Just a week after a massive blackout on the Iberian Peninsula, Brussels is once again turning its focus to energy policy. This time, it’s about a final break: a complete halt to Russian gas imports by 2027.

On Tuesday, the European Commission, under President Ursula von der Leyen, unveiled its roadmap for cutting off Russian gas supplies. The plan includes multiple measures: by the end of 2025, no new gas contracts with Russian providers can be signed within the EU. Existing contracts must expire or be terminated by the end of 2027. The aim is to force a total supply freeze from Russia. What will happen with deliveries routed through third countries — currently about a fifth of Russian gas supplies to the EU — remains unclear.

An Ambitious — and Possibly Blind — Exit Plan Brussels’ exit strategy is ambitious, but it may also be dangerously shortsighted. The facts speak for themselves: Russian gas still accounts for 13 to 16 percent of the EU’s supply, including indirect routes through intermediaries. In a twist of irony, Russian gas imports in Q2 of this year — at 12.7 billion cubic meters — exceeded even those from the United States, which stood at 12.3 billion.

Given the fragile state of Europe’s energy grid and its heavy import dependency, it’s unclear how this void will be filled. In fact, surging gas demand in Italy, the Czech Republic, and France caused Russian gas imports to increase by 18 percent in 2024. Workarounds via third countries remain embedded in the market. Europe’s industry is still deeply dependent on conventional energy sources.

The International Energy Agency estimates that by 2030, only about 50 percent of the EU’s gas demand can be met through non-Russian sources. Not even the most aggressive push for renewables will be able to close the looming gap.

A Centralized Procurement Monopoly to the Rescue? Brussels’ answer: centralization. The EU plans to counter the complex energy market with a new supranational energy agency wielding centralized purchasing power. But whether this top-down approach can reconcile national interests with wildly varying energy needs remains highly doubtful.

The structural flaw is all too familiar — just look at the European Central Bank. Brussels’ bureaucratic ambitions regularly clash with member states’ priorities, sparking recurring tensions.

So, how exactly will Europe plug its energy deficit? For now, we’re offered the usual Brussels jargon: more renewables, more diversification, and expanded LNG imports from countries like the U.S. and Qatar. New LNG terminals and supply routes are in the works. Funding will likely flow through institutions like the European Investment Bank (EIB) and Germany’s KfW.

But Brussels also falls back on its go-to dogma: subsidized energy efficiency programs and enforced consumption cuts in industry and households. In short: everyone will have to tighten their belts.

Bleak Outlook for European Industry None of this bodes well for Germany’s industrial base, which has borne the brunt of the EU’s sanctions regime since the start of the Ukraine war. Electricity prices for German manufacturers have doubled since then. Compared to their American competitors, the difference is stark: German firms without subsidies pay about €0.18 per kilowatt hour, and those with subsidies around €0.12. In the U.S., the same power costs just €0.03 to €0.04.

The cost pressure is now translating into cold, hard numbers. Factory closures at BASF and production halts at Volkswagen are wiping out tens of thousands of jobs. In 2023 alone, Germany lost around €65 billion in direct foreign investment. Much of that capital likely went to the United States, where the government is aggressively fueling a manufacturing revival — through deregulation, tax cuts, and strategic tariffs.

On top of that, the U.S. is fast-tracking fossil fuel and nuclear energy projects, offering industries the kind of stability that is vanishing in Europe. America’s departure from ideological energy policy may prove to be a decisive competitive edge, while Brussels ties itself into moralistic knots over Russia and green virtue signaling.

Legal Roadblocks Ahead But even Brussels’ plan isn’t legally watertight. To dissolve existing gas contracts with suppliers like Gazprom, the Commission must invoke “force majeure” or hardship clauses. Given that Russian suppliers — especially via TurkStream — have largely honored their contracts, legal challenges seem inevitable. Expensive, drawn-out lawsuits may soon follow — exactly what Brussels hoped to avoid.

Europe’s industry is gasping for air. While Brussels lectures about “strategic autonomy” and “climate responsibility,” industrial capacity is quietly drifting across the Atlantic. The price of ideological energy policy is steep: economic decline, a fragile energy infrastructure, and a slow erosion of prosperity.

Those who think steel can be forged and factories run on moral superiority are in for a rude awakening.