In testimony before the House Energy Subcommittee, Energy Secretary Chris Wright delivered a forceful defense of the Department of Energy’s Fiscal Year  2026 budget proposal. The plan leans heavily on fossil fuel expansion, nuclear innovation, and aggressive deregulation, while sharply curbing clean energy programs supported under the previous administration.

• “Under President Trump’s leadership … to unleash a golden era of American energy dominance,” Wright proclaimed, adding that “a reliable and abundant energy supply is the foundation of a strong and prosperous nation.”
  
  
• He lauded the slashing of “more than 47 regulations … projected to save the American people approximately $11 billion,” and emphasized the cancellation of 24 projects—amounting to $3.7 billion—that he described as failing economic, national security, or energy viability criteria.

Wright also championed fossil fuels and nuclear power: “The United States is blessed with an abundance of coal, oil, and natural gas,” and the Department is working “to advance the rapid deployment of next-generation nuclear technology, including small modular reactors.” He highlighted DOE’s role in AI research, referencing the agency’s stewardship of “four of the world’s top ten supercomputers.”

Critics Sound Alarm Over Cuts

Environmental advocates decry the budget as an outright assault on climate action. The Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy faces a nearly 75% cut, according to multiple analyses, prompting criticism that the proposal “would decimate clean energy and climate funding”.

Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D‑OH), ranking member on the Energy Subcommittee, called the plan “devastating,” citing a “74% cut to energy efficiency and renewable energy” she described as “not just short‑sighted, it is dangerous” .

The Energy Sciences Coalition (ESC) warned Congress that slashing $1.148 billion from the DOE Office of Science threatens U.S. leadership in areas like fusion, AI, and quantum computing .

DOE employees, speaking anonymously, cautioned that the cuts and deregulation would raise energy costs, noting reports suggesting households could see a 7% increase in utility bills and a $230 rise in annual costs by 2035 . One worker lamented the elimination of efficiency rules, stating:

“The impact of … energy efficiency … can really be life changing … every dollar matters”

Environmental groups framed the budget as a “backdoor repeal of the Inflation Reduction Act,” with Alaska’s Jennifer Hyde warning that the rollback of renewable energy credits threatens progress and could hike costs in remote communities .

Advocacy organizations such as the League of Conservation Voters branded the FY 26 budget “the most anti‑environmental bill in our nation’s history,” criticizing its “78 anti‑environmental provisions and major handouts to Big Oil” .

Secretary Wright maintains the budget reorients DOE back to its core missions—energy dominance, national security, nuclear stewardship, and AI—while eliminating what the administration terms wasteful programs. But opponents argue the strategy undercuts long-term U.S. competitiveness, energy affordability, scientific innovation, and climate resilience.

Congressional appropriators now face the task of reconciling these sharply divergent visions. Majority support in the Senate will be essential to fend off environmental and scientific backlash—and determine whether the Trump agenda reshapes DOE’s future—or stalls under bipartisan pressure.