Context

The urgent need for a global energy transition has been sharpened by conflict in West Asia and the resulting price swings. Yet, the Santa Marta conference, aiming to chart a course away from fossil fuels, instead spotlighted deep economic and geopolitical divisions that hinder a unified global strategy. The meeting of a 'coalition of doers' showed that national interests, resource reliance, and varying abilities to fund decarbonization efforts are shaping different paths.

Geopolitics and Producer Paradox

The conflict in West Asia has caused a significant energy shock, slowing global economic growth to 3.2% in 2026. Brent crude prices around $80 per barrel in 2026, with risks of surpassing $100, highlight ongoing threats to supply chains and energy security, especially for energy-importing regions in Asia and Europe. Paradoxically, countries reliant on fossil fuel revenues, like Norway and Brazil, attended the conference. Norway plans nearly $23 billion in oil and gas investments for 2026, even while aiming to cut upstream emissions. Brazil balances substantial oil production with a growing renewables sector, expecting oil output to peak in 2030. Their participation suggests an effort to influence transition discussions while preserving hydrocarbon ties, which clashes with a full fossil fuel phase-out.

Key Nations' Different Paths

A key issue is the absence of major developing economies like India and China from this core group, despite their significant roles in renewable energy deployment. India added about 50 GW of renewables in 2025 and aims for 500 GW by 2030, driven by energy security and growth needs. China is also rapidly expanding renewables, with non-fossil sources making up over 60% of its power capacity, though it still imports substantial fossil fuels. These nations, needing vast energy to industrialize and raise living standards, prioritize financing, energy access, and security—concerns not fully met by this forum. Their transition plans are shaped by domestic needs, not external mandates.

Financing Hurdles

The conference's goal to turn commitments into practical steps is challenged by the exclusion of key nations and vast financial gaps. Global investment in the energy transition hit a record $2.3 trillion in 2025, but growth slowed and falls short of what's needed. Developing countries face severe funding pressure from high debt, reduced aid, and rising borrowing costs. This funding gap means richer nations and some producers can fund transition technologies, while many developing economies struggle to secure capital for essential renewable projects. This could lead to a divided energy future, with energy poverty persisting in some regions and widening global inequalities.

Risks of Fragmentation

Geopolitical instability and a fragmented approach to the energy transition pose significant risks. Past energy crises show that security concerns can sometimes lead to more investment in fossil fuels, potentially slowing decarbonization. The current disruption offers reasons to transition but also economic justification for continued fossil fuel investment, especially from low-cost producers. Excluding major energy consumers and renewable developers from the main 'doers' group weakens the credibility of any transition plan. Without a global strategy addressing developing nations' financing needs and vulnerabilities, the transition risks being slow, uneven, and subject to geopolitical influence. The Santa Marta conference may serve as a meeting point for like-minded nations rather than a driver of global agreement, leaving vulnerable economies to face rising energy costs and climate impacts with limited support.

What's Next

The divisions seen in Santa Marta indicate the global energy transition will unfold through varied regional and national strategies, shaped by economic, political, and resource differences. The West Asia conflict and the ongoing need for reliable energy may sustain the role of hydrocarbons in the near to medium term, even as renewables grow in certain markets. The transition's success will depend on the global community's ability to bridge financing gaps and ensure a secure, equitable energy future for all nations, especially the most vulnerable.