The Shifting Sands of Energy Policy

The change isn’t about a revolution in energy technology, but a revolution in communication, according to Samuel Furfari, a former European Commission senior energy official and current energy geopolitics professor at ESCP Business School in London. “Mr. Trump has made a communication revolution, not an energy revolution,” he observes. This communication shift is directly tied to policy changes. An executive order issued early in the administration listed fossil fuels, geothermal, and nuclear as priority energy resources, conspicuously excluding solar, wind, and hydrogen.

The “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” further solidified this hierarchy, slashing incentives for wind and solar while extending tax credits for geothermal through 2033. Symbolic actions followed, such as the renaming of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory to the National Laboratory of the Rockies – a move widely interpreted as a deliberate downplaying of renewables. Most recently, a halt to all offshore wind projects under construction, citing national security risks, underscored the administration’s commitment to its new energy priorities. The Department of the Interior’s decision sparked immediate legal challenges from the offshore wind industry.

Adapting to the New Reality: Industry Strategies

Initially, wind and solar companies attempted to align with the administration’s “energy dominance” rhetoric, but the removal of key tax incentives and rising electricity costs forced a change in strategy. Lloyd Ritter, a clean energy consultant in Washington D.C., notes that affordability has become the central message. “Electricity costs are now a thing in politics, and I don’t think that’s going to change anytime soon,” he says. This shift is driven by projections indicating a 32% increase in U.S. electricity demand by 2030, largely fueled by the explosive growth of data centers, according to a recent report from Grid Strategies.

Solar and storage developers are capitalizing on this demand, emphasizing that solar remains the “fastest and cheapest form of electronics to get onto the grid,” according to Raina Hornaday, cofounder of Caprock Renewables in Austin, Texas. Battery storage, in particular, is gaining traction, with developers aligning with the administration’s focus on domestic manufacturing. “The R&D for battery storage is really the winner across the board, and we don’t consider battery storage renewable. It can utilize renewable energy electrons, but it doesn’t have to,” Hornaday explains. “It can be power from the grid.”

Nuclear power is also adapting, touting the potential of small modular reactors (SMRs) and the possibility of restarting decommissioned reactors to meet growing demand. The potential for revitalizing existing nuclear infrastructure is being actively explored.

Geothermal’s Fortuitous Position

Next-generation geothermal developers find themselves in a surprisingly favorable position. While continuing to emphasize geothermal’s potential as a baseload power source, companies like Sage Geosystems are increasingly highlighting their ability to rapidly deploy energy to the grid, specifically to accommodate the needs of expanding data centers. Cindy Taff, CEO of Sage Geosystems, notes a deliberate shift away from solely emphasizing geothermal’s “clean and renewable” aspects. “There’s now a little bit more allergic connotation with clean and renewable,” she says.

Geothermal companies are also leveraging their connections to the oil and gas industry, emphasizing the transferable skills and technologies that can accelerate development. Geoffrey Garrison, vice president of operations at Quaise Energy, stresses the importance of tailoring messaging to the audience. “I think you have to be cognizant of who’s listening and who has got their hands on the lever.… You tailor your message,” he says.

Fervo Energy, another geothermal company, is incorporating the oil and gas industry connection into its investor pitches, highlighting the use of established drilling technologies. Sarah Jewett, senior vice president of strategy at Fervo Energy, acknowledges that while the core message remains consistent, the emphasis shifts depending on the audience. “Some sides of the aisle like parts of it, and other parts of the aisle like other parts of it,” she says.

The Rise of ‘Energy Addition’ Globally

This shift in messaging isn’t confined to the United States. At the ADIPEC conference in Abu Dhabi, the industry-wide buzzword “energy transition” was increasingly replaced with “energy addition.” This reflects a growing recognition that simply transitioning away from fossil fuels may not be sufficient to meet rapidly increasing global energy demands. As Taff at Sage Geosystems puts it, “Energy transition was, in my opinion, when [demand] uptick was very steady. But now that you’ve got the hockey stick, the use of ‘addition’…is much more applicable.”

The impact of the U.S. administration’s policies is being felt internationally. Furfari observes, “We were shy to mention fossil fuel. Mr. Trump does not care, and says, ‘No, we need fossil fuel.’ This is changing the world.”

What does this new era of energy communication mean for long-term sustainability goals? And how will companies balance political realities with the urgent need to address climate change?

Frequently Asked Questions About Energy and Political Messaging