IEA's Renewable Energy Forecast: What's the Impact and Can We Trust the Data?

Trump's Revenge: How the IEA's "Cautious Perspective" Screws Us All

Okay, so the IEA – that's the International Energy Agency for those of you who don't spend your days doomscrolling energy reports – just dropped its annual report. And what a steaming pile it is. They're saying renewables are gonna grow faster than anything else in the next decade, which should be good news. But there's a catch, isn't there always?

The "Cautious" Bullshit

Apparently, the IEA reintroduced a "cautious perspective" on the energy transition. What the hell does that even mean? Oh, right, it means they're kowtowing to pressure from US Republicans. Specifically, from the orange menace himself, Donald Trump. I mean, the guy's still haunting us from beyond the political grave. They're literally bending over backwards to appease a guy who thinks climate change is a Chinese hoax.

David Tong from Oil Change International is right on the money when he calls it Trump's "dystopian future." And Cop30 in Brazil? Don't even get me started. World leaders need to have some damn backbone and tell Trump where to stick his fossil fuels.

And the IEA found renewables would grow faster than any other major energy source in all scenarios modeled. So why the "cautious perspective"? It's like saying, "Yeah, the patient's getting better, but let's not get our hopes up, they could still spontaneously combust." Give me a break. According to the IEA, a supply boom in cheaper renewables will seal end of fossil fuel era.

AI's Insatiable Thirst

The report also mentions that global investment in datacenters, fueled by AI, is gonna hit $580 billion in 2025, surpassing the $540 billion being spent on global oil supply. Okay, that's... insane. We're basically trading one addiction for another. Fossil fuels for… AI server farms? Is that really progress? I mean, offcourse, AI is changing everything, but at what cost?

We're so busy patting ourselves on the back for "innovating" that we're completely ignoring the energy footprint of these technologies. It's like building a super-efficient car that requires a nuclear power plant to charge. What's the point?

It’s all driven by electric cars, heating, cooling, and AI datacenters. A 40% rise in electricity demand over the next decade? That's terrifying. Are we even prepared for that kind of surge? I'm not convinced.

The Price of "Compromise"

The worst part is that the US will have about 30% less solar power by 2035 than forecast in last year’s report because of Trump’s pullout from renewable energy support. Thirty percent! That's not a minor setback; that's a goddamn catastrophe. One man's ego and fossil fuel buddies are literally setting us back years.

It makes you wonder, doesn't it? How much are we willing to sacrifice for "political compromise"? How many degrees of warming are acceptable to appease the right-wing echo chamber? Where does it end?

Mariana Paoli from Christian Aid says governments are "dragging their feet" on building clean energy systems. No kidding. They're not just dragging their feet; they're actively sabotaging the whole damn thing. Maybe I'm being too harsh... nah, probably not.

So, What's the Real Cost of Appeasement?

The IEA should be ashamed of themselves. Instead of leading the charge towards a sustainable future, they're hedging their bets and giving cover to climate deniers. It's not about being "cautious"; it's about lacking the balls to stand up to the fossil fuel lobby. And honestly, it's pathetic.