Live

In total, Europe’s fossil fuel import bill during the gas crisis reached around €1.8 trillion. The extra €930 billion represents what the EU paid on top of what it would have spent if pre-crisis prices had remained stable, according to a new report by the think tank Ember.

Despite reducing reliance on Russia, Europe is still heavily dependent on imported fossil fuels. In 2024, imports covered 58% of the EU’s primary energy—far more than in China (24%) or India (37%). And this dependence remains highly concentrated: just four suppliers provided 83% of all EU gas imports in 2024, similar to the pre-crisis years.

While Russia’s share has dropped, the EU has shifted its reliance elsewhere—most notably to the United States, now Europe’s largest provider of LNG and crude oil.

As Dr Daniel Kiewra, chief climate and energy expert at the Responsible Business Forum, explains, “High dependence on imported fossil fuels exposes the EU to fundamental risks for its energy security.”

He adds that global energy price swings translate directly into higher production costs, lower industrial competitiveness, and increased inflation—pressuring both businesses and households.

Transport and Heating: Europe’s Weak Spots

While the EU’s power sector is slowly decarbonising, other parts of the economy remain deeply tied to fossil fuels. Only 19% of electricity generation depends on imported energy, but in transport that number shoots up to 88%.

Relying on imports also means exporting vast amounts of money—hundreds of billions each year—that could otherwise support European innovation and investment.

Still, renewable energy has made a visible impact: wind and solar helped the EU save around €59 billion on fossil fuel imports between 2019 and 2024, according to Ember.

Uneven Progress in Electrification

Only a bit more than one-fifth of the EU’s total energy needs are currently met through electrification—and progress varies widely across member states.

Electricity use in households ranges from 12% in Poland to 48% in Sweden. In iron and steel production, it varies from 18% in Slovakia to 57% in France.

Two-thirds of the remaining energy demand could be electrified with technologies that already exist, especially in road transport and heating. Denmark illustrates this future: electric vehicles there already cut oil use by an amount equal to 11% of its annual crude imports.

According to Kiewra, electrifying major sectors—transport, buildings, and industrial processes—with clean power would deliver huge economic benefits. It would sharply reduce dependence on imported fuels, improve the EU’s trade balance, and keep capital circulating inside the Union.

2040 Targets: Ambitious but Possible

Experts believe that cutting fossil fuel imports by half by 2040 is technically feasible—but only with unprecedented political will and investment.

This will require more than rapid growth in wind and solar energy. The EU must also prioritise massive improvements in energy efficiency. Yet the biggest bottleneck is infrastructure: without major investment in grids, storage, and simplified permitting, renewable energy development will hit a wall.

The green transition may also create new dependencies, especially for technologies and raw materials needed for solar panels, batteries, and wind turbines.

Kiewra argues that the EU needs a strong industrial strategy to avoid simply replacing one dependency with another. This includes:

  • building EU-based supply chains and scaling up domestic production of key technologies

  • diversifying imports of critical raw materials through trusted international partnerships

The United States as Europe’s New Supplier: Advantage or Risk?

Replacing Russian fossil fuels with supplies from the US and other partners brought mixed results for EU energy security. On one hand, Europe reduced reliance on a hostile supplier. On the other, substituting relatively cheap pipeline gas with expensive LNG made Europe more exposed to volatile global markets.

European gas prices now react to demand in Asia or technical incidents in the US, such as disruptions at LNG export terminals. As Kiewra notes, while geopolitical dependence has decreased, the EU has become more vulnerable to global competition in LNG markets.

A landmark EU-US energy and trade deal worth $750 billion, signed in 2025, further deepens this new reliance.

Written by

Shape the conversation

Do you have anything to add to this story? Any ideas for interviews or angles we should explore? Let us know if you’d like to write a follow-up, a counterpoint, or share a similar story.

Write a counterargument article Write a related article