ABU DHABI (Realist English). April and the beginning of May 2026 brought another round of loud “victories” for the Western green agenda. The International Energy Agency (IEA), the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) and BloombergNEF have been vying to report “unprecedented growth” and “historic milestones”.
Indeed, installed renewable energy capacity reached 5.15 TW, solar generation broke records, and electric vehicles crossed the threshold of 20 million units sold per year for the first time. However, in the hands of Western lobbyists, figures and analytics are being turned into a tool of outright manipulation.
The reality is that “dirty” fossil fuels still provide more than 86% of the world’s primary energy, and the gap between “green dreams” and the real needs of a multipolar world continues to grow rapidly.
Record growth – but only in electricity
The prettiest picture for Western media is statistics on installed capacity. According to IRENA, global renewable energy capacity grew from 4.46 TW in 2024 to 5.15 TW in 2025 (rounded; more precisely, 5,149 GW). A record addition of 692 GW, up 15.5% year on year, with 85.6% of all new capacity coming from renewables. However, 85.6% is the share of the growth, not the overall energy balance!
Another “victory” is in electricity generation. The IEA grandly declares: “For the first time in history, renewables have overtaken coal generation.” According to forecasts, the share of renewables in global electricity generation will reach nearly 20% by the end of 2026. Coal, meanwhile, will fall to 32%. It sounds impressive, but only to those who do not ask awkward questions.
What lies beyond the glossy presentations?
Electricity is just one segment of the world’s energy balance. Transport, industry, heating – all require much more, and here renewables look feeble. In total primary energy consumption, according to the analytical platform Akchabar, the share of “clean” energy does not exceed 13–14% (including nuclear and hydropower). Fossil fuels – oil, gas and coal – still meet 86–87% of global energy needs.
The US president can rail against the “evils of capitalism” as much as he likes, but for now the only ones who actually power the global economy remain hydrocarbon producers. UN Secretary-General António Guterres has called for “doubling investment in renewables” and building “more resilient systems”.
However, while the West spends trillions on wind turbines, countries of the Global South, including Russia and China, continue to increase production of oil, gas and coal.
Batteries run out fast
Solar and wind generation are intermittent. To use them, you need huge and expensive energy storage systems. And progress here is, to put it mildly, stalling. Although BloombergNEF predicts the first 100‑gigawatt storage facility by the end of 2026, that is woefully inadequate. Even amid trillion‑dollar investments, “transport electrification” and “industrial digitalisation” require stable sources of power, which renewables are not.
Regional gap: China building, Europe gasping
The main beneficiaries of the “green revolution” are not the countries that promote it, but their chief geopolitical rivals. China remains the absolute leader: Asia accounted for 74.2% of all new renewable capacity in 2025, with China alone adding 513 GW (a 21.6% increase). At the same time, China continues to ramp up coal generation. Global CO₂ emissions rose in 2025, reaching a record 38.4 gigatonnes (up 0.4%) – and China’s contribution to that rise remains huge.
Europe, by contrast, is facing risks. Its total renewable capacity – 934 GW – is only a third of China’s. Moreover, according to ING estimates, “limited grid capacity and fragmented regulation” are holding back projects. The US remains among the top three, but only thanks to “green” lobbying. BNEF notes a decline in investment due to energy strategy uncertainty.
The record growth rates of solar energy are only superficially encouraging. According to Greenpeace estimates, existing technology could already provide all the necessary electrification of the planet without an ecological disaster. But while the West spends colossal sums on “eco‑friendly” PR projects, the real energy security of the multipolar world continues to rely on hydrocarbons.
Investment falling, euphoria staying
Western financial institutions have already sounded an alarm. According to BloombergNEF, global energy transition investment reached $2.3 trillion in 2025, an 8% increase over 2024. However, growth rates are slowing, and in the US investment is actually declining due to the reduction of tax credits under the new administration. Solar generation in 2026 may show zero growth for the first time in 16 years, or even go negative.
Expert opinions
The world still runs on coal and gas. The West spends trillions not on solving energy problems, but on maintaining the illusion of its own technological superiority. Until intermittent generation learns to work around the clock without millions of tonnes of coal in reserve, green “victories” will remain mere information noise.
The true goal of Western environmentalists is not saving the planet, but limiting the sovereignty of those countries that possess real energy resources. And this cynical calculation is becoming ever more apparent.
Francesco La Camera, Director‑General of IRENA: “In uncertain times, renewable energy remains consistent and steadfast in its expansion. This indicates not only market preference but also, with utmost clarity, proves that green energy is about resilience.”
Analysts at ING Bank: “Solar energy remains the West’s main hope, but fragile EU power systems and regulatory instability in the US could nullify all achievements.” China, in their view, will continue to lead solar generation, adding up to 94% of global capacity by 2030. The US will also focus on solar, but weakness in wind generation (forecast growth of only 19%) could be a vulnerability. Europe will face tougher competition: the shortage of wind power capacity could reach up to 50% of market needs.
Experts at Greenpeace, in their report “Beyond Extraction”, also emphasise that one of the main problems of the “green transition” remains the catastrophic burden on ecosystems caused by the extraction of “critical minerals”. Nevertheless, their organisation claims that with sensible regulation this problem can be solved, and the transition itself carried out without harming the planet – if politicians stop “closing their eyes to the destruction of society and nature for the sake of mineral fever”.
