The push for a transition to renewable energy sources and convoluted legislation are holding back the development of artificial intelligence in the European Union, causing the bloc to fall behind the United States and China in this field. This view was expressed by U.S. Ambassador to the EU Andrew Puzder and U.S. Deputy Secretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment Jacob Helberg in an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal.

"To enter the AI economy, the European Union needs to expand its power supply — not pursue an energy transition — and abandon policies that raise energy costs and restrict the use of fossil fuels. If the EU does not change course, the U.S. may leave it behind," they argued.

Puzder and Helberg maintain that the U.S. currently leads in AI development, though China is close behind. The authors note that Europe has everything it needs to thrive in this space, but EU leaders must focus on innovation rather than increasing pressure on the energy sector and passing new laws that restrict AI. Europe needs data centers and vast amounts of energy to power them — energy that is increasingly difficult to source given restrictions on fossil fuels and the promotion of low-efficiency clean energy alternatives.

The officials believe that companies within the EU are capable of building the multi-billion-dollar infrastructure required for AI. They are willing to grow and invest in neural networks, but European regulations stifle initiative and drive businesses out of the bloc. The EU has numerous laws restricting the development and use of AI that slow progress, raise costs for companies, and delay products from reaching the market.

In Puzder and Helberg's view, investment in AI drives both economic growth and advantages in potential military conflicts through the use of neural networks in intelligence, logistics, and command and control. The officials referenced a White House report comparing the development of AI to the Industrial Revolution — a period that created a divide between those who invested in industrial development and those who did not. A similar divide, they argue, is forming today between those who invest in AI and those who do not.