Right speech, wrong room

May 06, 2026 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

(Kaieteur News) – Reports in the media indicate that President Irfaan Ali used his platform at the Offshore Technology Conference 2026 to advocate a shift in global discourse from an “energy transition” to what he termed “energy balance.”

At first glance, this framing appears pragmatic, even sensible. A call for “balance” acknowledges that fossil fuels, renewables, and economic realities must coexist. At least for now. But while the message may carry intellectual merit, its delivery at this particular event raises a more uncomfortable question. Was this the right speech, delivered in the wrong room?

The Offshore Technology Conference is, by design and tradition, an oil and gas conference. Its core audience consists of petroleum engineers, offshore operators, energy executives, and investors whose primary concern is the efficient and profitable extraction of hydrocarbons.

This is not a neutral energy forum or a climate summit grappling with decarbonisation. It is a space where the future of offshore oil is not questioned but optimised. Against that backdrop, a call to rethink the narrative away from or to “transition” risks sounding either misplaced or, worse, rhetorically diluted.

There is an inherent contradiction in urging “balance” at a gathering structurally predisposed toward one side of that balance. If anything, such a message might have been more impactful at a climate-focused forum, a multilateral development conference or a renewable energy summit where the dominant narrative leans heavily in the opposite direction. There, Guyana’s argument would gain greater traction. At an oil conference, however, the argument becomes almost out of place.

This is not to say that Guyana should shy away from articulating its energy philosophy. As one of the world’s fastest-growing oil producers, the country occupies a unique and increasingly influential position. It has both the opportunity and the responsibility to shape how resource-rich developing states navigate the energy transition.

However, effective messaging depends not only on content, but also on context. In this case, the context diluted the potential effect of the message. You don’t go into an oil conference and preach energy balance when the stakeholders present are more interested in extending oil production.

More troubling, however, is the question of whether Guyana itself embodies the “energy balance” it now champions. The rhetoric by the government suggests a diversified energy pathway, one where fossil fuels coexist with meaningful investments in renewables. It suggests that Guyana is moving towards displacing fossil fuels. Yet the reality on the ground appears less balanced and more transitional in a different sense. It suggests a shift from oil dominance to gas dominance.

The expansion of natural gas infrastructure, particularly through gas-to-energy projects, signals a deepening reliance on another fossil fuel, albeit a cleaner one. Solar and other renewables remain present, but largely as supporting actors rather than central pillars of the energy mix.

This raises a legitimate concern about the substance behind the slogan about “balance”. It forces one to ask whether “energy balance” is a genuine policy framework, or is it a reframing of continued fossil fuel dependence in more palatable language?

Natural gas may burn cleaner than oil, but it is still part of the carbon economy. If renewables are not scaled aggressively, the risk is that Guyana becomes locked into a new form of fossil fuel dependency, just as the world accelerates toward decarbonisation.

There is also a strategic dimension to consider. By emphasising balance over transition, Guyana aligns itself with a growing bloc of countries advocating for a slower, more flexible approach to energy change. This position resonates with many in the Global South, where energy poverty remains a pressing concern. However, it also places Guyana in a delicate diplomatic position. International financing, climate partnerships, and technological support are increasingly tied to demonstrable commitments to renewable energy. A narrative that appears to sideline transition in favour of balance may complicate these relationships.

Ultimately, the issue is not that President Ali’s argument lacks validity. On the contrary, the call for a more nuanced and inclusive energy discourse is both timely and necessary. The problem lies in the place chosen to deliver it, and the ambiguity surrounding its practical implementation.

At an oil conference, the message risks being absorbed into the prevailing consensus rather than challenging it. And at home, the policies underpinning “energy balance” appear, at best, incomplete.

If Guyana is serious about redefining the global conversation, it must do more than reframe the language. It must demonstrate, through concrete investment and policy choices, what true balance looks like in practice. Otherwise, the concept risks becoming little more than a convenient middle ground. One that is politically appealing, but strategically hollow.

(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)

---

• energy transition, Offshore Technology Conference, Peeping Tom, President Irfaan Ali

---