🆕 | As the effects of climate change intensify, interest in geoengineering approaches is ramping up.
But these methods risk creating new ecological & security threats, warn @olazard.bsky.social, @mandibissett.bsky.social, & @jamesgdyke.info.
carnegieendowment.org/research/202...
Geoengineering is a sign that we have entered the age of the planetary. But we lack the analytical, governance, & normative frameworks to help humanity evolve in this age. Intervening at planetary levels without those frames raises new security challenges that we are unequipped for.
👉Introducing a novel analytical frame for understanding what risks geoengineering approaches generate for human, environmental, geopolitical, and planetary security.
Here is what this report will help you with:
👉 Understanding the scientific and policy background against which geoengineering is emerging
👉Understanding the range of geo-engineering applications, their technicalities and their readiness level
We wanted up-to-date information about various forms of climate interventions - what they are, how they interact, what they will do, and not do. Most of all, we want informed questions to guide debates, and to inform decisions about the why, what & how of geoengineering.
Policy and public debates about geoengineering tend to polarize. It is only natural - the increasing interest in geoengineering is a sign that existential threats are materialising as a result of the lack of or delayed climate & nature action.
In the gap between costs and necessary measures, voices advocating for geo-engineering approaches are becoming louder. They are designed to mitigate the effects of climate change as opposed to its drivers. They range from carbon dioxide removal to solar radiation management.
Why?
The world is hurtling past the 1.5°C threshold at a staggering pace. The costs & impacts that climate change inflicts are not just adding up; they are increasingly threatening the foundations of life-support systems & civilisations. Yet, mitigation efforts are neither fast nor radical enough.
🚨New Report on Geo-Engineering and Risk Gradients in the Era of Planetary Security
With Mandi Bissett and James Dyke, we worked over the past year on a policy primer about various geo-engineering approaches.
carnegieendowment.org/research/202...
La guerre des ressources : géopolitique de l’extraction - @olazard.bsky.social
youtu.be/ayUAr9USWXo?...
🎧 | Trump's cuts to climate funding complicate the clean energy transition.
In a new episode of #EuropeInsideOut, @rmomtaz.bsky.social, @olazard.bsky.social, & @milomcbride.bsky.social explore the avenues left for EU-US clean energy cooperation.
👉 europe-inside-out.simplecast.com/episodes/can...
3y ago I gave a TED talk on the blindspots of the energy transition, particularly in relation to mining. It is time to reflect on the cognitive dissonances I have witnessed since then when it comes to working on the material implications of the energy transition 👇
www.linkedin.com/pulse/3-year...
President Trump makes it very clear that he has understood the geo-strategic dimension and implications of climate change, much like Russia and China. All gloves are off now: security dilemmas are reaching a peak, and with them, the race to redesign the global order is fast and furious.
The places that are being considered as the future of exploration horizon coincide significantly with geo-strategic hotspots: the Arctic, the Antarctic, the meeting point between the Arctic and the Atlantic Ocean, the Clarion-Clipperton area in the Pacific Ocean.
Here is what is NOT in the report, and which I will write about elsewhere:
❄️ The battle to secure critical minerals is not just playing out within fragile contexts, and via fragility; it is also playing out in frontier resource horizons such as the cryosphere (Greenland!) and the deep seas.
It is imperative to understand this: a climate-safe future will only be built on the back of conflict transformation and geopolitical de-escalation as much as it will be built on the back of critical minerals;
Fragility is now being instrumentalized & weaponized within systems rivalry. This is a phenomena that will cost us collectively, and which history will look back upon with shared expiation.
🚨 I delved into small case studies like Brazil, Myanmar and the DRC to illustrate the ways in which localised forms of risks connect to planetary ones. Human insecurity, ecological insecurity, national security and planetary security are currently pitted against one another in a dangerous spiral.
💥I also argue that the global competition, & the subsequent scramble for resources is likely to create a form of security dilemma between international security (an exercise in balancing power) & planetary security (which relies on ecological pillars, teleconnections w/in and btw ecosystems etc);
There are many publications on critical minerals out there. This publication covers some well-known ground. Here is how it adds to the conversation:
🌎 The most important point is that mining for the energy and digital transition opens us up to planetary-level risks, not just environmental ones;
Hot off the press! ☄️
I am so very glad to have worked on this new Global Bulletin on the Scramble for Critical Minerals with Instituto Igarapé.
This publication aims to connect the dots on some of the transition risks we need to navigate in relation to mining, particularly in fragile zones.
Denmark is also the focus of geo-strategic debates in relation to Greenland, a place of significant importance for global climate security. I am incredibly proud of the work I have done with the government, and I look forward to continuing it in the coming months.
Denmark sits on the UN Security Council for the next two years. It will take over the EU's presidency in the second half of 2025. It is at the forefront of climate security, and now planetary security work.
3/ analyse transition related risks in key context, especially where mineral extraction will take place. This, with the view to enhance the chances of accelerated mitigation and adaptation at bio-regional levels.
The idea behind our work was to recognise that climate risks in fragile zones 1/ require multi-layered issue/actor analysis focusing on political economies and political ecologies of fragility, criminality and fragility; 2/ require complex regeneration interventions to help stabilise hydro-cycling;
Climate security is a field that was historically confined to risk mitigation/management in conflict & fragile zones. I worked with the Danish government last year to crack our understanding of climate security wide open. Our thinking is now published in this "peace and planet" guidance note.
