Crude Realities: Decarbonization Without De-Petrolization
I was fortunate to participate in several events during NYC Climate Week 2025, listening to speakers, exchanging ideas with industry leaders, and feeling inspired by the vision of a cleaner, carbon-free future. Yet almost a month after that week of panels, pledges, and PowerPoint optimism ended, the market sent a different signal. Oil prices climbed again. Brent crude hovered near $90 a barrel, traders cited geopolitical uncertainty, and airlines quietly added new surcharges. It felt like the market’s gentle reminder: nice conference … but let’s get back to reality. So, let’s see what is really going on.
In my view, the contradiction is simple. We built not only our economies on oil but also our identities around it. From the jets that bring world leaders to climate summits to the data centers that power artificial intelligence, #hydrocarbonsremain the invisible muscle of globalization. We are decarbonizing in language, but NOT yet de-petrolizing in practice.
According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), global oil-demand growth in 2025 is expected to be modest, about 0.7 million barrels per day, but total demand still exceeds 100 million barrels daily (IEA, 2025a). Emerging economies need these barrels for growth; developed ones need them for stability. Oil has become less a villain and more an inconvenient friend — the one we claim to avoid, but still call when the lights flicker.
Energy transitions are never just technical. They are about #power, #politics, and #psychology. Governments want cheap fuel and clean reputations. Companies want to appear sustainable while protecting decades-old supply chains. Consumers want electric cars, but not higher electricity bills. Everyone, including myself, is negotiating with their values. And producers are doubling down.
If global oil had a stage, OPEC+ (a coalition of 23 nations led by Saudi Arabia and Russia) would run the show. Formed in 2016, it is less a family and more a strategic alliance of necessity (Energy Information Administration [EIA], 2024). As ministers meet again in October 2025, they face a familiar paradox: stability without collapse and cooperation without surrender. Saudi Arabia remains the swing producer, balancing its Vision 2030 diversification with dependence on oil revenue. Russia, under sanctions, sells through shadow fleets to Asia and uses OPEC+ to maintain relevance. Meanwhile, the UAE’s ADNOC and other producers expand capacity while branding themselves as sustainability champions.
The United States, though outside the group, remains the world’s largest producer. Shale output reacts faster than bureaucracy, but even it cannot escape the pull of global sentiment. In this market, scarcity is not only economics — it is diplomacy. A well-timed production cut can redirect investment, influence elections, and reshape alliances. OPEC+ still holds the world’s pulse in its hands (Financial Times, 2024).
Governments talk about energy transition, but act in the dialect of energy security. Europe illustrates this perfectly. After the shock of the Ukraine war, European leaders promised never again to depend on Russian energy. Technically, they kept that promise — but dependence merely changed its accent. New LNG terminals are rising across the continent, and U.S. tankers now dock from Rotterdam to Wilhelmshaven. According to the European Commission (2024), the United States supplied roughly 45 percent of the EU’s LNG imports in 2024. Natural gas, politely re-branded as a bridge fuel, has become the acceptable way to admit we are still hooked.
Asia tells its own story. India’s oil consumption has reached record highs, and China, despite leading in solar and EV production, expanded both coal output and refined-oil imports (IEA, 2025b). Even the technologies of the clean future are energy-hungry: AI data centers and digital factories consume more electricity than some small countries, still powered mostly by fossil grids.
The IEA calls this the era of energy duality — two systems, old and new, coexisting and dependent on each other (IEA, 2025c). If oil vanished tomorrow, renewables could not yet fill the gap. If oil remains dominant forever, the planet cannot bear the cost. So we improvise, swinging between moral pressure and market logic.
If oil is the lifeblood of trade, its arteries are the routes it travels. The Strait of Hormuz, between Iran and Oman, carries about 20 percent of the world’s traded oil each day (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2024). A single naval flare-up there can ripple through freight rates and inflation indexes before breakfast in New York. Similar pressure builds along the Suez Canal and Red Sea.
At the same time, new suppliers are reshaping global geography. Offshore discoveries in Guyana, Mozambique, and Namibia are giving the Global South a louder voice (Reuters, 2024). For these nations, oil is not a relic of the past, it is a path to development.
Meanwhile, carbon and fuel markets are beginning to merge. We now see “lower-carbon crude” and “responsibly extracted” oil — barrels wrapped in sustainability certificates. Oil still connects everything: ships crossing oceans, fertilizer plants feeding billions, and AI servers running nonstop. The story is no longer about whether oil will end, but about how long the world can pretend it has.
After all the summits, pledges, and glossy reports, one reality remains: the global economy still runs on what it publicly denies. That may not be hypocrisy, perhaps it is evolution. Transitions are messy. Real change rarely happens when the old system vanishes, but when the new one learns to coexist with it.
Oil continues to be the heartbeat of global commerce — steady, controversial, and indispensable. Decarbonization is underway. De-petrolization is not. The world is changing, but the fuel beneath its feet remains stubbornly the same, at least for now. What do you think?
@ Katsiaryna “Kate” Foronda
