Energy Secretary Wright Threatens To Take U.S. Out of International Energy Agency over Climate-Cult Supporting Forecasts
Instead of sipping champagne while making up fantasy stories of melting polar ice and dying polar bears, Wright challenges narratives and promotes policies that will not only help our nation, but the rest of the world.
President Donald Trump’s current cabinet is a marked upgrade from the one he had in his first term.
Take, for example, the Department of Energy. When he was first nominated to head the agency, I reported that entrepreneur Chris Wright did not believe in the climate crisis hysteria. Rather, he is a proponent of ensuring our nation has inexpensive, efficient, and reliable energy.
Nor does he believe in ginned-up data from climate cultists, who want to pretend that solar and wind options are every bit as reliable and efficient as fossil fuels and nuclear. So, when confronted with the happy talk from the International Energy Agency on their “data”, Write said the organization needed to be reformed or the U.S. would no longer be a member.
In a July 15 interview with Bloomberg, U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright said he has told Fatih Birol, head of the International Energy Agency (IEA), his agency must either reform its forecasting methods or face potential U.S. withdrawal from the organization. This development reflects growing tensions between the Trump administration’s energy priorities and the IEA’s focus on clean energy transitions.
Wright’s criticism centers on the IEA’s reports and projections, which he and other critics of the agency argue are overly optimistic about renewable energy adoption and fail to adequately prioritize energy security. The debate underscores a broader ideological divide between the U.S. administration and many other western governments over global energy policy and could impact international cooperation and domestic energy strategies.
…Wright laid out the U.S. position in the Bloomberg interview, stating, “We will do one of two things: we will reform the way the IEA operates, or we will withdraw.” He expressed a preference for the former, saying, “My strong preference is to reform it,” in hopes his discussions with Birol and others can influence a return to the more balanced approach which formerly characterized IEA’s modeling approach.
Apparently, the IAE forecasts indicate the need for fossil fuels will “peak” before 2030...then go into decline.
…[T]he IEA’s annual World Energy Outlook (WEO), which it previously styled the “gold standard of energy analysis”, has proclaimed the “Age of Electricity”, consistently projecting that demand for all three fossil fuels will peak before 2030 before going into permanent decline.
“That’s just total nonsense,” responded Wright, who was CEO of a US$2.8-billion oilfield services company before joining Donald Trump’s cabinet and taking over responsibility for his new boss’ analytically challenged “Drill, Baby, Drill” agenda. In an interview during a conference at Pittsburgh’s Carnegie Mellon University, Wright told Bloomberg he’d said as much to IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol.
“Wright’s criticism of the agency that gets millions of dollars in US funding is in line with Trump’s broader pro-fossil fuels thrust,” Bloomberg writes.
🚨BREAKING: Energy Secretary Chris Wright Threatens to Pull USA from the International Energy Agency
“We will do one of two things: we will reform the way the IEA operates or we will withdraw,”
Energy Secretary Chris Wright blasted the Paris-based International Energy Agency… pic.twitter.com/sR2viq1owI
— Walter Curt (@WCdispatch_) July 15, 2025
The IAE’s assertion defies all logic and reason. Take, for example, the more plausible projections of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC):
This forecast starkly contrasts with OPEC’s outlook, which anticipates oil demand rising to 123 million barrels per day by 2050, up from around 105 million bpd today.
OPEC has repeatedly criticized the IEA’s predictions as “dangerous,” warning they could lead to energy market volatility.
Furthermore, it is clear that the IAE numbers are not factoring in the energy-greedy artificial intelligence (AI) data centers. There are likely quite a number of them that will be built, and all of them will require a steady source of a great deal of energy that green energy cannot supply.
Interestingly, the biggest US grid ( PJM Interconnection, serving about 65–67 million people across 13 states and the District of Columbia) lacks the capacity to take on these facilities, according to a watchdog group.
“There is simply no new capacity to meet new loads,” said Joe Bowring, president of Monitoring Analytics, which is the independent watchdog for PJM Interconnection, the grid that extends from Washington to Chicago. “The solution is to make sure that people who want to build data centers are serious enough about it to bring their own generation.”
Artificial intelligence is driving the biggest US surge in electric demand in several decades, adding stress to grids that have proven vulnerable to extreme weather. PJM, which is home to the highest domestic concentration of data centers, has endured such tension for more than a year.
Tight supplies on PJM led to a record $14.7 billion in an annual auction last year. (The auction provides a key revenue source for generators within the system.) The results of the next auction, which are scheduled to be released late Tuesday, are expected to show capacity prices match or exceed all-time highs as the growth of data centers, especially for artificial intelligence, accelerates, according to Barclays Plc.
Ignoring economics and physics has real-world consequences. Just ask Spain.
Instead of sipping champagne while making up fantasy stories of melting polar ice and dying polar bears, Wright challenges narratives and promotes policies that will not only help our nation, but the rest of the world.
Personally, I like that in my Energy Secretary.
I can’t wait to laugh when this doesn’t happen. 🤣 pic.twitter.com/wApUUcQKEN
— Chris Martz (@ChrisMartzWX) July 25, 2025
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
“…the fantasy stories of melting polar ice & dying polar bears”
However the fact remains, the primary cause of death among polar bears is old age.
There are numerous polar bear subpopulations across the Arctic: two subpopulations have shown an increase and four are stable, the rest have insufficient data to report, however none are in danger of extinction.
Cartesian bears are faring best due to the fact that their coordinates are unrelated to the weather.
Cartesian bears are one of the few that can travel due south, then either due east or west, then turn due north, and be back where they started!
Thanks. You made my day.
Everyone knows that the island city of Atlantis was lost due to early climate change. History doesn’t always repeat itself, but it often rhymes, in Al Gore Rhythms.
Why stop at the IEA and Unesco? Go for the whole kit ‘n caboodle, as in the entire UN.
What benefit does the US derive from membership in the UN? Or having the headquarters located in Manhattan? I don’t know if it would take an act of Congress for the US to withdraw. However Trump could have all the UN ambassadors declared Persona Non Grata. Surely that lies within the President’s Article II powers. Of course the UN would sue and a rogue judge would try to dictate US foreign policy. Think of the conniption fits the Democrats would go into. That alone would make the exercise worthwhile.
I see a benefit to having UN headquarters in NYC. It reinforces that the USA is the most powerful country in the world and we can make diplomats come here. Even though those diplomats rack up traffic tickets and don’t pay them, they’re still supporting the US’s economy with all their staff. China would build a new palace overnight for the UN if the US kicks them out, taller and shinier (and buggier) than what’s in New York. Better to keep the UN where we have more leverage over them.
IMO the UN is a corrupt hub of Marxist/globalist crap that serves no purpose other than to allow shady NGOs and lefty causes to operate with a patina of respectability while siphoning off US taxpayer dollars.
Any Nation that actually desires good diplomatic relations with the USA can send their diplomats to their Embassy in DC. If the US Gov’t wants diplomatic relations with them we can establish an Embassy or Consulate in their Nation.
Throw these.UN grifters the heck out of the USA.
Don’t just threaten, do it!
Meh it looks better to offer opportunities for reform and helps bring the squishy moderates onboard for the inevitable decision to kick these irredeemable international entities to the curb b/c they won’t drop their anti USA bias.
threatening ??????
at this point in time THATS AN INSULT TO JUSTICE
Reform is impossible. Just get out.
Besides their projections what purpose does the IAE serve? Oh yeah the symposiums at trendy resorts.
Excellent and encouraging article. But lots of “IAE” typos.
In regard to peak fossil fuel in the next 5 years: The only way electrical needs can be met without gas-oil-coal fired plants is nuclear. Unless this climate crisis pipe dream is pushing for a large amounts of nuclear plants it’s nonsense. Even then I haven’t looked at the numbers for grid vs transportation fossil fuel usage. Realistic transportation is ICE all the way. Electrical battery vehicles are novelty items for at least another 20 years.
(remember their are two types of bad ICE to progressives- Internal Combustion Engines and Immigration and Customs Enforcement. )