The U.S. energy transition is poised for a major shift, led by Chris Wright , CEO of Liberty Energy and future Secretary of Energy, and Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla and incoming head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Their contrasting approaches—Wright’s assumed support for hydrocarbons and Musk’s aggressive push for renewables—highlight the complexity of balancing political support, energy security, climate goals, and economic growth.

(French Version: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/chris-wright-et-elon-musk-redéfinissent-lénergie-que-doit-marcoux-kbgle)

Contrasting Visions: Wright vs. Musk

• Chris Wright advocates for abundant, affordable, reliable energy through oil, gas, and nuclear power, focusing on solutions like carbon capture to reduce emissions. He supports expanded domestic production, streamlined regulations, and using U.S. energy as a geopolitical tool.
• Elon Musk envisions a rapid shift to renewables, electrification, and grid-scale storage, seeing decarbonization as an economic opportunity. Musk champions policies that accelerate innovation, scale EV and battery production, and positions the U.S. as a leader in clean technologies, AI, and space exploration.

Implications for U.S. Policy

Both are likely to become members of the new National Energy Council, headed by upcoming interior secretary Doug Burgum and which aims to establish American “energy dominance”. Their combined influence will likely result in an “all-of-the-above” approach:

• Climate Change: Policies balancing Wright’s emphasis on energy security and gradualism with Musk’s urgency for EVs and renewables.
• Energy Production: Expanded oil and natural gas production (and maybe nuclear power) alongside investments in renewables and storage.
• Regulations: Broad deregulation favoured by both Wright and Musk streamlining energy development, but potentially cutting incentives for clean energy adoption.
• Competitiveness: Leveraging the U.S.’s energy resources and tech leadership, especially in AI data centres.
• Manufacturing: Renegotiating trade agreements (e.g. USMCA), imposing tariffs to protect domestic industries, and reducing regulatory burdens on manufacturers.
• Foreign Relations: Blending energy independence with global energy leadership.

Areas of Conflict between Wright and Musk

• Fossil Fuels: Wright’s strong support for hydrocarbons as essential to energy security stands in sharp contrast to Musk’s mission to phase them out in favour of renewables.
• Pace of Transition: Musk’s urgency to accelerate the renewable transition could conflict with Wright’s call for a more gradual approach, prioritizing reliability and infrastructure readiness.

Impact on Canada’s Trade

• Oil and Gas: Wright’s focus on domestic oil production could reduce U.S. reliance on Canadian oil, though U.S. refineries’ reliance on processing heavy Canadian crude limits this shift in the short term.
• Electricity: Increased U.S. natural gas power and grid scale batteries could compete with Canadian hydropower (especially Hydro Québec), but growth in EV adoption, data centres and manufacturing could push electricity demand even faster.
• Manufacturing: Due to its lack of productivity and innovation, Canada risks being left behind in the rapidly growing clean technology sectors, such as renewable energy, electric machinery, electric vehicles, and battery production.

Strategic Considerations for Canada

To remain competitive, Canada must:

• Diversify oil and gas exports to reduce dependence on the U.S.
• Engage in interregional grid planning, with US states locking in Canadian generation.
• Address productivity and innovation gaps in manufacturing.

Conclusion

Wright and Musk’s leadership will redefine U.S. energy policy, striving to establish American “energy dominance”. For Canada, this means adjusting strategies to remain competitive while aligning with evolving U.S. priorities.

What are your thoughts—how can Canada thrive in this evolving energy landscape??