Earlier this month, the US Department of Energy (DOE) canceled $7.5 billion in clean-energy awards and began reviewing nearly $100 billion in loans, sending an alarming message across the clean-tech industry. Europe, however, doubles down on its own green investments. Experts reveal the building sector will be impacted the most.
NEW DELHI (India CSR): The US Department of Energy (DOE) recently canceled more than $7.5 billion in clean-energy awards, terminating 223 projects, and launched a review of nearly $100 billion in loans and conditional commitments approved late in the previous administration.
As a result, projects across building operations, clean power, and emissions-cutting technologies now face significant delays or cuts.
While US initiatives are being paused, Europe is moving in the opposite direction. The EU currently has over €250 billion available for green measures under the NextGenerationEU framework. According to the European Commission, member states have already gained €66 billion in direct benefits from investments in clean transportation, building renovations, and renewable energy initiatives.
According to experts from Exergio, a company that reduces energy waste through AI-based optimization of building operations, cutting clean-tech funding in the US is a major setback for sustainability.
“If clean-tech solutions continue to be de-funded, this will become a major issue for corporate budgets. At the moment, the EU offers far more predictable frameworks, while the US seems to be entering a pause-and-review cycle. For industries such as the building sector, it shows that policies are not prioritising sustainable solutions. Buildings, however, run every day and consume energy regardless of funding timelines,” said Donatas Karčiauskas, CEO of Exergio.
Karčiauskas reveals that the buildings industry is the most susceptible sector to sudden policy changes, and also the one with the greatest potential to cut global emissions.
Commercial and public buildings together use approximately 32% of global energy and produce 34% of energy-related CO₂, according to the International Energy Agency. In the US alone, commercial buildings emit about 830 million tonnes of CO₂ each year, roughly equivalent to Germany’s entire annual emissions.
“If the grants in the US had gone through, many firms would have gone ahead or even built novel technologies to boost their energy efficiency. Without that push, companies will remain running on older setups, wasting even more energy,” Karčiauskas explained.
However, building owners will now have to choose operational fixes over new equipment. It can be a cheaper option to reduce energy waste, Karčiauskas adds, but many businesses are not aware the solution already exists.
“The realistic step now is software on top of existing controls. On the good note, we’ve already seen such solutions deliver even better results than some deep renovations or major upgrades. For example, existing AI tools can read site data, identify waste, and apply small corrections. The result is steadier temperatures, fewer fault hours, smoother run profiles, and, most importantly – energy savings up to 30%,” Karčiauskas added.
Karčiauskas shared how operational fixes could lead to immediate energy savings, a much cheaper and already established solution while large-scale funding remains uncertain.
“For example, we implemented an AI-based energy optimization system that is many times cheaper than deep renovations or hardware-based technologies. It led to more than one million euros in savings for the business, one of the largest shopping centers in Lithuania. It’s possible to reduce energy waste now, but it wouldn’t be possible to scale these solutions without sustained funding,” he said.
Moreover, businesses cannot afford to wait for subsidies while federal funding is on hold. In the US, cities and states are still moving ahead with climate regulations.
New York, for example, limits building emissions and requires regular reporting from firms. Washington, DC enforces fixed compliance cycles. And California will soon make large companies report their emissions on a set schedule.
These measures make it clear that companies must act regardless of the status of federal clean-energy programs.
“When we’re talking about clean tech and energy waste, we should talk about global policies and solutions. It doesn’t matter who’s doing better, but how to be better. The fact that the EU is in a leading position now doesn’t mean it can’t get complicated with the upcoming budgets, too,” concluded Karčiauskas. “If governments around the world can’t agree, businesses have to take action, and it will benefit them too, not only the climate.”
(India CSR)
