When oil and gas executives first began using the phrase “all of the above” more than a decade ago, it was their pitch that climate advocates and sympathetic policymakers should keep natural gas alongside renewables in their vision of a new energy future. The grid needs abundant, reliable natural gas as back up when the wind isn’t blowing, they argued.
[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]
This year, the tables have turned. With renewable energy in the Trump Administration’s crosshairs, energy industry big wigs have come to use “all of the above” as a reminder that renewable energy—particularly solar—has an important role to play in keeping the lights on.
“We believe in all forms of energy,” said John Ketchum, CEO of NextEra Energy, the world’s most valuable electricity company, at a CERAWeek side event. “When we go to customers, we don’t really care if we’re selling wind turbines or gas turbines, we want to give them the lowest cost solution.”
To hear some activists talk about the new Trump Administration, the president blindly does the bidding of his fossil fuel benefactors. And, in public, many top executives are keen to praise Trump and show close relations with the White House. But behind the scenes many in the industry are more measured, and even critical.
Projections of soaring power demand in the U.S. have led utility executives to turn to whatever power source is available—including wind and solar—even as the Trump Administration tries to diminish renewables. Tariffs have threatened the bottomline. And oil executives have woken up to the reality that Trump’s vision of low oil prices doesn’t align with increased domestic production—or industry profits.
It’s certainly possible that these tensions remain under wraps. Corporate executives are not inclined to cross Trump, and market forces may be strong enough to keep the energy sector humming along mostly in line with expectations. Nonetheless, understanding the complicated nuance—which in many ways is counterintuitive—is important to grappling with the opportunities to minimize emissions in the coming years.
There is no better place to digest energy industry sentiments and trends than the annual CERAWeek conference by S&P Global in Houston. The conference, held last week, draws energy executives and government officials from around the world.
This year’s conference, which I attended for part of last week, offered a prime example of the phrase “two things can be true at once.” Industry officials widely praised some of the new administration’s deregulatory moves, but at the same time many expressed deep concerns about the uncertainty that Trump has created.
“Swinging from one extreme to another is not the right policy approach,” Chevron CEO Mike Wirth said on the CERAWeek main stage. “We have allocated capital that’s out there for decades, and so we really need consistent and durable policy.”
Jack Fusco, CEO of natural gas company Cheniere, praised the administration for pivoting the “regulatory machine” in a direction that’s “fair and transparent.” But he followed his praise with a hint of apprehension, saying he hoped the agenda would “hold up in a rule of law”—an acknowledgement of the litigation and uncertainty that surrounds much of Trump’s policy agenda.
Even attacks on the Inflation Reduction Act, former President Joe Biden’s landmark climate change law, have some corners of the industry worried. Oil and gas companies had planned to pursue tax incentives for technologies like hydrogen and carbon capture and storage—and dedicated billions in capital to doing so. “We’re looking for the continuation of 45Q,” said Vicki Hollub, the CEO of Occidental Petroleum, referring to a tax credit for carbon capture on the conference main stage. “To accelerate the technology at the pace that the U.S. needs it to accelerate, to start having the positive impact on our energy independence, we need 45Q to happen and to stay in place.” (The provision is thought to be one of the credits most likely to survive though everything will be in play during negotiations).
Behind the scenes many executives offered more vocal concern. As stocks plummeted on the conference’s opening day, executives stewed over tariffs that Trump imposed on Canada’s energy sector, which is highly integrated with the U.S. And Trump’s unpredictable approach more broadly drew concern. In the long term, different views on the price of oil may represent the biggest potential collision. Trump has repeatedly suggested he would like to see the price of oil come down as low as $50/barrel. (Right now the U.S. benchmark for crude oil is around $72/barrel). Voters love low energy prices because it means affordable gas at the pump. But oil companies hate when prices sink too low because it’s harder to turn a profit.
For utility executives, the complication of rising power demand remains top of mind. Analysts have predicted soaring demand for electricity as technology companies grow their data center footprint in response to artificial intelligence. That has led the industry to pursue whatever electricity it can build quickly—a lot of natural gas, yes, but also a lot of solar.
As I’ve written before, the dynamic nature of the Trump Administration’s policymaking makes it difficult for companies to plan. And predicting what comes next is folly. But whatever happens it’s safe to say that the convenient narrative of a Trump Administration moving in lockstep with the energy sector is, at the very least, missing several puzzle pieces.
It also means, oddly, that the most influential advocates in Washington for some decarbonization provisions—like carbon capture, sustainable aviation fuel, and hydrogen—may be energy executives embracing the “all of the above” mantra. But even that may not be enough to save climate-friendly tax incentives.
To get this story in your inbox, subscribe to the TIME CO2 Leadership Report newsletter here
TIME receives support for climate coverage from the Outrider Foundation.TIME is solely responsible for all content.