English references

The growth in US power demand is surging to its highest rate in decades, driven first by the electrification of oil and gas production and then by the build out of data centers. While still below the 5-10% growth seen in China, the world’s first “electrostate," the US power sector is experiencing rapid structural growth. The country is delivering more than a 3.5% annual power demand growth rate for the first time in several decades, potentially positioning the US as the world’s next “electrostate,” despite the strong oil and gas focus of the Trump administration.

This article examines the technocentric bias that characterizes climate mitigation literature, focusing on the reports of the IPCC's Working Group III. This bias stems from structural features of the scientific field that prioritizes innovation, leading to the overrepresentation of technological solutions in climate research. Funding mechanisms further reinforce this tendency by incentivizing collaboration with industrial R&D, creating a self-reinforcing loop in which scientific authority and industrial interests converge. The IPCC's institutional positioning—as a policy-relevant yet politically cautious body—amplifies this dynamic by favoring allegedly “cost-effective” technological pathways that lack practical feasibility.

New research suggests social transformations that prompt “degrowth” could cut humanity’s climate footprint in time to meet the Paris climate agreement target.