Avoiding old geopolitical paradigms for new energy challenges
The US needs critical minerals for the energy transition, but its strategy for securing supplies should not mirror its approach to fossil fuels
I joined a workshop in early April on the geopolitics of the energy transition, hosted by nonprofit the Stanley Center for Peace and Security and climate change thinktank E3G. Although the workshop touched on a wide range of challenges, those related to critical raw minerals (CRM) stood out. Washington has clearly woken up to the need to secure CRM, but it risks overlaying old frameworks onto new challenges. Specifically, it risks overplaying great power rivalry and treating CRM like fossil fuels. At stake is the pace and extent of the energy transition, and the commercial opportunities it should yield. For context, the workshop laid out a few key points. First, that the transition to clean
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/58a71/58a719b6c73effff63906d66236ab511869d46dd" alt=""
Also in this section
18 February 2025
Demand for CCS to abate new gas-fired plants is rising as datacentres seek low-carbon power, Frederik Majkut, SVP of industrial decarbonisation, tells Carbon Economist
11 February 2025
Rising prices have added to concerns over CBAM impact on the competitiveness of EU manufacturing
7 February 2025
Norwegian energy company slashes spending on low-carbon sectors as transition decelerates
30 January 2025
The UAE’s oil and gas company puts its faith in technologies including CCS and AI to deliver its emission-reduction goals