6 days ago
5
HOUSTON – Global CEOs, policymakers, and industry leaders are once again gathering at the annual CERAWeek in Texas, and if there’s ever a time to raise an eyebrow and clutch your coffee tighter, it’s now. With the Trump administration’s sharp ‘detour’ plowing through global energy transition goals, the industry might be a little more ‘energized’ than expected – it will be in for some wild, unplanned turns; and let’s just say, it’s not the smooth green ride everyone was hoping for.
Compelling questions are waiting for decisive answers: Can the seismic shift in US policy derail the momentum driving clean energy investments? Will it trigger regulatory rollback or force a recalibration of policies in markets that have cautiously embraced ‘green technology developments’ at a measured pace? Will the Trump-enforced US exit from the Paris Agreement shatter collective climate ambitions – particularly the long-held target of capping global warming at 1.5°C? And if energy transition stalls further, how will the world justify its inaction to the most ‘vulnerable nations’ that are already standing on the frontlines of a climate disaster?
In recent years, CERAWeek policy dialogues and leadership discussions had been synonymous with the pursuit of clean energy, technological innovation, and ambitious net-zero goals. However, with the US now shifting tides, the energy transition narrative is getting far from linear – it has been twisted into something less predictable, and it’s no longer a steady journey into a green pathway. What was once a hopeful march toward renewables is threatened by policy reversals that could resurrect fossil fuel juggernauts – mainly heralding the vengeful comeback of ‘King Coal’ and ‘Big Oil.’
For those attending this year’s CERAWeek, expectations run high when Trump’s newly appointed Energy Secretary, Chris Wright, takes the stage at Monday’s (March 10) Leadership Dialogue – this won’t just be another routine discussion; attendees are bracing for razor-sharp and unfiltered insights that may slice through rising geopolitical conflicts; AI-driven energy innovations; and energy markets in chaos as the world teeters on a knife’s edge of uncertain and volatile transition.
Amid all this contemplation, a stark realization is also beginning to resonate among energy policy leaders: Are we truly navigating the rough terrain of ‘energy transition,’ or are we merely layering new technologies atop old paradigms in an endless cycle of ‘energy addition’? Suffice it to say that we might actually be failing to dislodge fossilized technologies while deluding ourselves that, maybe, we are making some progress.
Collision of investment priorities
In the unfolding ‘energy transition’ versus ‘energy addition’ debate, the Philippines still appears firmly entrenched in the latter – because, in reality, there’s been little to no meaningful replacement of fossil-fuel capacities from green energy; what’s happening is: the RE-generated capacities have just been adding up to supply drawn from dominant thermal technologies.
After over two decades of restructuring in the Philippine power sector, it's still a common refrain among industry players that the priority is addressing persistent capacity shortfalls that continue to strain the nation, particularly during the peak-demand summer months. However, for investors championing clean tech and decarbonization, there’s a call for a bolder, more aggressive shift – primarily a surge in renewable energy investments while equally demanding forceful strides in energy efficiency; because, to them, that is the only way to break free from the outdated business model of energy investments.
Drawing from 'The Troubled Energy Transition' analysis published by S&P Global ahead of CERAWeek, it was starkly outlined that in an ‘energy addition’ scenario – rather than replacing conventional energy sources – the expansion of renewables is merely stacking on top of existing fossil fuels – thus, creating a double-edged sword of energy growth that fails to fundamentally shift the status quo.
S&P Global bluntly stated that with Donald Trump’s return to the U.S. presidency, the focus will once again shift to conventional energy production and his administration’s doctrine of ‘energy dominance,’ starkly highlighting that this direction stands in sharp contrast to the trajectory originally envisioned for the energy transition – a path that is now being derailed by a return to fossil fuel supremacy; and with that, the switch from fossil fuels is seen to be “much more difficult, costly and complicated than was initially expected.”
Elsewhere in the world, energy markets find themselves in the same precarious position, grappling with what is now clear as a ‘treacherous terrain’ to energy transition. What’s unfolding in these markets is less about true transformation and more about simply adding renewable energy (RE) capacities, prioritizing new installations without core replacement of existing fossil fuel-based capacities – a far cry from the genuine objective of energy transition that demands the eventual dismantling of outdated technologies in favor of a sustainable future.
For the Philippines, in particular, coal capacity additions are still being aggressively pursued to patch the country’s unstable baseload supply; and it’s also critical to emphasize that there’s no definitive policy yet on retiring the country’s aging coal fleets; instead, the Department of Energy (DOE) favors repurposing of these outdated facilities.
To date, only one industry player – ACEN Corp of the Ayala group – has stepped up with a firm commitment to accelerate the phaseout of its South Luzon Thermal coal plant by 2030, anchored on a trailblazing goal of replacing the plant’s capacity entirely with renewable energy. This shift is being bolstered by capital flowing in through transition credits, but the question remains: Can this single yet major initiative spark the sweeping change needed, or will it remain a lone voice in the ‘dark’?
For feedback and suggestions, please email at: [email protected]
