What is the core of your research?
A. My work focuses on geopolitics and energy — I started with hydrocarbons like oil, gas and coal. My portfolio now includes renewable energy and the geopolitics of electricity.
Q. Why are rare earths so crucial now — and how is the contest over these shaping geopolitics?
A. We call these ‘rare earths’ — but they are actually found fairly widely. Importantly, their extraction is somewhat limited right now. Rare earths and critical minerals catapulted to the forefront as these are necessary inputs for renewable energy technologies, electric vehicles (EVs), digital apparatus, wind turbines, solar panels, etc. Only a few countries mine for these. There’s huge dependency on China — it is head and shoulders above any other economy in processing these. Since 2010, recognising that dependency, other countries have tried to de-risk from this. Significantly, in recent trade tensions, China has also held back some rare earths from market to exert its control. In 2021, under Joe Biden’s administration, the United States placed rare earths and critical minerals as a national security priority and emphasised the need to have friend-shoring and on-shoring to ensure US access to these since they are crucial resources for many industries, including the military. Recently, President Trump highlighted these in his references to Greenland and his talks with Russia over Ukraine. His attempt to use Ukraine’s mineral resources to pay back the US for its support is a misguided approach though — the Trump administration is now weaponising critical minerals to issue threats in geopolitics.
Q. You’ve also researched power supply in the US — why are big tech companies so worried about this?
A. If you go back about ten years, power demand was generally flat here. Suddenly, an uptick in demand for electricity began — part of that is linked to the drive towards greater electrification but now, the race to AI superiority requires data centres. The United States is the global leader in the number of data centres — as these become bigger, going to hyperscale and mega-scale data centres, even looking potentially at five gigawatts per centre, they require reliable and resilient power. So, the ‘GAFAM’ companies — Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft — are becoming much more involved in the power space as their data centres need growing amounts of this resource.
I argue this will drive up natural gas demand in the US and elsewhere — again, America sees this as a national security priority to lead the AI space and triumph geopolitically against China. Of course, the assumption of needing ever more power could be challenged, as DeepSeek, which emerged recently from China, has shaken some of the demand assumptions for AI — but increased electrification will keep driving power demand. Some big tech companies, also having ambitious renewable energy targets, are seeking more solar and wind — Microsoft, Google and Amazon are venturing towards nuclear energy as well to ensure reliable access to baseload.
Q. What are some other important — and even surprising — global energy trends?
A. Along with Dr Richard Haass, who works on foreign policy, I’ve been studying this idea that the world is ‘moving away from fossil fuels’ — that is not what the data shows. Instead, as global growth and populations change, there is rising demand for oil, natural gas and coal — yet, about a decade ago, there was an assumption the world would limit coal, this being the dirtiest fossil fuel. However, there are year-on-year increases in global coal use. This is partly driven by higher demand for power plus countries needing energy security. That involves availability, affordability, accessibility and acceptability — however, only the first two criteria are actually prioritised when linking energy and national security.
Q. Your writing argues for using the term ‘energy coexistence’ over the ‘energy transition’ — why?
A. ‘Energy coexistence’ is closer to today’s reality. If the ‘energy transition’ means we are moving away from oil, natural gas and coal, the facts at hand don’t show this — even as we are deploying more renewable energy, we are still adding fossil fuels and continuing to rely on hydrocarbons. Hence, ‘energy coexistence’ is a more accurate term for where are we and where we will probably stay for the next five to ten years. I believe the world does need much more renewable energy — however, when you still have millions of people lacking access to affordable and reliable energy, it is imperative their needs are served because human development relies on energy access. Ideally, this should come from non-carbon-emitting sources — but that is not what we see. There is an irony in energy. Even as the world experiences more extreme heat situations with global warming, it will need more cooling — hence, as temperatures increase, there will also be growing demand for coal to power cooling systems.Views expressed are personal
