The Trump administration announced a deal with French energy giant TotalEnergies that shifts nearly $1 billion in planned offshore wind investment into U.S. oil and gas projects, raising industry concerns that presidential intervention could chill infrastructure spending more broadly.
Under the agreement, TotalEnergies will recover almost $1 billion it and partners paid for offshore wind leases off North Carolina and New York and commit an equal amount to U.S. oil and gas production and a liquefied natural gas plant in Texas. The company also pledged not to pursue any new U.S. offshore wind projects, saying such investments are not in the country’s interest.
Analysts say the deal represents a new tactic for a president to influence private-sector investments and could create lasting policy uncertainty. “The Trump administration has created a new playbook for how a sitting president can constrain energy resources or policies it opposes,” said Timothy Fox, managing director at ClearView Energy Partners. Leslie Abrahams, deputy director of the Energy Security and Climate Change program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, warned that by intervening in private investments, the administration risks chilling infrastructure projects across the economy—making them rarer, slower and more expensive.
The Interior Department framed the deal as a victory for affordable, reliable energy. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said the agreement with TotalEnergies “is yet another win for President Trump’s commitment to affordable and reliable energy for all Americans.” TotalEnergies CEO Patrick Pouyanné described the arrangement as mutually beneficial, arguing at an energy conference in Houston that offshore wind projects in the U.S. are costlier than in Europe and could hurt power affordability for consumers. The company had already paused its U.S. offshore wind work following Trump’s reelection.
The move follows a broader White House push to prioritize fossil fuels and limit renewables. Earlier, a federal judge struck down an executive order that halted approvals for new wind projects on federal lands and waters. The administration also tried—and failed—to stop construction of five offshore wind projects along the East Coast, citing alleged national security concerns flagged by the Defense Department.
Industry groups and grid operators caution that offshore wind is important to meeting growing electricity demand and ensuring reliability. Evan Vaughan, executive director of the Mid-Atlantic Renewable Energy Coalition, called the TotalEnergies deal “disappointing but sadly not surprising,” and emphasized the need to use all available energy sources to deliver affordable, reliable power as demand rises.
Experts say the agreement could encourage similar deals, though TotalEnergies may have been uniquely positioned to shift investments because of its large oil and gas business. Companies hold more than a dozen leases in federal waters that could host future wind projects, and some might seek payouts from the administration given Trump’s opposition to wind. Conservation Law Foundation attorney Nick Krakoff noted that while other firms could pursue similar arrangements, not all have alternative business lines to absorb redirected investment.
Beyond offshore wind, analysts worry that heightened politicization and abrupt policy swings raise long-term investment risks across the energy sector. “When you’re building a power plant or thinking about oil production, you’re thinking not just about the current administration, you’re thinking about the next couple of decades,” Fox said. “And the pendulum swing is a real policy risk.” That risk could deter developers and financiers from committing to capital-intensive projects, slowing progress on infrastructure needed to meet future energy demand.