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
Also in this section
16 April 2024
US and European oil majors snap up smaller players and look to accelerate development in a region deemed to possess all the key elements for successful CCUS deployment
15 April 2024
Demand for credits seen rising 20% this year despite issues around integrity and standardisation
11 April 2024
Volatile allowance prices and small size of voluntary market undermine ability to drive investment, says Oxford Institute for Energy Studies
8 April 2024
Chevron New Energies is lead investor in funding round by Colorado-based provider of post-combustion capture technology