Of Mark Gongloff

Given the hostility of the US government against anything “green” and the daily titles for cancellations of wind farms, tax exemptions and environmental rules, you may mistakenly believe that pure energy is in its necrocate. In fact, at least to one point, it is better than ever.

According to Bloombergnef, global investment in renewable energy reached $ 386.5 billion in the first half of 2025, the best semester ever recorded – whether you believe it or not. This happened despite a 36% reduction in US investments compared to the second half of 2024, when investors rushed to exploit the tax reduction law for the last time, which was abolished by the return of President Donald. As expected, Trump did not waste time and tried to radically eliminate clean energy, removing not only the motives but also any regulation that could motivate the transition from fossil fuels. For good and for bad, it also upset global supply chains and business models with an innovative commercial philosophy that could be described as a “chimpanzee with Kalashnikov”.

Trump’s short -sighted attack on these emerging technologies at a time of boom in electricity demand not only threatens to increase electricity bills for Americans, but also gives the geopolitical opponent, China, the keys to the energy future. Faced with US high duties, China’s solar panels have entered new markets in Africa, where China panel imports have increased by 60% in the last year, according to the Ember thought tank.

As has been the case for more than a decade, mainland China has contributed more to the global boom in clean energy in the first half, with $ 169 billion. These costs were slightly reduced compared to the second half of 2024, when a shift in the energy market policy in Beijing prompted manufacturers to lock the projects before the end of the year.

But the real story here may be the European Union, where investments have increased by 63% from the second half of 2024 to nearly $ 76 billion, twice as much as $ 37 billion in the US. In fact, the EU and the US have exchanged positions as the world’s second largest greenery destination after China.

“This argues the view that manufacturers and investors may redistribute US funds in Europe,” BNEF analysts wrote. They noted that Totalenergies SE, the French oil company with a large portfolio of wind energy, recently told shareholders that it was adjusting its plans for offshore wind energy to the North Sea and far from the US, as well as the German energy giant RWE AG.

In other words, the revolution of pure energy does not lose from Trump. It is simply relocated, leaving behind the US.

Even global investments in wind energy – in which Trump attacked particularly vitriolic this week claiming to “destroy our country” – increased by 8% in the first half to $ 126 billion. But the big winner of the transition is still solar energy. It increased to $ 252 billion in the first half, even when investment in utilities in China, Brazil and elsewhere suffered from negative energy prices and other excessive power consumption.

A good thing with pure energy, in addition to all this issue of “maintaining a sustainable environment”, is that it is usually cheaper and faster in installation than other forms of energy. Investments in these sources provide greater performance, especially when the trillions of dollars are taken into account in damage caused by the burning of fossil fuels. Not even Trump’s intense contrast can overcome this economic advantage. This explains why solar energy and battery storage are expected to account for 80% of energy growth in the US in the second half of this year, according to the US Energy Information Service.

Wind energy is becoming increasingly expensive, but it is also more expensive and more difficult to build gas turbines, with years of waiting for supplies. It is noteworthy that 12% of the new utility energy in the US will come from wind energy in the second half of 2025, compared to 7% for gas.

Of course, the US government’s attempt to sabotage the transition to pure energy is undesirable when every country should work enthusiastically for the same goal. People no longer have time to limit global heating to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre -industrial averages and to avoid the most devastating effects of climate change.

In order to reset global carbon dioxide emissions by 2050, people will have to invest more than $ 7 trillion per year, including both supply and demand, according to BNEF estimates. Based on this wider measure, people invested just $ 2.1 trillion last year – a record, and better than the $ 1.2 trillion investment in fossil fuels – but still lags the target of at least $ 5 trillion.

The good news is that, despite the US extreme efforts to overthrow it, the transition to pure energy has a self -sustaining momentum that continues to attract capital and make its exponential adoption more and more likely. Ignore the noise and follow the money.

Mark Gongloff is a Bloomberg Opinion author and columnist on climate change. He previously worked for Fortune.com, the Huffington Post and the Wall Street Journal.