Argentina Is Repeating Old Mistakes in a World That Has Changed

Pablo Rutigliano asserts that Argentina's future lies in electromobility, batteries, a modern energy matrix, and industrial development

By: Pablo RutiglianoPresident of the Latin American Chamber of Lithium – CEO of Atómico 3

⸻

Argentina is going through a decisive moment, yet it continues to make decisions as if we were still in the last decade. The energy transition is underway globally, driven by electromobility, batteries, storage systems, and a profound transformation of the productive matrix. But here, we continue to look at the future through old rearview mirrors. We insist on technologies that represent no real progress and avoid facing the only path capable of generating genuine development, quality employment, national industry, and strategic positioning. I am not saying this from the comfort of commentary, but from years of study, work, and commitment reflected in La revolución del litio (The Lithium Revolution), where I clearly state that the country needs a vision, not a band-aid solution. And what is happening today is precisely the opposite.

Importing hybrid cars as if that were energy transition is a perfect example of the lack of direction. A hybrid changes absolutely nothing; it is a vehicle that continues to consume fossil fuels and only adds a technical device to justify the idea of "progress." But it does not advance: it maintains the same energy model that is already exhausted. It is a convenient solution, useful for those who need to delay the real technological leap and keep the logic of gasoline and diesel consumption intact. While the world consolidates total electro-mobility, Argentina clings to a technology that in developed countries is already considered an outdated intermediate stage. Bringing in hybrids is kicking the can down the road on the development of the electrical infrastructure, charging stations, 500 km corridors, and the national network that we should have been building for years. It is, in simple terms, continuing to burn fuel disguised as modernity.

If the country really wanted to initiate a genuine energy transition, it would start with the basics: infrastructure. Not speeches. Not marketing. Infrastructure. Electrical hubs, high-capacity charging stations, storage systems, logistics corridors, investments in domestic batteries, technological integration, and federal development. The energy transition cannot be decreed: it must be built. And that construction requires vision, planning, and, above all, understanding that electromobility is not a fad but a profound redesign of the economic system. The countries leading the process know this. Here, however, we continue to debate as if the transition were simply a catalog of cars.

Added to this is a narrative that I hear more and more often: "lithium is finished," "now it's all about hydrogen." This idea is as absurd as it is convenient for those who want to sow confusion. Hydrogen is a valuable technology, yes, but no hydrogen vehicle, no smart grid, no integration of renewables can operate without electrical storage systems. And storage is based on batteries. There is no electromobility without batteries, no decarbonization without batteries, no modern energy matrix without batteries. Those who say that lithium is a thing of the past do not really understand anything about the scientific, technological, or economic processes that define the new industrial era. It is a discourse that attempts to downplay the importance of a key resource in order to continue defending fossil fuel models that no longer make strategic sense. Argentina has lithium, it has technical capacity, it has the potential for industry. What it lacks is political will.

And when we analyze the role of YPF, the contradiction becomes clear. Every incoming government uses it as a propaganda tool, turning it into an instrument to reinforce a narrative and presenting it as a symbol of energy independence that, in reality, only deepens dependence on fossil fuels. They want to convince us that liquid fuels are the future of a country that, ironically, already produces lithium and has everything it needs to lead the way in electromobility. The real discussion is this: what percentage of the future energy mix will continue to be fossil fuels and what percentage should migrate to electricity? That is the technical, economic, and strategic question. The rest is political marketing.

It must also be said bluntly: there are sectors that deny climate change because it suits them to do so. They have turned it into an ideological business to sustain structures that are not adapted to the 21st century. But denying the climate crisis is denying human evolution. It is denying the common home we inhabit. It is ignoring the fact that if we are not capable of caring for our environment, the damage will come back to us multiplied and destroy us. Those who say that climate change "does not exist" seek to block the collective consciousness so that the world does not change, but history shows that such powers always have an expiration date. What emerges afterwards is a deeper, more honest current, more aligned with the real needs of human beings.

Argentina stands at the threshold of a historic opportunity. It can choose to continue retreating or it can accept once and for all that the future lies in electromobility, batteries, infrastructure, a modern energy matrix, industrial development, and the real transition that the world's powers have already defined. What it cannot continue to do is confuse its society with quick fixes, empty rhetoric, and decisions that benefit a few while harming the entire country. The energy transition is not optional. It is inevitable. And the longer we take to understand this, the higher the cost of delay will be. The future is already here; what is needed is for Argentina to stop looking the other way and start building it with the determination that history demands.