The International Energy Agency's (IEA) "U"-shaped energy shift.

Future scenarios for oil and natural gas production and consumption are immensely important, since planet Earth – for the years before and after 2050 – will still be highly dependent on oil and natural gas at 72.5%; but also, very dependent on the behavior of investors when they decide to make energy decisions to sustain the normal development of the world's social and economic progress.

The IEA – as the energy arm of the OECD, the economic organization for cooperation and development – ​​has almost always been on the opposite side of OPEC's observations as the “think tank  ” of the developing energy world, now called “GlobalSouth”.

In particular, since the UN has focused on the green issue of Climate Change with the goals of both the COP21 in Paris for 2030 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and reduce global warming, and the COP26 in Glasgow for 2050 to achieve net zero consumption of fossil fuels such as oil and natural gas.

The shift by the “International Energy Agency, IEA” and its recent position has just been formalized in the publication of the report entitled: “Implications of declining oil and natural gas rates”, which says, “if current production levels are maintained, by 2050 gigantic investments in new conventional fields will be necessary to produce about 45 million barrels per day and about 2000 trillion cubic meters of natural gas.

Additionally – as an illustration of the metaphysical institutional slip-up – in the report, the IEA makes “a mea culpa” for the emphasis on the climate crisis in its statements to the British newspaper The Guardian, which discouraged investors from putting their money into oil and natural gas.

And, at the same time, it also mentions the evolution of the markets with the shale revolution in the US, the price crash of 2014-2015 and the discouragement of investors in hydrocarbon projects.   

The IEA's repositioning on non-renewable and renewable energy could be a great opportunity for all major players in the oil and natural gas industry to observe with heightened interest that other schools of thought should not be overlooked.

While the leadership imposed by United Nations agencies like the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change has led to COPs costing trillions of dollars to secure the foolish commitment of member countries to the Paris Summit and Net Zero, this does not mean that those who now lead climate thinking at the UN are closed to receiving other perspectives on similar issues that show "the other side of the coin," as was the case with the letter from 1,600 scientists—not members of the UN scientific teams—requesting that the COPs avoid the metaphysical detour into "Climate Crisis" that their scientific body of knowledge has induced. This could be achieved by making the COPs' recommendations more scientific and less political.

In science and technology, not everything has been said. And scholars are always on the lookout for new knowledge. 

* RGOrtiz, more than 40 years of experience in the technical fields of oil, natural gas, electricity and mining, environmentalism and energy diplomacy and private investments, professional life as Chairman of Boards of Private Companies, which is combined with public service, as Secretary General of OPEC; Minister of Energy and Mines of Ecuador, on two occasions; and, as President of Business Associations.