How to understand without overcorrecting
The Moment exists only because The Myth came first—the Myth of an Easy Energy Transition. Put forward by well-intentioned optimists, the Myth sold half the country on the idea that (a) emissions would drop quickly, driven by policy and the resulting technological breakthroughs, and therefore (b) there would be a relatively painless and eminently affordable transition to zero greenhouse gas emissions!
The Myth held sway for over a decade. But in The Moment, The Myth is unraveling.
As oil and gas leaders, we must understand The Myth for three key reasons: (1) to capture the relevant lessons of its unraveling for our endeavors, (2) to recognize its continued influence, and (3) to seize the opportunities it leaves in its wake.
We are going to explore The Myth here not to deride it but to understand its continued potency.
Both of these things are true:
- The fall of The Myth of An Easy Energy Transition feels like the end of an era.
- The underlying impulses and interests behind The Myth continue unaltered—and they offer you a challenge and an opportunity.
The Situation: Why Is the Myth So Potent?
Until recently, climate action was the central driving narrative of all things energy. Much “energy policy” was really climate policy. And most environmental priorities got subsumed under the all-encompassing climate umbrella.
Many of you have read Robert Fulghum’s All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten, so I hope you’ll take this bit of wisdom from that author to heart:
I believe that imagination is stronger than knowledge. That myth is more potent than history. That dreams are more powerful than facts. That hope always triumphs over experience.
Over the past decade, we have certainly, collectively, lived this quote through The Myth of an Easy Energy Transition. The Myth has been attractive for a couple of reasons:
- It was simple and easy—too easy. The Myth’s mythical transition was an easy, policy-driven, and affordable process, minimizing personal sacrifice. Governments, industries, and the public would align around a rapid transformation to a cleaner energy future, powered by the right incentives and technological breakthroughs. If only we committed to it, The Myth suggested, we could move seamlessly from one era of energy to another—without disruption, tradeoffs, costs, or hard decisions.
- It had heroes and villains. If the transition was not happening quickly, there must be someone to blame: Special interests! Greedy corporations! Corrupt politicians! This framing made it easier to believe that the very real emerging systemic challenges—engineering hurdles, capital requirements, and the need for reliable baseload energy—were simply roadblocks put up by bad actors rather than inherent realities of a complex transition.
The villain of choice? Fossil fuel companies, of course! First, it was coal (which did play the villain rather well). Then, as coal declined, the focus shifted to oil and gas (see “Thank You for Smoking”). This villainization wasn’t just rhetorical; it shaped policy, investment portfolios, and public perception. Oil and gas companies weren’t seen as historical participants in the energy system—but as peddlers of lies and opponents of progress.
The reality, of course, was far more nuanced. Oil and gas companies have been charged with powering the world and navigating the energy transition at the same time. But The Myth thrived on clear heroes and compelling villains.
The result: Oil and gas leaders were largely shut out of conversations about energy and climate solutions. The industry was treated as pushing the “fuel of the past,” as an enemy of progress rather than an essential partner in building the energy future. Instead of being included in pragmatic discussions about emissions reductions, infrastructure, and innovation, oil and gas leaders found themselves on the outside looking in.
So Why Won’t the Myth Just Disappear?
The perpetuators of The Myth aren’t scheming masterminds; they are, for the most part, deeply concerned, well-intentioned people who genuinely believed that a simple energy transition is possible. They are policymakers, investors, activists, and academics who see a clear moral imperative and assume the technical and economic pathways will naturally follow. Some are certainly “for-profit activists,” building careers, businesses, and political influence on the idea that the transition was as simple as political will. Others are simply optimistic: underestimating the scale, cost, and tradeoffs involved. Some are your family members and neighbors. Most are going to find it hard to change their minds about something so fundamental to their worldview as climate orthodoxy.
As we learned in “Climate Warrior or Climate Curious,” it’s easy to mistake all climate-centric stakeholders for climate warriors. There are certainly plenty of absolutists, but there’s absolutely no upside to blaming all climate-centric stakeholders, most of whom are well-meaning “climate followers,” for believing in and perpetuating The Myth.
Seize The Day: Your Opportunities in the Wake of The Myth
The Myth was comforting. It provided a story of swift, righteous progress that didn’t require hard decisions or inconvenient partnerships. The Myth has real consequences! Today we are faced with climate policy commitments that may take a decade or more to replace with sensible, pragmatic solutions. That’s why we need to understand The Myth—because it defines and will continue to define both legacy policy and legacy mindsets.
The Myth did fail us very directly: by excluding the very expertise, capital, and ingenuity that could accelerate a realistic and durable transition. As reality asserts itself, we, as oil and gas leaders, have an opportunity not to blame but to reframe the conversation and offer our own leadership and solutions.
As The Myth fades and The Moment emerges, let’s take our seat at the table. We do so by:
Engaging Without Blame. The Myth framed oil and gas as the villain, but its unraveling gives us a chance to reshape the conversation. By being relentlessly forward-focused, we can craft a compelling vision of our shared future, even though getting there won’t be quick or simple.
Attacking the Myth Gently. Many well-intentioned people still hold to all or part of The Myth. (Myths are powerful!) These climate-centric stakeholders continue to believe that the transition can be swift and painless. Rather than dismissing their perspectives outright, industry leaders can approach the conversation with patience and pragmatism. (See “The Three Ts of Energy Realism” for more on timeframe, trade-offs, and truth). By meeting people where they are, we can replace The Myth with informed, solution-driven dialogue.
Leading with Shared Goals. Addressing the fall of The Myth doesn’t mean asking people to abandon climate objectives; it means shaping the energy dialogue. Begin by acknowledging shared goals—lower emissions, energy security, and economic stability—while introducing the realities of scale, cost, and infrastructure needs. Instead of waiting to be invited into the conversation, take the initiative to lead! Oil and gas leaders’ North Star: replace our role as chief villain in The Myth and instead participate as a necessary partner in building a sustainable energy future.
Now what?
Myths are powerful, and so too are Adamantine’s resources to help your team manage the unraveling of The Myth. Three things you can do:
- Share this with two colleagues who are ready to move beyond The Myth and into The Moment.
- Email us to schedule a briefing or strategy session for your team.
- Support my work! Please help my writing reach more readers by clicking that heart button below!
Myth busted,
Tisha
