From KlimaNachrichten

As the chart above shows, the global mean temperature in May fell compared to the previous month. The deviation from the long-term average of satellite measurements is now 0.5 degrees Celsius. The decline in global temperatures is clearly visible, as they continue to decline towards the long-term average.
Today I want to deal with the unsatisfactory metal demand of the energy transition and the accelerated expansion of nuclear energy in the USA and China. Both are highly topical topics.

The expansion of renewable energies will fail due to the shortage of critical metals

The new German government is also sticking to the goal of climate neutrality in 2045. To achieve this, it relies on the 100% expansion of renewable energies for energy supply (apart from the planned 20 GW of gas-fired power plants with CO2 capture, which the federal government wants to allow to avert blackouts).
In my newsletters, I have repeatedly pointed out that the German way of energy supply, which is based almost exclusively on solar and wind energy, will fail for the following reasons:

1. The costs of the energy system due to the extremely expensive storage of the fluctuating electricity supply will multiply and lead to deindustrialization and massive losses of prosperity.
2. The tripling to fivefold increase in solar and wind energy will lead to the destruction of the landscape, the habitats of many animal species and to a change in meteorological conditions that is difficult to estimate.
3. A secured, frequency-stable power supply is not guaranteed. (see Spain blackout April 2025).

Through a publication by Simon Michaux of the Finnish Geological Survey, we have now been made aware of a fourth reason that leads this path of the energy transition ad absurdum:
The specific metals necessary for the installation of solar and wind turbines, cable trays, storage systems (batteries and hydrogen), e-vehicles and heat pumps, such as copper, nickel, lithium, cobalt, vanadium and graphite, are used according to Michaux will not be sufficiently available in the next 20 years. It is well known that the replacement of coal, oil and gas is only possible with a considerable amount of metals: A 6-MW wind turbine consists of 30-50 tons of copper and up to 300 kilograms of rare earths. An electric vehicle needs 10 kilograms of cobalt, 10 kilograms of nickel and 60-80 kilograms of copper, 4-5 times as much copper as a diesel or gasoline engine.
Michaux’s calculation is based on the fact that today only 4% of the world’s energy supply is covered by wind and solar energy, 11.2% by hydropower and nuclear energy and 84.7% by fossil energies. If the world were to follow Germany’s example and replace the 84.7% share of fossil fuels with wind and solar energy, an additional 6000 million tons of copper would be needed. The annual production of copper is 28 million tons. The demand for a 100% renewable energy supply corresponds to 200 times as much.
The following graph (source report, p. 242) puts the gigantic, additional consumption of critical metals in relation to the amount that can be extracted. Michaux assumes that not only the known reserves, but also unknown resources, such as seabed mining, are developed. In addition, Michaux expects the recycling volumes of the metals to increase. The case presented here, calculated by Michaux, requires an energy storage system for 28 days (battery/hydrogen) that can survive dark doldrums of 28 days.
The result: In all cases – from copper to vanadium – the demand for metals exceeds the estimated availability including new sources many times over. (see the following graphic)

One can only be glad that no nation in the world is following the German pioneering path of a 100% solar and wind energy transition, but like the USA and China, for example, wants to base a large part of the future energy supply on nuclear energy and fossil sources and only wants to cover a part of it with renewable energies.

But even if Germany goes it alone without nuclear energy and without fossil fuels, it will pose problems for the world: If you break down Michaux’s global figures to Germany, which has about 1.74% of the world’s primary energy consumption, 1.74% of 6000 million tons of copper will have to be used in Germany until the goal of climate neutrality in 2045 is achieved. That is then 104 million tons of copper in 20 years. This corresponds to 15% of world copper production over the next 20 years (about 700 million tons by 2040, see page 254). This amount would have to be reserved for Germany, which today consumes only about 4% of world production (about 1 million tons per year). It is certain that such an increase in demand will cause prices for the energy transition to rise additionally.
In addition, if the energy transition continues as before, we will have to knock very politely on the door of the Chinese, who have now secured almost 50% of the world’s copper production.

China dominates the world in 19 out of 20 critical raw materials

The International Energy Agency IEA’s Global Critical Minerals outlook 2025, published in May, revealed that China is the world’s dominant producer of critical metals and products, be it copper (45%), cobalt (80%), lithium (70%), graphite (95%) or rare earths (90%). (Source: IEA, 2025)

And China is making strong use of its monopoly position: the export restrictions are a tried and tested means in world trade and in the geopolitical debate. China has banned the export of the metals gallium, germanium and antimony to the USA in December 2024. A general export restriction for all countries was decreed in February 2025 for rare earths, graphite, tungsten, bismuth, indium, tellurium and molybdenum.

The last 5 years show that China is expanding its monopoly position (see next chart source IEA 2025). In copper, lithium, cobalt, graphite and rare earths, China has massively increased its world market share since 2020. This applies to wind turbines, solar systems, batteries, e-cars, electric motors and generators.

China will replace the US as the world’s largest nuclear power operator

On May 24, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order to accelerate nuclear power expansion in the United States. Electricity generation from nuclear energy is expected to quadruple from just under 100 gigawatts to 400 gigawatts by 2050. The U.S. has 95 operating nuclear power plants. In the last 40 years, only two nuclear power plants have been built. The last nuclear power plant Vogtle in Georgia had a licensing period of 15 years because the nuclear energy licensing authority NRC kept developing new requirements to prevent the expansion process. Therefore, the president has determined that the approval periods should only last 18 months. He has severely curtailed the rights of the NRC. Even 4th generation experimental power plants must be approved within 30 months. Interior Minister Dough Burgum said that if you want to win the race with China for artificial intelligence AI, you have to have enough reliable energy available. “What we do in terms of energy in the next 5 years will decide the next 50 years.”
But China has used the last 20 years to develop its own competitive power plants (Hualong – Chinese dragon) from imported nuclear power plants (e.g. from Westinghouse or Framatome). China has now built nuclear power plants with a capacity of 58 gigawatts and will have completed another 10 nuclear power plants in 2026. (a Chinese nuclear power plant has 1.1 gigawatts)
With 2.8 billion dollars for a nuclear power plant, China is building power plants that cost seven times as much in Europe or the USA. China’s plan is to produce more nuclear energy than the US as early as 2030. It is impossible that the West will be able to catch up with China’s lead in reactor construction, which is about 5-10 years.

In the shadow of the race between the US and China, all countries in Europe – except Germany and Austria – are now ready to build or consider new nuclear power plants in Europe, as even Denmark recently did. Former Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen described an exclusion of nuclear power as “ridiculous”. “Wind and sun are good as long as you have wind and sun. But you need a non-fossil base load, and it is ridiculous to exclude nuclear power from the outset.”

Only the new German Environment Minister Carsten Schneider (SPD) has spoken out against supporting nuclear power plants at the European level as a sustainable solution to reduce CO2 emissions. There will be no classification as sustainable power plants with the SPD, Schneider said. In Germany, people like to import nuclear energy electricity in dark doldrums, but at the same time they dupe their neighbours because they think they know better. What did Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen say? “Ridiculous”. Can you contradict him on that?