An argument long advanced by Europe’s climate policymakers has been that renewable energy would be a critical step forward to independence from the whims of foreign despots (unless, until 2022 or so, they were Vladimir Putin, but let’s not talk about that).
How’s that drive for independence going?
Here’s a clue. In its effort to prop up a manufacturing sector that is being eroded (to use a gentle word) by the EU’s futile and failing “race” to net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, Brussels is proposing that the bloc should, Reuters reports, introduce “low-carbon and ‘Made in EU’ requirements for public procurement of, or subsidies for, making aluminum, cement and steel, and technologies including wind turbines, electrolyzers or electric vehicles.”
Given that decarbonization was, people were told, to trigger a “green industrial revolution,” why the need for this protectionist proposal?
Well:
“If we do nothing, then it’s quite clear that very soon, 100% of clean tech technology will be produced in China. . . . It’s quite possible that our cement, steel industries will be offshored completely in the next few years,” [EU] Commission Executive Vice-President Stephane Sejourne told a news conference.
Put another way, there has been a green industrial revolution, but in China, and it is wrecking Europe’s economies and creating a dangerous dependency on the Beijing regime.
To reduce and eventually eliminate that dependency is well worth doing, but there is a catch. Claims that “renewables” are a source of cheap energy rest at least to a degree on the fact that so many of the components used to make renewables (sort of) work have been made in China, where costs are lower, thanks in part to Beijing’s mercantilism. When it comes to pricing, the EU’s mercantilists will not be able to match Beijing’s. The result will be that the price of renewable energy, which (if calculated properly) is already high, will rise even further, increasing the pressure on Europe’s industries — and its people — yet more.
The answer is for the EU to scrap or substantially rework its commitment to net zero, but that’s not going to happen anytime soon.
Meanwhile, how are things going in the U.K., which years after Brexit is attempting to build an EU in one country? (h/t: Stalin)
The Daily Telegraph, February 27, 2026:
Ed Miliband has opened the door to greater investment by Chinese companies in Britain’s energy infrastructure in a deal that critics say threatens national security.
The Energy Secretary on Friday quietly published the memorandum of understanding he struck with Beijing on his visit to China nearly a year ago, following accusations that he was trying to keep the agreement secret.
It commits the UK to closer cooperation with China on offshore wind farms, electricity grids, battery storage, carbon capture and hydrogen, while leaving the door open to potential cooperation on other areas, including civil nuclear power.
Oh.
When some outline details of the memorandum (which, to be fair, is nonbinding) were announced last year, there was qualified approval from Friends of Socialist China, “a platform based on supporting the People’s Republic of China and spreading understanding of Chinese socialism,” although not too much understanding.
Miliband’s visit to China was “a positive sign” and the Friends welcomed the fact “that the British government is exploring opportunities for cooperation with China around the climate emergency.”
But . . .
They were not pleased that Miliband had promised to “raise issues including forced labor in supply chains, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and human rights in Hong Kong”:
The slanderous accusations of forced labour in Xinjiang have been used to impose sanctions on Chinese renewable energy materials, and as such form a direct impediment to global climate action. . . .
British politicians would do well to drop their empire nostalgia and to avoid hectoring their Chinese counterparts. When it comes to humanity’s shared project of preventing climate catastrophe, Britain has more to learn than to teach.
Any idea that China is using Western fear of a “climate catastrophe” to advance its economic and geopolitical interests are, of course, nonsense.