“Least regrets.”
“Realistic transition.”
“Optimised decarbonisation pathway.”
These aren’t just technical terms—they’re carefully engineered narratives. Phrases like these don’t just describe our energy future. They shape it. They define what’s considered sensible, achievable, and worth funding.
But who’s behind this language—and what aren’t we being told?
The Shift from Awareness to Action
In recent years, the climate conversation has shifted from awareness to action. Governments and corporations alike now race to demonstrate their green credentials. But scratch beneath the surface, and a subtler competition emerges—not just over technology, but over who gets to define the story.
Consultants as Narrators
Take the corporate energy consultancy sector. While it positions itself as a neutral advisor, helping countries and corporations make “data-driven” decisions, it also plays a major role in shaping what options are seen as feasible.
Reports and analysis from these firms rarely advocate for radical departures from the status quo. Instead, they often reinforce a slow, careful, incrementalist approach:
- One that’s easily marketable
- One that’s palatable to existing power structures
The Language of Limitations
And make no mistake: language matters.
Consider the term “least regrets.” On the surface, it suggests careful planning and risk mitigation. But dig a little deeper, and it becomes clear this framing is biased toward incremental solutions:
- Favors natural gas as a “bridge” fuel
- Pushes long timelines that preserve current dependencies
It signals that bold systemic change is off the table. That climate action should never be disruptive to economic interests.
When Analysis Is the Narrative
The problem isn’t that companies are doing analysis.
The problem is that their analysis becomes the narrative—the default framework:
- It shapes public perception
- Influences media coverage
- Sets policy tone
- Limits the range of acceptable solutions
All without most of us even realizing it.
What’s Missing?
These narratives often flatten complexity. They leave out critical voices—ones that ask:
- Is endless economic growth compatible with ecological survival?
- Could decentralised energy systems disrupt entrenched monopolies?
- What about Indigenous knowledge or localised, community-first solutions?
Those stories are often edited out before they reach the table.
Someone’s Watching…
Interestingly, some of the most-read Critical MindShift articles lately have been the ones asking whether renewable energy is as independent as it appears—or whether it’s quietly steered by the same fossil fuel interests we thought we were moving away from.
That interest hasn’t just come from everyday readers. Let’s just say… industry is watching.
We’re not naming names, of course. 😉 But it does raise an important question:
If those shaping our energy transition are also shaping the narrative around what’s possible, how do we ensure a diversity of perspectives and values in that process?
Read. Question. Rethink.
If you find yourself nodding, questioning, or even disagreeing—that’s good. That’s the point.
Critical thinking starts with asking better questions and seeking out a wide range of viewpoints. Especially when the future of our planet is on the line.
Further Reading:
The following book is linked to Amazon.com for your convenience. If you decide to purchase through this link, we may earn a small commission — at no extra cost to you.
Book: The New Climate War [amazon.com]
By Michael E. Mann
Explores how powerful interests use delay tactics, misdirection, and carefully framed messaging to hinder real climate action—while appearing supportive of sustainability efforts.
Article: Corporate Response to Climate Change: Language, Power and Symbolic Construction
This study explores how corporations communicate about climate change, examining the language and symbols they use to position themselves within the climate debate. It offers a critical perspective on the power dynamics at play in corporate environmental discourse.
Related articles on criticalmindshift.com
The Carbon Credits Controversy: Climate Solution or Clean Conscience Scam?
This article investigates whether carbon credits are truly an effective climate solution—or a convenient way for big polluters to buy their way out of accountability. It explores how carbon offsetting has become a lucrative market while delivering questionable real-world impact.
Are Fossil Fuel Giants Quietly Controlling Renewable Energy?
A deep dive into how major fossil fuel companies are investing in and influencing the renewable energy space. This piece raises tough questions about whether the green transition is being guided by the very entities it was meant to replace.
Image acknowledgement
We’re grateful to the talented photographers and designers on Unsplash for providing beautiful, free-to-use images. The image on this page is by William Tellez. Check out their work here: https://unsplash.com/@williamtellez/illustrations.
