EU Gas Dependence: From Russia to US – Greenpeace Warns of New Energy Vulnerability
From Russian Pipelines to American LNG: Is Europe Trading One Dependence for Another?
Europe’s swift move to ditch Russian gas following the invasion of Ukraine was a landmark decision. But a growing chorus of voices, led by organizations like Greenpeace, warns that the continent may be leaping from the frying pan into the fire – swapping reliance on one autocratic regime for another. The focus is now shifting to the burgeoning imports of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) from the United States, and the potential geopolitical implications.
The Rise of US LNG in Europe
Before the war in Ukraine, Europe heavily relied on Russia for roughly 40% of its natural gas supply. The EU’s ban on Russian gas imports prompted a scramble for alternatives, and the US quickly stepped in. According to the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA), the US supplied 57% of Europe’s LNG imports in 2025, a figure projected to climb to a staggering 80% by 2030. This isn’t just about volume; it’s about power dynamics.
Greenpeace’s recent analysis highlights a concerning trend: an estimated €28 billion worth of US gas has been imported by EU countries since January 20, 2025, the date of Donald Trump’s second inauguration. Italy, in particular, has become a significant importer, receiving 12% of all US LNG destined for Europe, with ENI signing long-term contracts with American companies. This dependence raises questions about Europe’s energy sovereignty, especially given Trump’s history of challenging transatlantic alliances.
Did you know? A single LNG tanker can carry enough natural gas to heat approximately 80,000 homes for a year.
The Political Risks of Energy Dependence
The core argument isn’t simply about the environmental impact of fossil fuels (though that remains a critical concern). It’s about the vulnerability created by relying on a single, potentially volatile supplier. Lisa Göldner of Greenpeace Germany succinctly puts it: “The more Europe depends on the United States for energy, the more vulnerable it is to the pressures of Trump.” Trump’s past criticisms of NATO and his “America First” policies suggest a willingness to leverage energy supplies for political gain.
This isn’t hypothetical. Despite repeated threats from Trump, over 60 LNG tankers from the US have arrived in Europe since the beginning of 2026, demonstrating a continued reliance even in the face of potential political headwinds. The situation echoes historical concerns about Russia’s use of energy as a geopolitical weapon, only now the risk originates from a traditionally allied nation.
Italy’s Case: A Sovereign Nation or an Energy Satellite?
Italy’s increasing dependence on US LNG is particularly noteworthy. Greenpeace Italy’s Simona Abbate questions Prime Minister Meloni’s definition of “sovereignty” when her government prioritizes US energy imports over the potential for energy independence through renewable sources. The long-term contracts signed by ENI lock Italy into decades of reliance on American gas, potentially limiting its ability to pursue a truly independent energy policy.
Pro Tip: Diversifying energy sources is key to energy security. Investing in renewables, improving energy efficiency, and exploring alternative gas suppliers can reduce vulnerability to any single nation.
The Path Forward: A Renewable Energy Revolution
Greenpeace advocates for a radical shift in strategy: a complete withdrawal from the commitment to import $750 billion of US energy (primarily gas) by 2028, an immediate halt to negotiations for new gas deals, and a comprehensive plan to phase out gas altogether. The organization champions a rapid transition to a fully renewable energy system, powered by sources like solar, wind, and geothermal.
This isn’t just an environmental argument; it’s an economic and security imperative. Investing in renewable energy creates jobs, stimulates innovation, and reduces reliance on volatile global markets. Furthermore, it empowers Europe to control its own energy destiny, free from the political pressures of external suppliers.
Beyond Protests: A History of Direct Action
Greenpeace’s concerns aren’t merely theoretical. Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the organization has engaged in direct action across Europe, blocking shipments of Russian oil and gas in Finland, the UK, Belgium, Denmark, and Italy. They’ve also targeted infrastructure projects, such as blocking the construction of an LNG terminal in France and protesting a gas-fired power plant in Spain, highlighting the potential for these facilities to perpetuate fossil fuel dependence.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Q: Is US LNG environmentally friendly?
A: No. While it may reduce immediate reliance on Russian gas, LNG is still a fossil fuel and contributes to greenhouse gas emissions. The process of liquefying and transporting gas also has environmental impacts.
Q: What are the alternatives to US LNG?
A: Investing in renewable energy sources (solar, wind, geothermal), improving energy efficiency, and diversifying gas suppliers are key alternatives.
Q: What role does Italy play in this situation?
A: Italy is a significant importer of US LNG and has signed long-term contracts, making it particularly vulnerable to potential political pressures.
Q: Is Europe’s energy security truly at risk?
A: Yes. Over-reliance on any single supplier, even an ally, creates vulnerabilities that can be exploited for political gain.
This evolving energy landscape demands a critical reassessment of Europe’s long-term strategy. The pursuit of energy independence must prioritize sustainability, resilience, and genuine sovereignty – not simply a shift in dependence from one external power to another.
Want to learn more? Explore our articles on renewable energy investment and European energy policy.
Share your thoughts in the comments below! What steps do you think Europe should take to secure its energy future?