Connect with us

Published

on

While US President Donald Trump has ripped up much of his predecessor’s climate and foreign policy, he has pushed forward with Joe Biden’s pursuit of metals and minerals abroad while shifting the strategic focus from clean energy to military use, analysts say.

Biden spent some of his final days as US leader in Angola, talking up a railway that will bring copper and cobalt from Central Africa to the continent’s west coast where the materials can be shipped to the US.

Since coming to power in January, Trump has discussed deals to provide military assistance to the war-torn nations of Ukraine and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) in return for minerals, threatened to take over mineral-rich Greenland, and is reportedly considering a new law that would bypass UN discussions so as to allow mining of the deep seabed in international waters.

Explainer: Why the world is racing to mine critical minerals 

This week, Massad Boulos, Trump’s senior advisor on Africa, travelled to DRC as his first port of call shortly after being appointed. In a meeting with DRC President Felix Tshisekedi, Boulos – father-in-law to Trump’s daughter – said the US had reviewed the DRC’s minerals proposal. He said he was “pleased to announce that the President and I have agreed on a path forward for its development,” according to a statement from the DRC government.

While the details of the mooted deal are not yet public, Boulos said he would work with Tshisekedi to build a deeper relationship that benefits both the Congolese and American people and “to stimulate American private sector investment in the DRC, particularly in the mining sector”.

A day earlier, Trump exempted key minerals like copper and cobalt from the new trade tariffs he slapped on nations around the world.

The big unanswered question is why his administration is so keen to secure supplies of these resources, which are increasingly sought after because they are key to advancing the clean energy transition.

Fadhel Kaboub, associate professor of economics at Denison University in Ohio, said Trump’s interest is likely driven primarily by the importance of critical minerals for military and high-tech purposes. “The Trump administration is known for its anti-climate action rhetoric,” he said, adding that its priority is definitely not the energy transition, but other competitive sectors such as defence.

Once extracted and processed, minerals like copper and cobalt – which the DRC has in abundance – can be used in clean technology or for military equipment, among other things. Copper can be used to channel green electricity or as a liner for anti-tank missiles. Cobalt can be used for electric vehicle batteries or alloys for fighter jets.

Stockpiling critical minerals

The Trump administration – which heavily favours fossil fuel extraction over clean energy expansion – has publicly emphasised the military uses of minerals. Adam Burstein, the Department of Defense’s technical director for strategic and critical materials, said in January that the US is committed to “stockpiling critical minerals” to reduce the risk of supply chain disruptions from China, which dominates the sector.

In February, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio was asked about the Dominican Republic’s minerals. He said the world needs these for “technologies that are used for defence” and other advanced technologies, adding that “we want to help develop this wealth”.

Explainer: What does it take to make clean energy technologies?

When asked if the US government’s rhetoric on sourcing minerals for defence could shift these materials away from clean technologies, Ellie Saklatvala, head of nonferrous metal pricing at Argus Media, said there may be times when “demand for metals for defence applications competes directly with demand for clean energy applications”.

When it comes to raw materials, Saklatvala added, the defence sector can usually pay more for supplies, and this can have a significant impact on overall price levels if large volumes are acquired quickly.

Thomas Kavanagh, editor for battery materials at Argus Media, said there is potential for competition between these two sectors to grow “especially as cobalt going into the US defence industry is quite limited to a small number of suppliers, mainly outside of the DRC”.

DRC lobbying campaign

While Ukraine is still working on a diplomatically tricky deal with Washington for access to its minerals and Greenland has so far resisted overtures and even threats from the US to annex it from Denmark, the DRC under Tshisekedi has actively lobbied for a deal with the Trump administration in exchange for protection from the Rwanda-backed M23 rebels which have grabbed swathes of the DRC’s east.

Shortly after Trump’s election, documents submitted to the US government under the Foreign Agents Registration Act show that the DRC began employing a Republican lobbyist called Karl Von Batten to lobby in Washington on its behalf.

By calling and emailing contacts at the House of Representatives foreign affairs committee, Von Batten managed to set up a Zoom call between its chair, Brian Mast, and Tshisekedi on February 11, according to a document published online by the US Department of Justice.

Von Batten then organised a five-day visit by a delegation from the DRC government to Washington in late February, at a cost of $350,000, where they met with US defence, state department and trade officials.

According to the official document signed by Von Batten, strengthening “military and investment ties” was on the agenda, as were “preliminary discussions about a potential meeting” between Tshisekedi and Trump and planning a media strategy on “public narratives surrounding DRC initiatives”.

Since that visit, Republican Congressman Ronny Jackson travelled to the DRC in March to meet with Tshisekedi. According to the DRC government, Jackson was acting as an envoy for Trump and said in the meeting: “We want to work so that American companies can come and invest and work in the DRC. And for that to happen, we must ensure that there is an environment of peace”.

Tshisekedi also went on Trump’s favourite TV channel – Fox News – to talk about the proposed deal. “We are very happy to say that with the Trump administration, things are moving a lot faster on both sides,” he said in French, adding, “I think the US is able to use either pressure or sanctions to make sure that armed groups that are in the DRC can be kept at bay”.

A troubled deal

Henry Sanderson, associate fellow at defence and security think-tank the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), said the DRC is trying to “curry favour” and appeal to Trump’s “transactional” interests.

But a minerals deal with the DRC could face a “big hurdle”, Claude Kabemba, chief executive officer of Southern Africa Resource Watch, said in a policy brief.

The DRC mining sector’s “lack of transparency and accountability” could undermine a partnership, he argued, noting that “it would be difficult” for the US private sector to operate openly in the prevailing conditions of corruption and mismanagement.

Ending poverty and gangs: How Zambia seeks to cash in on the global drive for EVs

Another roadblock, according to RUSI’s Sanderson, is that the DRC wants security in return – and Trump has indicated that he does not want to get involved in foreign wars.

However, Kabemba warned that if the US does enter the DRC conflict, it could be on the other side, backing the rebels who currently control mineral-rich areas and are threatening to take over the capital Kinshasa. The rebels have, over the past year, advanced and occupied major cities in the country’s eastern region – including mining sites in North and South Kivu provinces – with large deposits of coltan.

Members of the European Parliament in February called on the European Commission to suspend an EU deal to develop sustainable raw materials value chains with Rwanda, until it stops interfering in neighbouring DRC, including exporting minerals mined from M23-controlled areas, they said in a statement. Rwanda denies that it is involved in such activities.

Kabemba believes Trump may have fewer qualms than his European counterparts. “A deal with the M23 rebels might be more appealing to Trump in the current situation,” he wrote. Trump could choose to do business with “the side that offers the best options for sustainable and long-term access to critical minerals and rare earth elements”, he added.

Making reference to the conflict during his visit this week, US Africa advisor Boulos said “there can be no economic prosperity without security”, adding that the US-DRC relationship has great potential and would involve multi-billion dollar investments which can only thrive in the most conducive business environment.

“We want a lasting peace that affirms the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the DRC, and lays the foundation for a thriving regional economy,” Boulos emphasised.

The post Trump follows the minerals trail – but for weapons not clean energy? appeared first on Climate Home News.

Trump follows the minerals trail – but for weapons not clean energy?

Continue Reading

Climate Change

What Is the Economic Impact of Data Centers? It’s a Secret.

Published

on

N.C. Gov. Josh Stein wants state lawmakers to rethink tax breaks for data centers. The industry’s opacity makes it difficult to evaluate costs and benefits.

Tax breaks for data centers in North Carolina keep as much as $57 million each year into from state and local government coffers, state figures show, an amount that could balloon to billions of dollars if all the proposed projects are built.

What Is the Economic Impact of Data Centers? It’s a Secret.

Continue Reading

Climate Change

GEF raises $3.9bn ahead of funding deadline, $1bn below previous budget

Published

on

The Global Environment Facility (GEF), a multilateral fund that provides climate and nature finance to developing countries, has raised $3.9 billion from donor governments in its last pledging session ahead of a key fundraising deadline at the end of May.

The amount, which is meant to cover the fund’s activities for the next four years (July 2026-June 2030), falls significantly short of the previous four-year cycle for which the GEF managed to raise $5.3bn from governments. Since then, military and other political priorities have squeezed rich nations’ budgets for climate and development aid.

The facility said in a statement that it expects more pledges ahead of the final replenishment package, which is set for approval at the next GEF Council meeting from May 31 to June 3.

Claude Gascon, interim CEO of the GEF, said that “donor countries have risen to the challenge and made bold commitments towards a more positive future for the planet”. He added that the pledges send a message that “the world is not giving up on nature even in a time of competing priorities”.

    Donors under pressure

    But Brian O’Donnell, director of the environmental non-profit Campaign for Nature, said the announcement shows “an alarming trend” of donor governments cutting public finance for climate and nature.

    “Wealthy nations pledged to increase international nature finance, and yet we are seeing cuts and lower contributions. Investing in nature prevents extinctions and supports livelihoods, security, health, food, clean water and climate,” he said. “Failing to safeguard nature now will result in much larger costs later.”

    At COP29 in Baku, developed countries pledged to mobilise $300bn a year in public climate finance by 2035, while at UN biodiversity talks they have also pledged to raise $30bn per year by 2030. Yet several wealthy governments have announced cuts to green finance to increase defense spending, among them most recently the UK.

    As for the US, despite Trump’s cuts to international climate finance, Congress approved a $150 million increase in its contribution to the GEF after what was described as the organisation’s “refocus on non-climate priorities like biodiversity, plastics and ocean ecosystems, per US Treasury guidance”.

    The facility will only reveal how much each country has pledged when its assembly of 186 member countries meets in early June. The last period’s largest donors were Germany ($575 million), Japan ($451 million), and the US ($425 million).

    The GEF has also gone through a change in leadership halfway through its fundraising cycle. Last December, the GEF Council asked former CEO Carlos Manuel Rodriguez to step down effective immediately and appointed Gascon as interim CEO.

    Santa Marta conference: fossil fuel transition in an unstable world

    New guidelines

    As part of the upcoming funding cycle, the GEF has approved a set of guidelines for spending the $3.9bn raised so far, which include allocating 35% of resources for least developed countries and small island states, as well as 20% of the money going to Indigenous people and communities.

    Its programs will help countries shift five key systems – nature, food, urban, energy and health – from models that drive degradation to alternatives that protect the planet and support human well-being by integrating the value of nature into production and consumption systems.

    The new priorities also include a target to allocate 25% of the GEF’s budget for mobilising private funds through blended finance. This aligns with efforts by wealthy countries to increase contributions from the private sector to international climate finance.

    Niels Annen, Germany’s State Secretary for Economic Cooperation and Development, said in a statement that the country’s priorities are “very well reflected” in the GEF’s new spending guidelines, including on “innovative finance for nature and people, better cooperation with the private sector, and stable resources for the most vulnerable countries”.

    Aliou Mustafa, of the GEF Indigenous Peoples Advisory Group (IPAG), also welcomed the announcement, adding that “the GEF is strengthening trust and meaningful partnerships with Indigenous Peoples and local communities” by placing them at the “centre of decision-making”.

    The post GEF raises $3.9bn ahead of funding deadline, $1bn below previous budget appeared first on Climate Home News.

    GEF raises $3.9bn ahead of funding deadline, $1bn below previous budget

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Marine heatwaves ‘nearly double’ the economic damage caused by tropical cyclones

    Published

    on

    Tropical cyclones that rapidly intensify when passing over marine heatwaves can become “supercharged”, increasing the likelihood of high economic losses, a new study finds.

    Such storms also have higher rates of rainfall and higher maximum windspeeds, according to the research.

    The study, published in Science Advances, looks at the economic damages caused by nearly 800 tropical cyclones that occurred around the world between 1981 and 2023.

    It finds that rapidly intensifying tropical cyclones that pass near abnormally warm parts of the ocean produce nearly double – 93% – the economic damages as storms that do not, even when levels of coastal development are taken into account.

    One researcher, who was not involved in the study, tells Carbon Brief that the new analysis is a “step forward in understanding how we can better refine our predictions of what might happen in the future” in an increasingly warm world.

    As marine heatwaves are projected to become more frequent under future climate change, the authors say that the interactions between storms and these heatwaves “should be given greater consideration in future strategies for climate adaptation and climate preparedness”.

    ‘Rapid intensification’

    Tropical cyclones are rapidly rotating storm systems that form over warm ocean waters, characterised by low pressure at their cores and sustained winds that can reach more than 120 kilometres per hour.

    The term “tropical cyclones” encompasses hurricanes, cyclones and typhoons, which are named as such depending on which ocean basin they occur in.

    When they make landfall, these storms can cause major damage. They accounted for six of the top 10 disasters between 1900 and 2024 in terms of economic loss, according to the insurance company Aon’s 2025 climate catastrophe insight report.

    These economic losses are largely caused by high wind speeds, large amounts of rainfall and damaging storm surges.

    Storms can become particularly dangerous through a process called “rapid intensification”.

    Rapid intensification is when a storm strengthens considerably in a short period of time. It is defined as an increase in sustained wind speed of at least 30 knots (around 55 kilometres per hour) in a 24-hour period.

    There are several factors that can lead to rapid intensification, including warm ocean temperatures, high humidity and low vertical “wind shear” – meaning that the wind speeds higher up in the atmosphere are very similar to the wind speeds near the surface.

    Rapid intensification has become more common since the 1980s and is projected to become even more frequent in the future with continued warming. (Although there is uncertainty as to how climate change will impact the frequency of tropical cyclones, the increase in strength and intensification is more clear.)

    Marine heatwaves are another type of extreme event that are becoming more frequent due to recent warming. Like their atmospheric counterparts, marine heatwaves are periods of abnormally high ocean temperatures.

    Previous research has shown that these marine heatwaves can contribute to a cyclone undergoing rapid intensification. This is because the warm ocean water acts as a “fuel” for a storm, says Dr Hamed Moftakhari, an associate professor of civil engineering at the University of Alabama who was one of the authors of the new study. He explains:

    “The entire strength of the tropical cyclone [depends on] how hot the [ocean] surface is. Marine heatwave means we have an abundance of hot water that is like a gas [petrol] station. As you move over that, it’s going to supercharge you.”

    However, the authors say, there is no global assessment of how rapid intensification and marine heatwaves interact – or how they contribute to economic damages.

    Using the International Best Track Archive for Climate Stewardship (IBTrACS) – a database of tropical cyclone paths and intensities – the researchers identify 1,600 storms that made landfall during the 1981-2023 period, out of a total of 3,464 events.

    Of these 1,600 storms, they were able to match 789 individual, land-falling cyclones with economic loss data from the Emergency Events Database (EM-DAT) and other official sources.

    Then, using the IBTrACS storm data and ocean-temperature data from the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, the researchers classify each cyclone by whether or not it underwent rapid intensification and if it passed near a recent marine heatwave event before making landfall.

    The researchers find that there is a “modest” rise in the number of marine heatwave-influenced tropical cyclones globally since 1981, but with significant regional variations. In particular, they say, there are “clear” upward trends in the north Atlantic Ocean, the north Indian Ocean and the northern hemisphere basin of the eastern Pacific Ocean.

    ‘Storm characteristics’

    The researchers find substantial differences in the characteristics of tropical cyclones that experience rapid intensification and those that do not, as well as between rapidly intensifying storms that occur with marine heatwaves and those that occur without them.

    For example, tropical cyclones that do not experience rapid intensification have, on average, maximum wind speeds of around 40 knots (74km/hr), whereas storms that rapidly intensify have an average maximum wind speed of nearly 80 knots (148km/hr).

    Of the rapidly intensifying storms, those that are influenced by marine heatwaves maintain higher wind speeds during the days leading up to landfall.

    Although the wind speeds are very similar between the two groups once the storms make landfall, the pre-landfall difference still has an impact on a storm’s destructiveness, says Dr Soheil Radfar, a hurricane-hazard modeller at Princeton University. Radfar, who is the lead author of the new study, tells Carbon Brief:

    “Hurricane damage starts days before the landfall…Four or five days before a hurricane making landfall, we expect to have high wind speeds and, because of that high wind speed, we expect to have storm surges that impact coastal communities.”

    They also find that rapidly intensifying storms have higher peak rainfall than non-rapidly intensifying storms, with marine heatwave-influenced, rapidly intensifying storms exhibiting the highest average rainfall at landfall.

    The charts below show the mean sustained wind speed in knots (top) and the mean rainfall in millimetres per hour (bottom) for the tropical cyclones analysed in the study in the five days leading up to and two days following a storm making landfall.

    The four lines show storms that: rapidly intensified with the influence of marine heatwaves (red); those that rapidly intensified without marine heatwaves (purple); those that experienced marine heatwaves, but did not rapidly intensify (orange); and those that neither rapidly intensified nor experienced a marine heatwave (blue).

    Average maximum sustained wind speed (top) and rate of rainfall (bottom) for tropical cyclones in the period leading up to and following landfall. Storms are categorised as: rapidly intensifying with marine heatwaves (red); rapidly intensifying without marine heatwaves (purple); not rapidly intensifying with marine heatwaves (orange); and not rapidly intensifying, without marine heatwaves (blue). Source: Radfar et al. (2026)
    Average maximum sustained wind speed (top) and rate of rainfall (bottom) for tropical cyclones in the period leading up to and following landfall. Storms are categorised as: rapidly intensifying with marine heatwaves (red); rapidly intensifying without marine heatwaves (purple); not rapidly intensifying with marine heatwaves (orange); and not rapidly intensifying, without marine heatwaves (blue). Source: Radfar et al. (2026)

    Dr Daneeja Mawren, an ocean and climate consultant at the Mauritius-based Mascarene Environmental Consulting who was not involved in the study, tells Carbon Brief that the new study “helps clarify how marine heatwaves amplify storm characteristics”, such as stronger winds and heavier rainfall. She notes that this “has not been done on a global scale before”.

    However, Mawren adds that other factors not considered in the analysis can “make a huge difference” in the rapid intensification of tropical cyclones, including subsurface marine heatwaves and eddies – circular, spinning ocean currents that can trap warm water.

    Dr Jonathan Lin, an atmospheric scientist at Cornell University who was also not involved in the study, tells Carbon Brief that, while the intensification found by the study “makes physical sense”, it is inherently limited by the relatively small number of storms that occur. He adds:

    “There’s not that many storms, to tease out the physical mechanisms and observational data. So being able to reproduce this kind of work in a physical model would be really important.”

    Economic costs

    Storm intensity is not the only factor that determines how destructive a given cyclone can be – the economic damages also depend strongly on the population density and the amount of infrastructure development where a storm hits. The study explains:

    “A high storm surge in a sparsely populated area may cause less economic damage than a smaller surge in a densely populated, economically important region.”

    To account for the differences in development, the researchers use a type of data called “built-up volume”, from the Global Human Settlement Layer. Built-up volume is a quantity derived from satellite data and other high-resolution imagery that combines measurements of building area and average building height in a given area. This can be used as a proxy for the level of development, the authors explain.

    By comparing different cyclones that impacted areas with similar built-up volumes, the researchers can analyse how rapid intensification and marine heatwaves contribute to the overall economic damages of a storm.

    They find that, even when controlling for levels of coastal development, storms that pass through a marine heatwave during their rapid intensification cause 93% higher economic damages than storms that do not.

    They identify 71 marine heatwave-influenced storms that cause more than $1bn (inflation-adjusted across the dataset) in damages, compared to 45 storms that cause those levels of damage without the influence of marine heatwaves.

    This quantification of the cyclones’ economic impact is one of the study’s most “important contributions”, says Mawren.

    The authors also note that the continued development in coastal regions may increase the likelihood of tropical cyclone damages over time.

    Towards forecasting

    The study notes that the increased damages caused by marine heatwave-influenced tropical cyclones, along with the projected increases in marine heatwaves, means such storms “should be given greater consideration” in planning for future climate change.

    For Radfar and Moftakhari, the new study emphasises the importance of understanding the interactions between extreme events, such as tropical cyclones and marine heatwaves.

    Moftakhari notes that extreme events in the future are expected to become both more intense and more complex. This becomes a problem for climate resilience because “we basically design in the future based on what we’ve observed in the past”, he says. This may lead to underestimating potential hazards, he adds.

    Mawren agrees, telling Carbon Brief that, in order to “fully capture the intensification potential”, future forecasts and risk assessments must account for marine heatwaves and other ocean phenomena, such as subsurface heat.

    Lin adds that the actions needed to reduce storm damages “take on the order of decades to do right”. He tells Carbon Brief:

    “All these [planning] decisions have to come by understanding the future uncertainty and so this research is a step forward in understanding how we can better refine our predictions of what might happen in the future.”

    The post Marine heatwaves ‘nearly double’ the economic damage caused by tropical cyclones appeared first on Carbon Brief.

    Marine heatwaves ‘nearly double’ the economic damage caused by tropical cyclones

    Continue Reading

    Trending

    Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com