To better understand the discursive dynamics behind the Medupi controversy, this chapter begins by viewing climate change and energy security not as objective facts but constantly negotiated discourses. Based on a targeted sampling of project documents, reports, testimony, and popular articles, the study then maps the discursive justifications behind the project (economic development, environmental sustainability and energy security) as well as those against it (corruption or maldevelopment, environmental degradation, and energy poverty and racism). Tracing the intricacies of the Medupi controversy provides rich insight into energy policy and planning in South Africa. In addition, examining the way conservationists situate their environmental advocacy in the context of competing, local economic claims—and moving beyond the ideological purity of conservationism, which Adams and McShane characterize as the “myth of wild Africa”—is necessary to refine strategies for sustainable development. In essence, the chapter helps reveal the multidimensional nature of energy security and climate change, showing how various aspects of each conflict and complement each other. Lastly, the move to map the institutionalization of discourses over time within government, capital and civil society reflects our recognition of the continual importance of untangling and politicizing real, concrete power struggles.