The transition trap: Why clean energy needs more than technology
Because we have built tools but not systems. The trap is not technological. It is structural.
At this year's Oman Petroleum & Energy Show (OPES), voices from government, industry, and finance agreed: it is not the lack of solutions that hinders progress—it is the absence of the enabling conditions that allow those solutions to scale. This is the great paradox of our time: we have what we need, yet we struggle to use it at speed.
WHEN READINESS MEETS RESISTANCE
Across the Gulf, the ambition is undeniable. Oman has awarded land for eight green hydrogen mega-projects in Al Wusta and Dhofar, aiming to produce one million tonnes annually by 2030. Saudi Arabia is building one of the world's largest carbon capture hubs in Jubail. The UAE has reached over 50 GW of clean energy capacity through Masdar and is pushing hard into green fuels and advanced solar. Qatar has deployed its first large-scale solar plant and committed to capture nine million tonnes of CO₂ annually by 2035.
These are real, capital-intensive projects. But when you speak to the people behind them, the message is sobering: deals are signed, infrastructure is planned, but execution is slow. Permitting is unclear. Offtake agreements are missing. Risk-sharing mechanisms are weak. The projects are world-class. The frameworks are not.
THE GLOBAL BLUEPRINT
Elsewhere in the world, the difference lies not in technology, but in policy. In the United States, the Inflation Reduction Act has triggered more than $280 billion in private clean energy investments in under two years—fueled by tax credits, domestic content rules, and production-based incentives. In Europe, the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism is not only reshaping global trade flows—it is compelling industries from Turkey to China to measure and reduce their emissions. In Germany, power market reform is underway to reward grid flexibility and build hydrogen-ready capacity.
These moves show how political clarity translates into market activity. Investors don't respond to slogans—they respond to structure. The countries moving fastest are those building architecture around ambition.
What is most encouraging—and urgent—is that private industrial players are already leaning forward. In steel, cement, chemicals, aviation—firms are no longer waiting for regulation to arrive. They are investing in carbon capture, electrification, sustainable fuels. In Sweden, a new generation of green steelmakers is emerging. In Canada, global firms are retrofitting old plants with clean hydrogen technology. In France and the Netherlands, companies are scaling carbon capture linked to port clusters and industrial zones.
But these pioneers also face a dilemma. Their projects cost more—at least for now. Their products are greener—but the markets do not yet reward them. This is where Gulf policymakers must act. Not just to fund innovation, but to build the rules, rewards, and risk buffers that allow these technologies to be commercially viable.
THE GULF'S COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE
The region has three unmatched assets: patient capital, integrated infrastructure, and strong project delivery capability. No one builds faster than the Gulf when the incentives align. But clean energy requires a different mindset. It's not about building a single refinery or solar plant. It's about orchestrating entire systems—from permitting and certification to financing and export policy.
The Gulf doesn't need to copy Europe's carbon pricing or America's tax credits. It needs its own model. A model that reflects its resource base, fiscal tools, and long-term investment horizon. But it also needs to be clear, bankable, and fast.
If Oman, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar want to lead the clean energy economy—not just participate in it—they must treat policy and market design as national infrastructure. Because in the energy transition, rules are infrastructure.
A CALL TO REWIRE
The clean energy economy won't emerge on its own. It must be built. That means rewiring not just how we generate energy—but how we price it, how we value emissions reductions, how we permit innovation, and how we reward climate-aligned products.
Otherwise, we risk becoming a region of world-class pilot projects that never scale. A place of vision, but not velocity.
The transition trap is real. And the way out is structural.
Qasim al Maashani
The writer is the head of business and politics section at Oman Observer
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Observer
03-08-2025
- Observer
A new trade agenda forclimate-resilient growth
Mitigating the worst effects of climate change requires reconciling ambition and justice. But achieving both a just energy transition and ambitious global climate action depends on trade rules that foster equitable development. To facilitate the shift to low-carbon economies, developing countries must have reliable access to green technologies, investments, and international markets. Regrettably, many of today's trade policies constrain developing countries' green ambitions. In particular, the securitisation of international trade – driven by the geopolitical interests of major powers and emerging blocs – threatens to disrupt global supply chains, limit access to emerging technologies, and reinforce existing power imbalances. If left unchecked, this trend risks undermining multilateral cooperation and regional integration efforts across the Global South. The European Union's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism is a prime example. While the CBAM is intended to position the EU as a global leader on climate action, many developing countries – particularly in Africa – view it as a protectionist measure and question its alignment with the principles of the 2015 Paris climate agreement. These concerns are well-founded. Research suggests that African countries could lose up to $25 billion annually as a direct result of the CBAM, and that the proposed amendments may not always stand to benefit African exporters. Moreover, despite the establishment of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), the EU continues to pursue fragmented bilateral deals that undermine Africa's integration agenda and weaken the coherence of regional trade strategies. Another example is the International Maritime Organisation's controversial plan to introduce a carbon emissions tax on shipping. Set to take effect in 2028, the tax falls far short of the more ambitious carbon levy developing economies had advocated, which could have supported low-carbon transitions, climate adaptation, and capacity-building in the world's most climate-vulnerable countries. Investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms also present significant challenges to effective climate action. These provisions, embedded in international investment treaties, often limit African governments' ability to legislate in the public interest or implement trade and investment policies that support green industrialisation and sustainable development. In recent years, international development practitioners have increasingly focused on the link between trade and climate policy. This signals a shift from a purely normative view of climate change to a more pragmatic approach that recognises climate policy as a driver of economic growth and investment. At the same time, global trade is undergoing a profound transformation as major trading powers prioritise geopolitical and economic self-interest over longstanding commitments to non-discrimination and multilateral cooperation, thereby weakening the World Trade Organisation. Against this backdrop, developed and developing economies alike are deploying fiscal stimulus packages, subsidies, and protectionist trade measures to align their climate goals with domestic green industrial strategies, aiming to reshape the global economic order in their favour. The race to gain a competitive edge in green industries is partly driven by the dominant position China has established over the past decade through a combination of fiscal expansion, strategic subsidies, and control over critical minerals and key supply chains. Adding to these tensions is US President Donald Trump's decision to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement, as he did during his first term. This move has further eroded global trust and undermined multilateral climate cooperation, casting doubt on the reliability of developed countries' commitments to the broader sustainable-development agenda. Yet periods of geopolitical realignment can also create new opportunities. Even amid rising tensions and economic fragmentation, there are opportunities for African countries to advance fairer, climate-aligned trade rules. One of the most promising is increased regional integration. Despite deep divisions within the G20, South Africa's presidency of the group this year could help advance trade policies that are better suited to managing climate risks and accelerating clean-energy transitions in the Global South. The upcoming Leaders' Summit in Johannesburg provides a platform to champion a more inclusive agenda that integrates risk management, economic diversification, and industrial development into a long-term vision of environmental justice. Some low-income economies are particularly vulnerable to measures like the CBAM, which, in its current form, departs from the 'common but differentiated responsibilities' principle that underpins the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Without careful design and implementation, it could exacerbate inequalities within Africa and jeopardise the continent's energy transition. To prevent such an outcome, the CBAM must be implemented through a transparent, multilateral framework that acknowledges differences in countries' historical responsibility and capacity to respond. Redirecting CBAM revenues toward supporting green transitions in low-income economies, for example, would be a step in the right direction. It is equally important to help countries that rely heavily on fossil fuels diversify their economies. This raises a fundamental question: How can trade policy be leveraged to foster climate-resilient development? The answer lies in recognising that diversification is not only central to long-term growth but also crucial to building resilience to both climate disasters and external shocks. While global consensus on climate policies remains out of reach, regional trade agreements and coalitions offer a viable path forward. The AfCFTA, for example, could help us reimagine trade as a catalyst for inclusive development. By strengthening intra-African trade and economic resilience, it could help unlock new pathways to food sovereignty, climate adaptation, and long-term stability across the continent. The world needs fresh thinking and more equitable relationships between the Global North and South. Although today's geopolitical landscape, marked by self-interest and weak leadership, is fraught with uncertainty, it also creates space to promote green, climate-conscious solutions that are largely absent from existing trade frameworks. When the current turbulent period gives way to renewed cooperation, we must be ready to introduce a new climate-trade framework. Such an arrangement should support decarbonisation across industries while upholding the principles of justice and solidarity, ensuring that developing countries are actively supported on their path to a more sustainable future. @Project Syndicate, 2025
Observer
27-05-2025
- Observer
Private sector must absorb premiums to accelerate energy transition
MUSCAT: The global energy transition will not succeed without private-sector willingness to absorb cost premiums, build scalable models and push investment despite current regulatory uncertainties, according to Salih Merghani, Executive Vice President for Energy at Olayan Saudi Holding Company. Speaking at the Oman Petroleum & Energy Show (OPES) held in Muscat recently, Merghani said that unlike previous shifts in industrial history, today's energy transition demands that companies move away from 'dense, cheap and reliable' fossil fuels to energy sources that are intermittent, complex and often more expensive. 'This is unlike anything we've attempted before. We're transitioning not because the alternatives are more efficient, but because of an environmental imperative. That makes the economics more challenging — and more urgent,' he said. Merghani noted that although Saudi Arabia and the region offer competitively priced energy, the lack of a comprehensive regulatory framework for decarbonisation is slowing momentum. As a result, private investors must take the lead in developing new mechanisms for green investment. 'In our case, we asked ourselves: why move now? The answer was scalability. The scale exists, the market is forming and our capital has to find a home where it contributes to the long-term shift,' he said. He cited examples of private investment by Olayan into carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies and industrial retrofits aimed at reducing emissions in sectors like steel, cement and heavy industry. 'We looked at steel production, for example. Instead of building a new 'green steel' facility from scratch, we worked on retrofitting existing operations to lower their emissions profile significantly,' he explained. However, he stressed that many low-carbon technologies will not scale without 'offtake guarantees' and financial structures that share the risk across the value chain. 'We realised that if we wanted to accelerate deployment, someone had to accept the premium — whether in the form of higher offtake prices, long-term contracts, or industrial policy support,' he said. Merghani also highlighted the role of voluntary carbon markets (VCMs), noting that investments under Saudi Arabia's VCM initiative have focused on creating credible carbon credits and building awareness within the private sector. 'We don't yet have taxes or binding emissions caps, but the idea is to integrate carbon into business decision-making through the market. The VCM gives us a way to do that,' he said. On technology maturity, he pointed out that while solar energy has now reached global scale, other solutions — particularly CCS and sustainable aviation fuels (SAF) — still face barriers. 'We've made strong progress in solar, but CCS and SAF require different economic models. For SAF, the aviation sector may be the last to transition and retrofits must become financially viable at today's cost structures,' he said. Merghani called for greater collaboration between industrial players, regulators and financiers to unlock the full potential of emerging technologies. 'Financing institutions must be part of the solution. We can't build a project pipeline if the banks and regulators aren't aligned with the pace of transition,' he noted. He concluded by stressing that while the private sector is ready to lead, market signals and policy coordination must follow if the region is to move from pilot projects to full-scale decarbonisation. 'The technology is here, the investment appetite is real — but if we want this to happen fast, it has to be a shared effort. This transition won't happen under normal conditions. We need to rewire the whole ecosystem,' he said.
Observer
20-05-2025
- Observer
Energy shift must balance business, climate
MUSCAT, MAY 20 The energy transition must strike a pragmatic balance between climate ambitions and business sustainability, said Emry Hisham Yusoff, Senior General Manager of the Carbon Management Division, Upstream at Malaysia's Petronas. Speaking at a panel session during the Oman Petroleum & Energy Show (OPES), Yusoff addressed growing concerns among industry stakeholders about the economic viability of decarbonisation pathways, especially in the context of carbon capture and storage (CCS) and other capital-intensive interventions. 'Yes, there is pressure in investor and stakeholder meetings,' he acknowledged. 'But we must ensure that alignment remains between long-term climate targets and the realities of running viable energy businesses.' Yusoff noted that natural gas continues to play a critical role in Malaysia's energy mix, not just as a transition fuel but also as a core product in global markets. 'Gas demand is still growing—especially in Asia. We continue to see interest in LNG and related projects. It's not about stopping activity, but about transforming it responsibly.' On CCS, Yusoff was cautious but optimistic. 'In places like the US, where the government supports CCS through incentives such as the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), projects are moving. But for us in Southeast Asia, the economics are different. The CO₂ concentration in our emissions streams is often below 4%, which makes capture much more energy- and cost-intensive,' he explained. He added that Petronas is now reassessing how best to approach energy efficiency and emissions reduction. 'We are working to reduce our own energy use and emissions intensity across upstream operations. But we also need to consider whether investments are achieving meaningful impact or just adding operational complexity.' Yusoff emphasised that energy transition strategies must be tailored to regional and operational contexts. 'This is not a copy-paste exercise. We must understand what works locally and where we need to refocus efforts.'
