Chinese Influence In Climate Change Lawsuits Threatens To Derail U.S. Energy Industry

A new op-ed from oil services CEO Dan Eberhart in Forbes makes the case that climate change litigation is a growing threat to U.S. energy – and that the U.S. could fall behind China as a result.

He notes that Senator Ted Cruz has repeatedly voiced concern that American energy security is under threat—not from foreign armies or economic collapse, but from a coordinated legal campaign masquerading as environmental activism. This week, Cruz’s Judiciary oversight subcommittee is convening a hearing to dig into what he believes is a coordinated effort between China and the U.S. climate litigation movement aimed at undercutting U.S. energy dominance.

According to Eberhart’s piece in Forbes, the wave of climate lawsuits, particularly those brought by firms like Sher Edling, are supported by a network of well-funded foundations and advocacy organizations. These entities, he argues, may be unintentionally serving the strategic goals of America’s geopolitical adversaries—especially China—by hampering domestic fossil fuel production and increasing reliance on foreign-controlled clean energy supply chains.

Eberhart points out that China already dominates global markets for critical materials like lithium and cobalt, as well as solar and battery manufacturing. So, any U.S. policy that accelerates a transition away from fossil fuels without securing domestic alternatives, he warns, risks handing Beijing the upper hand in both energy and manufacturing.

The national security implications are becoming harder to ignore. The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission has raised alarms that the Chinese Communist Party is working to influence U.S. state and local policy to advance its global agenda. A report from the nonprofit State Armor further claims that China has infiltrated segments of the American environmental movement to steer energy policy in a way that aligns with Chinese interests.

One organization receiving particular scrutiny is the Energy Foundation China (EFC). Though it’s officially based in San Francisco, most of its staff are located in Beijing, and its activities reportedly align closely with CCP goals. Eberhart notes that EFC has funneled millions into U.S. anti-fossil fuel groups, including the Rocky Mountain Institute and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)—the latter of which faced a 2018 congressional inquiry over potential foreign agent registration.

Concerns about Chinese influence don’t stop with advocacy groups. The House Energy and Commerce Committee has previously warned that Beijing is exploiting social and political divisions in America to steer energy policy in its favor. Several major U.S. philanthropic institutions—including the Rockefeller, Hewlett, and MacArthur foundations—have funded environmental litigation efforts that Eberhart believes would never have gained traction without their financial support. However, these donors have largely ignored the risks of foreign manipulation embedded in the groups they help fund.

The influence campaign, Eberhart claims, also extends into academia. Chinese government-affiliated institutions like the National Natural Science Foundation of China have published research in U.S. journals criticizing fossil fuels and painting American companies as deceptive. Notably, one of EFC’s top communications staffers once worked at this same Chinese foundation.

Meanwhile, what Eberhart calls a “revolving door” between activist nonprofits and federal agencies raises further ethical concerns. For instance, Ann Carlson, now serving in the Biden administration, previously consulted for Sher Edling while also sitting on the board of the Environmental Law Institute—a group that has partnered with Chinese organizations on legal education initiatives tied to climate litigation.

Eberhart argues that the Senate subcommittee led by Sen. Cruz is uniquely positioned to investigate the network of foreign and domestic actors behind the legal assault on American energy. Transparency, he writes, is crucial. Americans deserve to know who is funding these lawsuits and why. Otherwise, he warns, efforts to revive the “energy dominance” doctrine promoted during the Trump administration may not be enough to overcome what he sees as an opaque and potentially dangerous campaign.

While the U.S. debates and litigates its energy future, Eberhart cautions, China is rapidly building coal plants, securing fossil fuel deals, and tightening its grip on clean energy supply chains. If current trends continue, Beijing may find itself in a commanding position—while the U.S. energy sector is entangled in regulation, litigation, and foreign dependency.

It’s almost as if all of this progressive „activism” really was put in place to set us in motion backwards…