There is no Energy Transition - opinion

The concept of energy transition occupies a central position in discussions on sustainability, climate policies and energy planning.

Despite the advancement of renewable sources, the global energy matrix remains largely dependent on fossil fuels, and the structural replacement promised by institutional discourses has not been realized on a significant scale.

When analyzing recent data and geopolitical and technological implications, it is concluded that the transition, to date, is configured more as an expansion or diversification or energy addition than as a true replacement.

The term "energy transition" has gained prominence in global debates on climate change, sustainable development, and energy geopolitics. Governments, multilateral organizations, and corporations use it to describe the supposed shift from fossil fuels (oil, coal, and natural gas) to renewable, low-carbon sources.

There is a great distance between the normative discourse of transition and its empirical, economic and geopolitical expression.

Despite international commitments (such as the Paris Agreement) and the growing diffusion of renewable technologies, data shows that the global energy mix remains largely fossil-based. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA, 2024), more than 80% of the world's primary energy still derives from non-renewable sources, a figure that has remained virtually unchanged over the past three decades.

Furthermore, absolute fossil fuel consumption continues to grow. This indicates that the advance of renewables is not replacing fossil fuels, but merely adding new layers to the global energy system.

Global oil consumption remains at around 100 million barrels per day, and natural gas consumption at around 110 billion cubic meters per day. Both are stable or expected to grow in the coming decades.

One of the factors fueling the false perception of transition is corporate greenwashing. Major oil companies maintain fossil fuel expansion plans while announcing "net-zero" targets and investing a small percentage in renewables. At the same time, investment funds and banks adopt ESG labels but continue to finance carbon-intensive projects.

Some of the refined petroleum, between 10 and 15%, is used in petrochemicals to produce approximately 6,000 products that society uses daily. Another significant portion is used in logistics, such as diesel, gasoline, jet fuel, etc. Some of this logistics currently has a viable replacement limited to light electric vehicles, which are still incipient in the Western world. It's worth noting that petroleum doesn't produce electricity, or rather, it rarely does. Renewable energy sources don't produce petrochemicals, only electricity.

Beyond the energy dimension, the transition involves profound material changes. Solar and wind power, as well as technologies such as batteries and electric cars, rely heavily on strategic minerals—lithium, nickel, cobalt, graphite, and rare earths.

This dependence implies new mining, refining, and manufacturing circuits, dominated by a few countries, especially China. Thus, rather than breaking with structures of energy dominance, the transition may merely reconfigure geoeconomic and technological dependencies. The OPEC of oil may give way to something similar, such as the OPEC of minerals.

Building a decarbonized energy matrix requires consistent, long-term, and internationally coordinated public policies. However, global energy policy remains fragmented, marked by national interests, protectionism, and geopolitical shocks (such as the war in Ukraine, conflicts in Israel, or tensions in the South China Sea).

In developing countries, the dilemma between economic growth and climate mitigation further complicates the situation. In many cases, the expansion of fossil-fueled power plants remains the most economically viable solution in the short term.

Natural gas has been widely used to cover thermal generation in times of significant intermittency in energy from solar, wind and even hydroelectric sources, the latter obviously having very different cycles.

The statement “there is no energy transition” should not be interpreted as climate denial, but as a provocation based on the empirical reality of the global energy sector.

To date, there is no robust evidence that fossil fuels are being systematically replaced by renewable sources on a global scale and at a speed compatible with climate goals.

The so-called transition is fragmented, uneven, concentrated in a few countries, and insufficient. Therefore, an honest and profound critique of the limits of the current model and the risks of continuing to rely on promises that fail to materialize is urgently needed.

Studying, researching, and developing alternative energies and technologies is undoubtedly a civilizing obligation. But confusing and promising political dreams wastes resources that would be better spent on science and the pursuit of technological disruptions.