US-EU trade deal is a dramatic U-turn on the European Commission's and President von der Leyen's priorities from a couple of years ago," said Esther Bollendorff, senior gas policy coordinator at climate group CAN Europe. "Namely, building a future-proof European Green Deal based on climate ambition and rapid renewables build-out."

The Commission, under von der Leyen, unveiled the Green Deal to ramp up Europe's ambitions on fighting climate change at the end of 2019. Europe is the fastest-warming region globally, say scientists. The continent saw its hottest year on record in 2024. 

What would the fossil-fuel deal mean for the climate?

Just weeks ago, the Commission presented proposals for a 90% bloc-wide reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2040 compared with 1990 levels.

The mid-term target aims to help the EU reach its wider 2050 goal of carbon neutrality, with measures including improving energy efficiency, electrifying the transport sector and boosting green energy. In the next five years, the bloc aims to have 42.5% of its energy come from renewable sources. 

The EU says it wants to ramp up renewables to reach its mid-century climate goals Image: dw

The US-EU trade deal "flies in the face" of these commitments, said Luke Haywood, head of climate and energy at the European Environmental Bureau, a network of environmental organizations. 

"Tripling US energy imports in just three years isn't only physically implausible, it would derail the EU's mid-term decarbonization targets," he added in a statement. Burning oil and gas emits greenhouse gases like CO2, which trap heat in the atmosphere and warm the planet, fueling more extreme weather. 

Swapping pipeline gas for US LNG would further increase Europe's emissions, said Chris Aylett, a research fellow at the Environment and Society Center of UK-based independent policy institute Chatham House. That's because LNG production and transport emits more methane — a greenhouse gas far more potent than CO2, though it doesn't stay as long in the atmosphere.  

Can Europe keep its energy purchase promises?

Still, there is skepticism about whether Europe can live up to its new pledge on US energy spending, with Aylett saying it would be "very difficult."

In 2024, the EU imported around €60 billion worth of oil and gas from the US. Another €24 billion came from Russia. Taken together, that's a "long way away" from the €216 billion the EU promised to spend each year, Aylett told DW. 

The European Commission also cannot force member states or companies to buy US energy, said Aylett.

"It's an aspiration really. The EU has the means that it could encourage it [...] but it's all voluntary, so the Commission itself wouldn't be making the purchases," he added. "In some ways the promise has been made that the Commission itself doesn't really have any ability to deliver."

Swapping dependence on Russian energy with reliance on the US could be "catastrophic" for energy security too, warned Aylett.

"It would be breaking the very first rule, which is that you don't just rely on one supplier," he told DW, adding that it would make the bloc "extremely vulnerable."

Edited by: Jennifer Collins