Latin America and the Caribbean has one of the cleanest electricity mixes globally. According to the Latin American and Caribbean Energy Organization's (OLACDE) Monthly Electricity Generation Report , 158 TWh of electricity were generated in February 2026.
This reflects a system where renewable energies represent 67.7%, while fossil fuels contribute 29.7% and nuclear energy 2.6%.
This data underlines a structural reality: Latin America and the Caribbean continues to be a key player in the global energy transition, with a mix that considerably exceeds the global average in terms of clean generation, which is 33.8% (first quarter of 2026).
However, the region remains heavily dependent on hydropower, which accounted for 45.4% of total generation. The next largest sources were natural gas (22.7%) and wind power (12.2%). Together, these three technologies represent more than 80% of monthly generation, reflecting their structural importance in meeting regional electricity demand.
Less dependence on water and greater support for non-conventional renewables
When compared year-on-year to February 2025, the data shows a 3.9% growth in regional electricity generation; this is equivalent to an additional increase of 6 TWh. However, the most relevant aspect is how this growth occurred: while hydroelectricity decreased by 9 TWh, other technologies managed to compensate with a combined increase of 15 TWh. Emerging energy sources were responsible for this compensation.
- Wind power: +6 TWh
- Bioenergy: +5 TWh
- Solar: +2 TWh.
This pattern shows a fundamental trend within the system; diversification towards other renewable sources is gaining importance and reducing vulnerabilities.
Decrease in generation during February
The report also indicates that the monthly change in February 2026 compared to January of the same year was -6.2%. This contraction is partly due to the natural calendar adjustment—February had only 28 days—as well as a generalized reduction in almost all energy sources. The largest declines were observed in coal (-17%), geothermal (-14%), and natural gas (-10%), followed by oil, nuclear, and solar. This data is significant because it shows that the decrease was not the result of technological substitution but rather a general compression of energy dispatch.