EU’s U.S. Trade Deal Fails to Deliver Promised Energy Savings—What’s Really Powering Europe?
Brussels promised cheaper energy imports from America. The reality? European wallets are still feeling the squeeze.
The Paper Promise vs. The Pipeline Problem
Trade agreements look great on diplomatic letterhead. They signal cooperation, open markets, and mutual benefit. But when the ink dries and the LNG tankers don't show up at the promised discount, the economic math gets brutally simple. A deal is only as good as its execution, and right now, Europe's energy import ledger isn't seeing the relief that was touted.
Follow the Money, Not the Memos
If the traditional energy corridors are clogged with bureaucracy and unfulfilled promises, capital finds another way. It always does. While ministers debate tariffs and quotas, a parallel financial system is being built—one that operates 24/7, bypasses legacy intermediaries, and settles transactions in minutes, not days. It's the kind of efficiency that would make a central banker blush, if they weren't so busy managing inflation from their monetary ivory towers.
The New Energy Currency
Forget barrels and cubic meters for a moment. The real energy story isn't just about fossil fuels; it's about computational power and the digital assets that fuel it. Blockchain networks consume energy to secure value and execute contracts—a transparent, auditable cost for a decentralized financial grid. It's a provocative thought: what if the future of European energy resilience isn't tied to a foreign pipeline, but to a globally distributed network powered by a digital reserve asset?
The old guard is waiting for a deal to trickle down savings. The new paradigm creates its own energy market—one where you can be your own utility. Sometimes, the best trade deal isn't negotiated in a boardroom; it's coded into a protocol and validated by a network. A cynic might say traditional finance is still trying to solve yesterday's supply chain issues while missing the ledger-based revolution happening right under its nose.
Current levels of spending and infrastructure don’t match the deal
For all of 2025 so far, EU energy imports from the U.S. are sitting at $73.7 billion. That’s not even a third of what’s needed each year to hit the $750 billion goal by 2028.
Even if the EU swapped out every molecule of Russian gas with American LNG, it still wouldn’t get close. Argus Media, a firm that tracks global prices, said that WOULD only boost annual imports to about $29 billion, or just 23% of what’s required.
And to somehow reach the full target, gas prices would need to shoot up to $37.3 per mmbtu by 2028. That’s four times higher than where futures are trading now, which is around $8.2 per mmbtu, and nearly quadruple the current spot price of about $10.
The last time prices hit $37.3 was in December 2022, when Russia’s invasion of Ukraine triggered an energy crisis and forced the EU to scramble for alternatives.
Even then, Gillian doesn’t think that level of value is within reach. “Even if the EU were to replace all Russian gas with U.S. supplies, it would still not be enough to triple the import value,” she said.
The way she sees it, the deal looks like a way to score tariff relief, not an actual energy commitment.
Long-term purchases and bottlenecks raise more questions
Markets aren’t buying the dream either. With the U.S., Qatar, and Canada all expected to raise output, supply is likely to grow faster than demand. That means prices could keep dropping. There’s also growing talk about a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine, which has helped cool the market even more.
Martin Senior, an analyst at Argus, pointed to physical limitations as another barrier. He said the EU would need to boost its import capacity by more than 50% to handle more American energy.
On the U.S. side, export infrastructure would have to more than double to keep up with that level of commitment. That means new regasification terminals, more tanks, and additional pipelines, none of which can be built overnight.
So what’s the real story here? A former member of the EU Parliament who worked on energy issues said the entire agreement looked like a delay tactic. “The hour of reckoning must be postponed. And maybe the war [will be] over when the hour of reckoning comes,” said the ex-MEP.
According to them, this might be less about gas and more about politics. Just stalling until TRUMP finishes his second term in January 2029.
The European Commission claimed that it had spent €200 billion ($236 billion) on U.S. energy goods in the first 11 months of 2025.
They said purchases of LNG and oil were growing, especially from the U.S., and expected total LNG imports from the U.S. to hit 70 billion cubic meters in 2025, up from 45bcm the year before.
A Commission spokesperson said, “This trend will continue in the future, with at least nine new long-term contracts for U.S. LNG signed by EU buyers this year.”
But no one’s quite sure how much of those future orders were already baked into the €200 billion figure. And the number also includes a separate deal with Poland, €42 billion to buy three nuclear reactors from Westinghouse for a new power plant.
Nuclear fuel like uranium is technically part of the energy trade agreement, but it only makes up less than 1% of all EU imports from the U.S.
Claim your free seat in an exclusive crypto trading community - limited to 1,000 members.
