I didn't follow the case of Europe, but I did follow a bit the US.
Take a look at the first graph in [1]. Roughly speaking at this point the US gets 20% electricity from each of coal, renewable and nuclear and 40% from natural gas. In 1990 gas and renewables were standing both at around 10% (renewables in those times were just hydro). Gas went up exponentially to get to 4 times as high now. Renewables double, but that is deceiving. Hydro stayed constant, and wind and solar went from 0 to 10%. Nuclear was roughly constant for the last 20 years.
How do we get from here to net zero? It's quite simple actually: keep replacing coal with natural gas and renewables. In about 5 years coal should get to essentially zero. Then start keep growing renewables, and start replacing natural gas. Keep nuclear constant if possible. 2050 for net zero is easily achievable.
But that's maybe because, as you said, the US is in a nearly ideal position.
In EU, start by replacing all coal by nat gas. That's the best bang for the buck in terms of reducing emissions. Keep growing solar and wind. When the sun doesn't shine, and the wind doesn't blow, run the nat gas stations. In one decade or at most 15 years, we'll start shipping liquefied hydrogen. Most likely we'll convert the current LNG carriers to LH2 carriers. We should be able to convert nat gas power plants to hydrogen power plants. The EU is investing more than $100 BN into the hydrogen economy. It will work. 2050 will be doable. Not as doable as in the US, but still doable.
[1] https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=48896