The United States has spent hundreds of billions of dollars in recent years to transition its energy system toward so-called “green” energy, driven by ambitious policies aimed at curbing greenhouse gas emissions and combating climate change. The Inflation Reduction Act, Clean Power Plan, and various state-level mandates have funneled massive subsidies into wind, solar, and other renewable energy projects, often at the expense of traditional, reliable energy sources like coal, natural gas, and nuclear power. However, this aggressive push has not delivered the promised utopia of clean, affordable energy. Instead, it has left the U.S. power grid teetering on the edge of crisis, forcing policymakers to take extreme measures to prevent widespread blackouts and skyrocketing electricity costs.
A Grid Under Strain
The U.S. power grid is a complex network that must balance supply and demand in real-time to ensure reliability. Reliable baseload power—sources like coal, natural gas, and nuclear that can operate continuously—has historically been the backbone of this system. However, Biden-era policies, including stringent emissions regulations and generous renewable energy subsidies, have accelerated the retirement of coal plants and restricted the development of new fossil fuel infrastructure. At the same time, the intermittent nature of wind and solar power—dependent on weather conditions—has failed to provide the consistent energy needed to meet growing demand, particularly during extreme weather events.
Forget about this being rare. 1/3 of US generation has been shutdown due to climate regs. AI data centers and the EV revolution are going to more than double electricity demand for a grid that was barely adequate before. Blackouts will be the norm soon.
— Anartrash (@CockingSound) June 25, 2025
Energy Secretary Chris Wright recently warned that the U.S. power grid is nearing its capacity limit, with the Department of Energy issuing four emergency orders in recent weeks to keep reliable plants operational and prevent closures. These measures were critical to counter a Southeast heatwave that threatened grid stability and risked blackouts. “We were on a course that was a train wreck,” Wright told Fox News, blaming Biden-era regulations for pushing the grid to the brink.
The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) has echoed these concerns, noting that more than half of the U.S. faces an elevated risk of power shortages, especially during peak summer and winter demand. The rapid closure of coal plants, driven by regulatory pressures and market distortions favoring renewables, has left the grid vulnerable to demand surges and extreme weather. For example, during Winter Storm Uri in 2021, Texas faced widespread blackouts when natural gas supplies faltered and wind turbines froze, leaving millions without power and causing over 240 deaths. Similarly, California’s 2020 rolling blackouts were triggered by a heatwave and inadequate power supply.
The Cost of Ideology Over Reliability
The Biden administration’s push for renewable energy has been underpinned by massive financial incentives, including over $300 billion in loans and grants for green energy projects, such as those funded through the Inflation Reduction Act and the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. However, these investments have often prioritized ideology over practicality. The Edison Electric Institute, representing major U.S. power companies, has criticized the administration’s reliance on unproven technologies like carbon capture and hydrogen blending, which are neither deployable nor affordable at scale.
Moreover, the focus on renewables has come at the expense of grid reliability. Wind and solar power, while environmentally appealing, cannot provide the always-available, on-demand power that coal and nuclear plants deliver. As North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum noted, “You can’t run an electrical grid with just intermittent power… the sun doesn’t shine at night, and the wind doesn’t blow every day.” Spain’s recent grid collapse, driven by over-reliance on subsidized wind and solar, serves as a cautionary tale for the U.S., where similar policies have pushed states like Maryland to the verge of blackouts.
The closure of coal plants has also driven up electricity costs. Without coal’s stabilizing effect on the market, prices have become more volatile, hitting households and businesses with higher bills. In Maryland, Democratic leadership’s focus on “green” policies has led to a power crisis, with the state relying on imports from Pennsylvania to avoid blackouts during a recent heatwave. Meanwhile, the cost of transitioning to renewables—requiring massive investments in energy storage, transmission upgrades, and backup power—has been passed on to ratepayers, disproportionately affecting low-income households, farmers, and small businesses.
Extreme Measures to Avert Disaster
With the grid under strain, the Department of Energy has been forced to take drastic steps to maintain reliability. Emergency orders have been issued to keep aging coal and gas plants online, such as the Eddystone plant, which was critical to preventing blackouts during recent demand surges. These measures are a direct response to the destabilizing effects of Biden-era policies, which have prioritized emission reductions over grid stability.
The Trump administration, now tasked with addressing this crisis, faces significant challenges. While President Trump has pledged to realign U.S. energy policy toward cheap, abundant energy, experts warn that reversing the damage may be difficult. Congress would need to repeal parts of the Inflation Reduction Act and other climate-related funding, but clawing back grants already disbursed or modifying signed contracts could prove legally and politically contentious.
A Path Forward: Balancing Innovation and Reliability
The current crisis underscores the need for a balanced energy policy that prioritizes reliability and affordability alongside environmental goals. While some forms of “renewable” energy have a role to play, they cannot yet replace the baseload power provided by coal, natural gas, and nuclear. China, for example, has adopted a pragmatic approach, planning for a mix of nuclear, “fossil” fuels, and limited wind and solar to ensure grid stability. The U.S. could learn from this model, investing in advanced nuclear technologies and modernizing the grid to handle growing demand from AI data centers, electric vehicles, and industrial onshoring.
Rather than doubling down on subsidies for unproven technologies, policymakers should focus on innovation and cooperation. Streamlining regulations to allow the development of new nuclear plants, upgrading transmission infrastructure, and maintaining a diverse energy mix could prevent the rolling blackouts that have plagued states like California and Texas. As NERC warns, the gap between dispatchable generation and rising demand is growing, and without action, the U.S. risks a future of energy scarcity and economic disruption—not to mention skyrocketing power bills.
Conclusion: A Wake-Up Call
The U.S. has spent billions chasing the dream of a “green” energy future, but the reality is a grid on the brink of collapse. The aggressive push to phase out reliable baseload power in favor of intermittent renewables has endangered energy security, driven up costs, and forced emergency interventions to keep the lights on. As the nation grapples with this self-inflicted crisis, it’s time to rethink the approach. A stable, affordable energy supply is the lifeblood of a modern economy, and ideology must not trump physics. The path forward lies in pragmatic policies that balance innovation with reliability—before the next blackout hits.