 We are looking at how the political and economic elites reconcile the fact that on the one hand their countries are committed to the Paris Agreement, but on the other hand they continue extracting fossil fuels. And we are analysing how they talk about it, what discourses they use to bring these two things together. For this we looked at policy documents, at quotes in the media and other types of documents. For instance there is very technical, managerial language so you make it an issue that's expert and that's only about emissions and that makes it easy to say well we'll compensate so it's fine, we'll continue extracting and we will still meet climate goals. Another example is how in Colombia you see a new story about oil and gas being central core to the energy transition. Partly because of the revenues they generate and can facilitate investments for the energy transition. So the revenue question is really the one million dollar question because we know that renewable energy delivers energy access. We know about other technologies that can facilitate energy transition but governments in fossil fuel producing countries they can't get the same revenues from these technologies and these revenues are political capital, that's the way they keep in power. So this is really the core question here. In the Nigerian case it's that you see a bit of a discursive opposition between the old oil based economy which was all about the resource curse and exporting raw materials and not keeping much revenue in the country so now the discourse is about natural gas which is both an answer to the climate problem because it's a cleaner fuel according to these discourses and the answer to this economic aspiration of becoming a modernized industrialized competitive economy which relies on itself and its own production so natural gas in these discourses really helps square the circle in a way. Of course part of it is of challenging these discourses is really zooming into these inconsistencies and really asking so. What does it really mean? Does it really work? What is claimed in terms of energy specifics and emission specifics but on the other hand we also notice that is very much about development and the vision of development in the self imagery of the country and what the country wants to achieve on the international level, on the economic level for its population and basically we are working on thinking okay how can these needs and aspirations be also answered with an alternative development vision which is not based on fossil fuel extractives and a protection and doors on other assets.