The Trump administration's policies have divided the future of American energy, and the AI-driven power demand is difficult to support.

In the economic landscape of the United States, a core proposition is increasingly prominent: the world's largest economy is facing unprecedented challenges in electricity demand. The long-stagnant growth curve of electricity consumption has sharply risen under the impetus of the artificial intelligence revolution and the wave of industrial electrification, while the sudden shift in policy direction has cast a shadow over this energy transformation. The once stagnant electricity demand, due to slowing population growth and efficiency improvements, is now being reshaped by three major trends: the "new electrification" matrix consisting of artificial intelligence computing centers, autonomous driving networks, and smart factories is consuming electricity at a rate of 2% per year. The American Electrical Manufacturers Association estimates that by 2050, this type of demand will surge by 50%, equivalent to the electricity consumption of 180 million additional households. The giant data center cluster planned by OpenAI's "Stargate" project consumes enough electricity to rival 8 million American households, becoming a symbolic footnote in this energy race. Behind this transformation are the breakthrough advancements in Clean Energy Fuels Corp. technology and the dual drive of policy dividends. The incentive mechanism constructed by the 2022 "Inflation Reduction Act" allows new CECEP Solar Energy projects to receive a 30% tax credit or electricity subsidy, directly sparking a $33 billion clean technology investment boom. Data from the U.S. Energy Corp. Information Agency shows that by 2025, CECEP Solar Energy will account for over 50% of newly added utility-scale generation capacity, with wind power contributing 12%. In cost analysis, subsidized onshore wind power has become the most cost-effective incremental power source. However, the latest "Great Beauty Act" signed by the Trump administration is rewriting the rules of the game. This law prematurely terminates most of the subsidies for Clean Energy Fuels Corp., particularly dealing a fatal blow to the CECEP Solar Energy industry. It should be noted that the 18-gigawatt battery storage project under construction in the United States (equivalent to the peak output of 18 nuclear reactors) highly depends on policy support for its accompanying photovoltaic facilities. More critically, the battery localization rate restrictions to be implemented starting in 2026 will exclude the Chinese supply chain from the subsidy range, while 90% of lithium battery components worldwide come from this Eastern manufacturing powerhouse. Alternative solutions seem to exist but face numerous challenges: while natural gas power generation can provide stable output, gas turbine orders have been scheduled until 2030, and the new construction costs disclosed by NextEra (NEE.US) energy company have soared by 200% in three years. Nuclear power, which is highly anticipated by technology leaders, faces the harsh reality of a construction cycle of up to ten years and severe cost overruns, while emerging technologies like geothermal energy remain in the experimental stage. The REPEAT project model at Princeton University shows that if policy shifts continue, the United States will lose 820 terawatt-hours of new generation capacity by 2035, equivalent to the total annual electricity output of all current nuclear power units. The cost to consumers and businesses could reach up to $50 billion in extra electricity expenses. When policy uncertainty meets mismatched construction cycles, the United States is facing the embarrassing situation of "increasing demand but stagnant supply," and this energy dilemma may reshape the global industrial competitive landscape.