How Carbon Recycling technology (CRT) can reshape the oil and Gas landscape?

How Carbon Recycling Technology (CRT) Can Reshape the Oil & Gas Landscape For decades, the global energy debate has been framed around a single question: How do we get rid of fossil fuels? That framing may be the real problem. Oil and gas are not dominant merely because of lobbying or inertia. They dominate because they solved three hard problems better than any alternative: • energy density, • transportability, • and dispatchability at scale. The world didn’t choose fossil fuels because they emit CO₂. It chose them because they work. The overlooked question Instead of asking how to eliminate oil and gas, a more productive question is: Why aren’t we replacing fossil fuels with renewable fuels that behave the same way? This is where Carbon Recycling Technology (CRT) fundamentally changes the conversation. The mistake: treating carbon as the enemy Most decarbonisation strategies treat carbon itself as the problem. But carbon is not the issue — fossil carbon extraction is. Carbon is one of nature’s most effective energy carriers: • dense, • stable, • storable, • and compatible with global infrastructure. What’s unsustainable is introducing new fossil carbon into the system. CRT corrects this error by separating two roles: • Hydrogen is the fuel (energy source) • Carbon is the carrier (logistics medium) Renewable Synthetic Methane Gas (RSMG): a drop-in replacement CRT uses renewable electricity to produce hydrogen, then combines that hydrogen with captured CO₂ to produce renewable synthetic methane gas (RSMG). From a system perspective, RSMG: • behaves like LNG, • uses existing pipelines, storage, turbines, and engines, • provides dispatchable, long-duration energy, • but introduces no new carbon. When RSMG is used and the CO₂ is captured and recycled again, carbon becomes a closed-loop carrier, not an emission. Why the world isn’t focusing on this (yet) There are three main reasons: 1. Narrative inertia Energy discussions are dominated by binaries: renewables versus fossil fuels, electrons versus molecules. CRT doesn’t fit neatly into either camp. 2. Component thinking instead of system thinking Many solutions optimise one element — generation, storage, or efficiency — but ignore how energy must be carried across time, geography, and demand variability. 3. Misplaced focus on eliminating infrastructure Replacing global gas infrastructure is vastly harder than feeding it with a renewable fuel. CRT works with the system the world already has. What changes when CRT scales If CRT and RSMG are adopted at scale, the oil and gas sector doesn’t disappear — it transforms. • Gas infrastructure becomes a renewable energy network • LNG terminals become renewable fuel hubs • Gas turbines become zero-emission baseload assets • Carbon stops being waste and becomes a circulating carrier This is not incremental decarbonisation. It is a structural transition. The deeper shift The energy transition will not be won by removing complexity. It will be won by aligning with physical reality. Batteries buffer hours. Hydrogen upgrades energy. Carbon carries energy at scale. CRT brings these together into a coherent system — one that replaces fossil fuels without breaking the world that depends on them. The future of energy is not carbon-free. It is fossil-free. And that distinction matters.