You may think electrification means cleaner air and a low-carbon future. But in the U.S., the push for electric cars, new data centres and heat pumps is being powered largely by fossil fuels.
The country is building new gas plants and keeping coal plants alive, and that may come with a hidden cost for the planet and your pocket. Here’s how America may end up with “clean tech” running on dirty energy.
1. The clean tech paradox
Electrification was meant to help decarbonise America. Instead, it risks deepening dependence on fossil fuels.
“Electric cars and heat pumps replace oil and gas directly,” says energy analyst William Tilles. “But they still need electricity, and that power often comes from fossil fuels.”
The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) reports that nearly 60% of U.S. electricity still comes from coal and natural gas. That share has barely budged in five years. So, while electric vehicles are cleaner at the tailpipe, the smokestacks that power them remain active, with some even expanding.
2. New plants, old problems
Across several states, utilities are obtaining approval to build new natural gas plants and extend coal operations to meet the rising demand from electric cars, homes, and massive data centres. A single gas-fired plant can run 40 years or more, locking in decades of carbon emissions. Inflation and high construction costs also mean every new plant costs far more than the old ones they replace.
“New facilities, regardless of type, are expensive,” Tilles noted. “But renewables have an advantage, they don’t buy fuel. Sunlight and wind are free.”
Yet, renewable projects often face political pushback or local opposition. As a result, fossil fuel projects keep winning approvals while solar and wind projects sit idle in long interconnection queues.
3. The data centre dilemma
Tech giants are now at the centre of this paradox. At an AI summit last year, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt told industry leaders to “forget about your climate targets, you won’t achieve them anyway.” His blunt remarks highlighted a shift in Silicon Valley’s priorities, growth over green goals.
U.S. data centres already use 4% of the nation’s power, and the International Energy Agency expects that figure to double by 2030 due to AI demand.
To power them, companies like Google and Microsoft are pushing for guaranteed electricity supplies, even if that means more gas-fired plants. “They want cheap, steady power,” says energy economist Leonard Hyman. “They care less about where it comes from.”
4. Billions in new capacity
The EIA expects about 18.7 gigawatts of new gas-fired capacity between now and 2028. That sounds big, until you look back. Between 2000 and 2005, the U.S. added over 160 gigawatts of new gas plants, including 50 gigawatts in 2000 alone.
The current expansion, analysts say, is cautious but telling. Washington’s new “permission structure,” as Hyman calls it, quietly allows more fossil-fuel projects while delaying renewable alternatives.
Still, gas remains cheaper to build and easier to dispatch than many renewables. For policymakers facing rising electricity demand, it’s the “easy button.”
5. The road ahead
The question now is whether the U.S. can electrify and decarbonise at the same time, or whether the two goals are drifting apart.
Environmentalists call for faster solar and battery rollouts. Industry leaders insist they need stability first. Both sides agree the grid must expand fast, at least two to three times larger to meet the electrification boom.
For ordinary Americans, the outcome affects more than emissions. Every new plant, line, or upgrade means higher utility bills. “Consumers will pay for these choices,” says Hyman. “Whether through taxes or rates, the cost always flows downstream.”
The promise of clean tech still shines. But unless its power source changes, the electric future may arrive — still plugged into the past.
Read also: US needs $1.4 trn to escape Nigeria-style blackouts as AI, EV boom push power grid to breaking point
