Claudia Mora Uscátegui, a partner in the Corporate and Energy Law departments at Pinilla, González & Prieto Abogados, has written about the energy sovereignty crisis facing Colombia due to its dependence on imported liquefied natural gas. Based on her experience advising operators, she links this gap to the suspension of new hydrocarbon exploration and production contracts during the previous administration. According to Mora, this same tension resurfaces in the conversation about decarbonization: Colombia has a clean electricity mix—54.9% hydroelectric, 19.2% solar and wind—but Mora points out that the country’s total energy mix relies on fossil fuels for 75% of its energy needs, a figure she uses to argue that natural gas is now part of the country’s energy solution. For her, the roadmap to decarbonization must be built on that basis: “the Colombian energy transition should not be conceived as the elimination of natural gas, but as its strategic use.”
You have written about the energy sovereignty crisis facing Colombia due to its dependence on imported LNG. What role did the previous government’s instruction not to sign new exploration and production contracts play in this dependence, and what is needed today to reverse this trend?
For operating companies, the main problem has been that, during the previous administration, the instruction was not to sign new hydrocarbon exploration and production contracts. These contracts constitute the legal and contractual framework that allows us to develop new exploration activities, make new discoveries, and increase production. However, under existing E&P contracts, various exploration activities have been carried out, including discoveries with declared commercial viability, such as Sirius (formerly Uchuva).
To increase production and achieve new discoveries, it is necessary to incentivize exploration through the National Hydrocarbons Agency (ANH) and strengthen collaboration with operators currently holding contracts. This will facilitate their fulfillment of exploration commitments and enable them to move towards new bidding rounds that will revitalize the sector. Colombia currently has a sound regulatory framework in this area, although there are opportunities for improvement that could be incorporated into future contract allocation rounds.
In your writings, you suggest that the decarbonization goal may conflict with security of supply. Where do you draw the line between advising a client on how to meet ESG goals and warning them that this decision could compromise their energy security?
My opinion is that decarbonization is both a necessity and a responsibility for all countries. However, emissions reduction targets must be accompanied by a roadmap tailored to each country’s specific circumstances, taking into account its energy needs, the availability of natural resources, the level of development of its infrastructure, and security of supply. Furthermore, these targets should be implemented gradually, allowing for public policy decisions that do not create energy shortages or negatively impact economic competitiveness.
In the specific case of Colombia, we have a highly clean and renewable electricity grid. Currently, the installed capacity of the system is composed of approximately 54.9% hydroelectric generation, 19.2% solar and wind generation, and 25.8% thermal generation, primarily from natural gas and coal. This structure has allowed the country to have one of the cleanest electricity grids in Latin America, although it remains vulnerable to climatic phenomena such as El Niño, which significantly reduce water supply and test the reliability of the system.
On the other hand, when the energy matrix is analyzed as a whole, the reality is different. Colombia continues to depend significantly on fossil fuels, which represent approximately 75% of the primary energy consumed in the country, including oil, natural gas, and coal. Consequently, although Colombia’s impact on global emissions is relatively small and the electricity sector operates primarily with renewable sources, our economy still requires hydrocarbons to guarantee energy supply, transportation, industrial activity, and backup power generation.
For this reason, Colombia’s energy transition should not be framed as the elimination of natural gas, but rather as its strategic use as a transitional and backup fuel for the coming decades. Natural gas plays a fundamental role in ensuring the reliability of the electrical system, especially during periods of low water levels, and helps guarantee continuity of supply while the integration of new renewable energy sources is consolidated.
The risks associated with dependence on hydroelectric generation have been demonstrated during droughts and El Niño cycles. In such circumstances, thermal power plants are essential to supply the energy shortfall and maintain system stability. Added to this is the continuous growth in energy demand, which requires not only expanding generation infrastructure but also developing new sources of natural gas supply to replace declining fields and increase available reserves.
Decarbonization must be a cross-cutting goal for all industries, including hydrocarbons and mining, through the incorporation of more efficient technologies, the reduction of operational emissions, carbon capture, and the adoption of best environmental practices. However, this is a gradual process that must not compromise the country’s energy security or sovereignty. It focuses on diversifying energy sources, continuing to increase the share of renewable energy in both the electricity and energy mixes, and simultaneously ensuring the development of the necessary national energy resources to meet future demand and reduce gas imports.
Colombia is advancing new and simultaneous regulatory fronts – the first offshore wind round, self-generation and distributed generation, and low-emission hydrogen. Of these three fronts, which currently presents the riskiest regulatory gap for an investor, and what clause or contractual guarantee does legal practice use to cover this gap until regulation is in place?
Today, the biggest regulatory gap for investors isn’t in offshore wind, where Colombia has already established a relatively clear institutional framework, but rather in low-emission hydrogen. The main challenge is not only technical but also regulatory and commercial: certainty regarding how the product will be certified, marketed, and monetized in the long term. While this regulation matures, legal practice typically protects investors through robust change-of-law clauses, economic equilibrium mechanisms, regulatory suspensive conditions, and rights to renegotiate or withdraw from the project if future regulations affect its viability.
Additionally, regarding the clients we’ve supported in analyzing wind or hydrogen projects, I’d say the main challenge today isn’t solely regulatory. In many cases, uncertainty still exists about the economic viability of the business, given that these are capital-intensive projects with high development and infrastructure costs, and where there isn’t always sufficient certainty about future demand, remuneration mechanisms, or expected revenues. This can hinder achieving a solid financial close and generate caution among investors and financiers.
The scenario is similar for self-generation and distributed generation; Colombia already has relatively consolidated regulations. The main challenge is not legal but financial: ensuring that the project generates sufficient savings or income to justify the investment and achieve an attractive financial close for investors and financiers.
He has been advising hydrocarbon operating companies for over 20 years, including the corporate restructuring process that led to the creation of Parex Resources. Looking back on that case two decades later, what lessons in corporate structuring remain valid today for a company seeking to go public or attract foreign capital in the Colombian energy sector?
My experience in pre-incorporation and consolidation transactions for companies like Parex allowed me, from an early stage of my career, to participate in complex operations, cross-jurisdictional M&A transactions, sales of oil assets, due diligence on projects with inherent environmental, social, operational, and regulatory risks, and the development of negotiation strategies related to guarantees and indemnities, as well as the valuation of hydrocarbon sector assets. This learning was especially valuable because it was provided alongside business leaders I admire and lawyers from various jurisdictions with significant transactional experience.
The key lesson that remains relevant is that a company seeking to go public or attract foreign capital in the energy sector must have a solid corporate structure and a legally sound asset portfolio. This means that all relevant securities, contracts, authorizations, licenses, environmental obligations, contingencies, and risks must be identified, documented, and, to the extent possible, mitigated. In this sector, risk never completely disappears. However, it must be a known, measurable, manageable, and adequately disclosed risk to investors, financiers, and securities market authorities, as well as comply with all the accreditations and reporting requirements for a listed company.
From this perspective, the legal soundness of the underlying asset is crucial for building market confidence. It is not enough for the asset to be economically or geologically attractive; it must also be supported by a contractual, corporate, and regulatory structure that demonstrates traceability, compliance, and risk management capabilities. Having accompanied a company through its early stages, which later achieved recognition in the sector, and having participated in exploration and production contracts from its inception, has been a very rewarding experience and a confirmation of the importance of building value through the legal architecture of projects.
In August 2025, she assumed leadership of PGP’s Corporate Law practice, in addition to her role as partner and head of the firm’s Energy practice. For an energy client who previously had to coordinate two separate areas within the firm, what decisions or negotiations change now that both practices operate under the same criteria?
At PGP, the Energy practice has provided regulatory advice, support in project execution with the relevant public entities, contractual and corporate structuring of transactions, and more. However, the advantage of leading both practices is that I can offer energy sector clients much more comprehensive advice under a single strategic approach, both in negotiations specific to the sector and in transactions and contracts related to other areas, such as real estate acquisitions, investments, trust structures, and mergers and acquisitions. These latter transactions do not always originate directly from the energy business but allow clients to expand their activities and are relevant to their business operations and growth.
You have built your entire career –more than two decades– at the same firm, while the energy law you practice has shifted from revolving almost exclusively around hydrocarbons to being dominated by the energy transition conversation. What was the riskiest professional gamble you had to take during that shift, and would you make it again knowing what you know today?
Indeed, for many years my experience was concentrated in the hydrocarbon sector, primarily from the perspective of exploration and production companies. I have also advised on mining projects, from exploration to mine operation. However, even at that stage, it was already crucial for the extractive industry to make progress in reducing emissions, developing energy efficiency projects, and making serious, verifiable environmental commitments compatible with the continuity of its operations.
A prime example of this was the company where I led the Legal Department for several years. Between 2015 and 2017, this company certified emissions reductions and successfully registered carbon credits with the UN. At the time, this was a groundbreaking move for the sector, as it allowed the company to become one of the first oil companies in Colombia to register and certify these credits, which were linked, among other factors, to the reduction of gas flaring in its operations. Simultaneously, other projects were developed, including field initiatives focused on reusing water obtained from oil operations, environmental compensation, and mitigating the impacts inherent to extractive activities.
However, starting in 2020, my practice expanded significantly into the electricity and gas sector, including matters related to energy and gas trading, structuring solar projects, supporting PPA agreements, and providing contractual and regulatory advice related to new generation sources. In this process, the energy transition began to be integrated into discussions, the sector became more integrated, and we began to share scenarios that previously seemed to belong to separate sectors. This allowed hydrocarbon companies to actively participate in renewable projects, and enabled lawyers in the sector to work in a more cross-cutting manner, understanding energy as a system and, more comprehensively, as an energy supply that requires diverse sources, clear rules, legal certainty, and sustainability to meet the country’s needs.
My strategy has been to continue preparing myself and deepening my knowledge in the sector, which is why I completed a Master’s degree in Energy Regulation at the Externado University of Colombia, which I finished a few months ago and which allowed me to study the sector in a comprehensive way, hand in hand with experts in both renewables and mining and hydrocarbons.”
Claudia Mora Uscátegui’s career path mirrors the sector she advises. It began in the more traditional realm of Colombian energy law, focusing on hydrocarbon exploration and production contracts that gave rise to companies like Parex Resources. However, starting in 2020, her expertise expanded to include energy and gas trading, solar projects, and PPAs, reflecting the shift in the Colombian market from treating hydrocarbons and renewables as separate entities. This integration is now reflected in her role: since August 2025, she has simultaneously led the Corporate Law and Energy practices at PGP, a consolidation that allows her to offer advice under a unified strategic approach to clients who previously coordinated two separate practices. Mora says her earliest foray in this direction was leading the UN certification of a Colombian oil company’s carbon credits between 2015 and 2017. The most recent one was completing a Master’s degree in Energy Regulation, which she finished just a few months ago.
