Connect with us

Published

on

Professor Martin Siegert is Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Cornwall) at the University of Exeter and Chair of The UK Arctic and Antarctic Partnerships committee.

A 30-minute stroll across New York’s Central Park separates Trump Tower from the American Museum of Natural History. If the US president ever found himself inside the museum he could see the Cape York meteorite: a 58-tonne mass of iron taken from northwest Greenland and sold in 1897 by the explorer Robert Peary, with the help of local Inuit guides.

For centuries before Danish colonisation, the people of Greenland had used fragments of the meteorite to make tools and hunting equipment. Peary removed that resource from local control, ultimately selling the meteorite for an amount equivalent to just US$1.5 million today. It was a transaction as one-sided as anything the president may now be contemplating.

But Donald Trump is now eyeing a prize much larger than a meteorite. His advocacy of the US taking control of Greenland, possibly by force, signals a shift from deal-making to dominance. The scientific cost would be severe. A unilateral US takeover threatens to disrupt the open scientific collaboration that is helping us understand the threat of global sea-level rise.

    Greenland is sovereign in everything other than defence and foreign policy, but by being part of the Kingdom of Denmark, it is included within NATO. As with any nation, access to its land and coastal waters is tightly controlled through permits that specify where work may take place and what activities are allowed.

    Over many decades, Greenland has granted international scientists access to help unlock the environmental secrets preserved within its ice, rocks and seabed. US researchers have been among the main beneficiaries, drilling deep into the ice to explain the historic link between carbon dioxide and temperatures, or flying repeated NASA missions to map the land beneath the ice sheet.

    The whole world owes a huge debt of thanks to both Greenland and the US, very often in collaboration with other nations, for this scientific progress conducted openly and fairly. It is essential that such work continues.

    The climate science at stake

    Research shows that around 80% of Greenland is covered by a colossal ice sheet which, if fully melted, would raise sea level globally by about 7 metres (the height of a two storey house). That ice is melting at an accelerating rate as the world warms, releasing vast amounts of freshwater into the North Atlantic, potentially disrupting the ocean circulation that moderates the climate across the northern hemisphere.

    The remaining 20% of Greenland is still roughly the size of Germany. Geological surveys have revealed a wealth of minerals, but economics dictates that these will most likely be used to power the green transition rather than prolong the fossil fuel era.

    While coal deposits exist, they are currently too expensive to extract and sell, and no major oil fields have been discovered. Instead, the commercial focus is on “critical minerals”: high-value materials used in renewable technologies from wind turbines to electric car batteries. Greenland therefore holds both scientific knowledge and materials that can help guide us away from climate disaster.

    At ‘Davos of mining’, Saudi Arabia shapes new narrative on minerals

    Unilateral control could threaten climate science

    Trump has shown little interest in climate action, however. Having already started to withdraw the US from the Paris climate agreement for a second time, he announced in January 2026 the country would also leave the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, the global scientific body that assesses the impacts of continued fossil-fuel burning. His rhetoric to date has been about acquiring Greenland for “security” purposes, with some indications of accessing its mineral wealth, but without mention of vital climate research.

    Under the 1951 Greenland defence agreement with Denmark, the US already has a remote military base at Pituffik in northern Greenland, now focused on space activities. While both countries remain in Nato, the agreement already allows the US to expand its military presence if required. Seeking to guarantee US security in Greenland outside Nato would undermine the existing pact, while a unilateral takeover would risk scientists in the rest of the world losing access to one of the most important climate research sites.

    Lessons from Antarctica and Svalbard

    Greenland’s sovereign status and its governance is different to some other notable polar research locations. For example, Antarctica has, for more than 60 years, been governed through an international treaty ensuring the continent remains a place of peace and science, and protecting it from mining and other environmental damage.

    Svalbard, on the other hand, has Norwegian sovereignty courtesy of the 1920 Svalbard treaty but operates a largely visa-free system that allows citizens of nearly 50 countries to live and work on the archipelago, as long as they abide by Norwegian law. Interestingly, Norway claims that scientific activities are not covered by the treaty, to almost universal disagreement among other parties. Russia has a permanent station at Barentsburg, Svalbard’s second-largest settlement, from which small levels of coal are mined.

    Unlike Antarctica or Svalbard, Greenland has no treaty that explicitly protects access for international scientists. Its openness to research therefore depends not on international law, but on Greenland’s continued political stability and openness – all of which may be threatened by US control.

    If it is minded to take a radical approach, Greenland could develop its own treaty-style approach with selected partner states through NATO, enabling security cooperation, mineral assessment and scientific research to be carried out collaboratively under Greenlandic regulations.

    The future for Greenland should lie with Greenlanders and with Denmark. The future of climate science, and the transition to a safe prosperous future worldwide, relies on continued access to the island on terms set by the people that live there. The Cape York meteorite – taken from a site just 60 miles away from the US Pituffik Space Base – is a reminder of how easily that control can be lost.


    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    The post Why Greenland is indispensable to global climate science appeared first on Climate Home News.

    Why Greenland is indispensable to global climate science

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    ‘Energy Vampires’: Greenpeace calls for moratorium on data centres as new report reveals frenzied rollout would derail energy transition

    Published

    on

    SYDNEY, Wednesday 27 May 2026 — A new report from Greenpeace Australia Pacific and independent expert Ketan Joshi reveals how the frenzied rollout of AI data centres in Australia is set to derail the renewable energy transition, entrench gas and turbocharge climate pollution, prompting calls for an urgent moratorium on data centre approvals until appropriate guardrails are in place.

    The report, Energy Vampires: the AI data centres draining Australia, reveals the staggering scale of data centre growth in Australia, set to follow a US path of emissions blowout and rising community opposition to the resource-hungry facilities. The report exposes the links between the data centre lobby and the gas industry, who are using data centre growth to justify extracting more gas.

    Greenpeace Australia Pacific is calling on the Federal Government to urgently implement a moratorium on the construction and approval of new data centres, until appropriate regulations and safeguards have been put in place to protect the climate and communities.

    Key findings:

    • Data centres are already failing to cover their own demand with additional renewable energy, and resisting calls to mandate that they do.
    • At its peak, Australia’s biggest proposed data centre, the 1GW Mamre Road Data Centre Campus in Western Sydney, will generate annual emissions equivalent to 560,000 petrol cars, or all domestic flights within NSW in 2023.
    • There are early signs of a data centre-fuelled gas boom in Australia, including proposals for new on-site gas, as seen in the US. 
    • Cloud Carrier’s proposed gas-fired data centre in NSW would wipe out the state’s entire projected 2028 emissions cuts.
    • Even if only 1 in 4 new Australian data centres were powered by new on-site gas, it would result in 2.8x higher total emissions compared to using grid power.

    Joe Rafalowicz, Head of Climate and Energy at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “Australia is completely unprepared for the magnitude of impacts of the AI-driven data centre frenzy. Data centres are being rolled out at a feverish pace, with some of the largest planned for Australia consuming as much energy as Adelaide. The recent federal and state energy minister communique is a positive first step towards regulating the data centre industry, and managing its impact on the energy transition and the communities where they’re being built.

    “But we should all be concerned by the extreme lack of scrutiny being applied to the companies leading the data centre charge in Australia and their proposals. Without strong, legislated standards, we risk replicating the disastrous US pattern, where Big Tech corporations have carte blanche to drain energy and water, and build new, polluting gas and diesel-powered plants to fuel their operations. This has seen mounting community opposition that transcends party politics, something we’re beginning to see here in Australia.

    “Greenpeace is calling for a moratorium on new data centre approvals and construction until we have clearly defined, enforceable regulations and standards in place to govern this industry — essential if we hope to avoid the alarming outcomes outlined in this report.

    “Australia is not a playground for Big Tech corporations. It is time our leaders stepped up and took seriously their role as custodians of our resources and protectors of our society and environment.”

    Ketan Joshi, independent report author and climate expert said: “Impatience is not a virtue. The reckless data centre buildout is heaping massive new load onto the grid, meaning renewables have to run harder just to stay in the same spot. Currently data centres increase coal and gas output and delay shutdowns, while plugging polluting gas into data centres does the damage directly instead.

    “Unless the data centre industry builds no new fossil fuels and far more new renewables than new demand, we end up worse off. Australia’s gas industry sees a lifeline in an unchecked data centre frenzy, and the feeling seems to be mutual.

    “Data centre demand projections keep jabbing upwards each revision, and emissions projections keep getting worse. Everywhere in the world facing this frenzy sees the same trend.

    “Data centre moratoria have bipartisan support in countries around the world as the only path to reintroducing careful, considered governance of data centre growth. In the context of an irrational, unjustified panic, a temporary pause brings reason and rationality, along with bringing power to communities.”

    -ENDS-

    Images and an interview clipreel of Greenpeace spokespeople at the Mamre Road data centre in Western Sydney available here.

    Media contacts:

    Lucy Keller on 0491 135 308 or lucy.keller@greenpeace.org 
    Kate O’Callaghan on 0406 231 892 or kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org

    ‘Energy Vampires’: Greenpeace calls for moratorium on data centres as new report reveals frenzied rollout would derail energy transition

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Energy Vampires: the AI data centres draining Australia

    Published

    on

    A new report from Greenpeace Australia Pacific and independent expert Ketan Joshi reveals how the frenzied rollout of AI data centres in Australia is set to derail the renewable energy transition, entrench gas and turbocharge climate pollution, prompting calls for an urgent moratorium on data centre approvals until appropriate guardrails are in place.

    The frenzied rollout of AI data centres in Australia is rushing through massive new projects, which will derail Australia’s energy transition unless the government urgently intervenes.

    Greenpeace campaigner Solaye Snider at the site of the proposed Mamre Rd data centre with a banner saying "Data centres = energy vampires"
    Greenpeace campaigner Solaye Snider at the site of the proposed Mamre Rd data centre in Sydney. If approved, the data centre will be the biggest in Australia and will generate peak annual grid emissions equivalent to that produced by 560,000 petrol cars. © Toby Davidson / Greenpeace

    Key findings

    • The frenzied rollout of AI data centres in Australia is rushing through massive new projects, which will derail Australia’s energy transition unless the government urgently intervenes. Our conservative assumptions mean this impact is understated, in this analysis.
    • Australia’s biggest proposed data centre, the 1GW Mamre Road Data Centre Campus in Western Sydney, will generate peak annual grid emissions equivalent to that produced by 560,000 petrol cars for a year or all domestic flights within NSW in 2023.
    Bitcoin Big Horn Data Center in Hardin, Montana. © Janie Osborne / Greenpeace
    The Big Horn Data Hub and the Hardin Generating Station in Hardin, Montana. © Janie Osborne / Greenpeace
    • Data centres already fail to cover their own emissions with new renewables and their rollout will dramatically hold back Australia’s energy transition.
    • No data centre operator analysed in this report adequately proves their claim of driving Australia’s renewable energy growth. Claims they are doing this through truly “additional” new power purchasing agreements for renewable energy are unsubstantiated.
    • There are early signs of a data centre-fuelled gas boom in Australia, which will come with massive, nationally significant climate costs. For example, the Tamboran proposal for the Northern Territory would effectively double the state’s emissions. In NSW, Cloud Carrier’s proposed gas-fired project would wipe out NSW’s entire projected 2028 emissions cuts.

    • Even if only 1 in 4 new Australian data centres were powered by new on-site gas, it would result in 2.8x higher total emissions compared to using grid power.
    • New analysis shows that on-site gas for data centres globally could fuel emissions that exceed Brazil’s total power grid emissions by 2030.
    • Fossil fuel corporations are quietly joining the data centre lobby group as members, and sponsoring and attending technology industry conferences. The two industries are reinforcing each other’s talking points and PR spin.
    Clean Our Cloud Action in Seattle. © Greenpeace © Greenpeace
    Clean Our Cloud Action in Seattle. © Greenpeace
    • Data centre operators do not disclose the customers of an individual facility, the purpose of the computations performed there, or site-specific energy consumption, despite the industry’s defense of its ‘critical infrastructure’ status or claims of transparency. It is a matter of public record that AI is being used for abuse, war and other human rights violations.
    • Data centres can be ‘right sized’ through community ownership schemes, well-deployed AI software and strict moratoria to allow for democratic governance of this industry.
    An aerial view of the Facebook Data Center in Forest City. The 150-acre facility is the second Facebook-built data center in the United States. © Greenpeace

    This report recommends:

    • An urgent moratorium on data centre development until safeguards are legislated
    • Binding, legislated standards for AI development, including substantiated claims of additional renewable energy
    • Full disclosure of services delivered, emissions, finances and energy use, per project
    • Full assessment of compliance with human rights frameworks

    Lead author: Ketan Joshi is an independent climate, environment and sustainability expert. He was the lead author on “The AI Climate Hoax”, published with several corporate accountability and environmental groups in 2026, and previously wrote “Windfall: Unlocking a Fossil Free Future” with the University of New South Wales Press. He worked for eight years in Australia’s renewable energy sector (corporate and government), and has worked with European NGOs working on climate communications and corporate accountability.

    Energy Vampires: the AI data centres draining Australia

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Residents Wrangle Over Transmission Line Proposal for Rural Virginia

    Published

    on

    Valley Link would connect a potential nuclear reactor and fossil fueled-powered plants to serve suburban data centers.

    GOOCHLAND, Va.—Deborah Blackburn leaned on her cane in a line to enter the Central High Cultural and Educational Complex, angst-ridden over a giant transmission line proposal for reasons that are common refrains here: It’s all to benefit data centers in Northern Virginia, and it will disrupt the rural character here outside Richmond.

    Residents Wrangle Over Transmission Line Proposal for Rural Virginia

    Continue Reading

    Trending

    Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com