South SFV Today

A recent study published in Nature Climate Change on April 9 suggests that most countries would benefit from improved energy security and reduced trade risks by transitioning from fossil fuels to clean energy technologies by 2060. The research highlights lithium, nickel, cobalt, copper, and rare earth minerals as key resources for non-greenhouse gas-emitting energy systems which are predominantly found in the Global South, altering energy geopolitics.

Steve Davis, the study's senior author from Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability, noted, "Most people are focused on the new stuff that could be a problem, and not really considering the security benefits of moving away from fossil fuels."

The study indicates that even the United States, with its significant fossil fuel reserves but limited critical minerals, could enhance its energy security through decarbonization and by fostering new trade partnerships. As Davis pointed out, transitioning to electricity generation via solar and wind necessitates more imports compared to abundant domestic gas and coal resources, yet it reduces dependence on foreign oil benefiting transportation electrification.

Oil-rich nations like Russia and Saudi Arabia might face a drop in energy security under net-zero scenarios despite broadened trade links. The researchers analyzed each country's vulnerability to decarbonization relative to continued fossil fuel reliance. Jing Cheng, the study's lead author, compiled data on reserves of various fuels and minerals necessary for clean energy, alongside global trade flows.

The research modeled 1,092 scenarios for achieving global net-zero carbon emissions by 2060, incorporating data from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). It assessed risk levels in countries' energy sectors using a "trade risk index" that incorporates resource availability, import reliance, and market concentration.

Findings suggest that maintaining current trade networks would decrease trade-related energy security risks by 19% in net-zero scenarios. An expanded trade network could halve these risks on average. Strategies to reduce the need for imported materials, like enhanced recycling, could further mitigate risks, especially for mineral-poor nations like the U.S.

According to the study, a U.S. energy mix predominantly featuring renewables would best minimize trade risks, though other mixes may offer benefits like lower costs or less pollution. The research also indicates wind energy provides better security compared to solar, contingent on expanding trade networks for necessary materials.

Steve Davis emphasized the importance of diverse import sources to minimize risks: "If you’re importing a large fraction of what you need, that’s a vulnerability. If it’s all from a single other party, there’s a lot of risk that some natural disaster or geopolitical conflict could disrupt that supply. You want to diversify imports among as many sources as you can."

While the study suggests that keeping fossil fuels in an energy mix may detract from energy security, it is encouraging that most countries' trade risks decrease in net-zero scenarios and that substantial improvements occur where fossil fuel reliance is significantly reduced.

Building on these findings, Cheng, Davis, and their collaborators are launching a U.S.-specific energy security study and assessing the environmental impact of mining battery materials worldwide.

Davis stated, "We want to understand the price of more sustainable extraction."

Co-authors include Karan Bhuwalka of the Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability and Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institution for Science, alongside collaborators from Chinese institutions supported by a National Natural Science Foundation of China grant.

The original study was published by Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability.