Desertec

.

edit 2021:  I leave this blog post online and don't hide it, but if you want to know the current state of affairs on the subject I recommend to you this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OpM_zKGE4o

 

Desertec - it's been in German news for weeks, apparently in other European news as well. It's been almost completely ignored by U.S., Australian and New Zealand's news as far as I can tell. It's a huge and credible project of European companies to establish a renewable energy supply in North Africa with continuous current power line links to Europe. Desertec is a big enough effort to provoke comparisons with Manhattan and Apollo projects and could prove to be the most important grand strategic factor for Europe in the 21st century. I wrote about such ideas (which were circulating for about three decades in Europe) in 2007, and it's obvious that the European powers will need to be involved although the project itself will by driven and financed by private companies. State-funded R&D has apparently already ensured the feasibility, but that was only a small step in comparison to what lies ahead. Such a huge project would link Europe with Northern Africa and require a close and reliable relationship. Just a short collection of thoughts: * We would care a lot about political stability and reliability of the Northern African countries * Northern African economic and social problems would become an issue for us because they could destabilize governments. Economic aid policy and trade policy could reflect that. * Lesser objectives like establishing democracy and human rights would most likely be subordinated to energy political stability and reliability. This could similar to the Cold War's competition in the Third World when support for dictators depended almost entirely on whether they declared to be "socialist" or "anti-socialist". * A formal alliance (that prevents other alliances for the Arab countries in the fine print) may develop. This could be an extension to NATO or it could replace NATO. * Any unification movement would likely be in opposition to Europe because a unified Northern African/Arab Region would be less easily influenced (see previous blog posts here and here). * We would most certainly not accept being cut off of our energy supply and go to war to secure it just as Japan did in 1941 when cut off from its oil supply. * European nations would re-orient their military to the south; a huge increase in amphibious capability and dedicated defences for the power lines would be likely. * We would want to make the Northern African countries more dependent on us to increase the safety of the project. * We could even take the modern equivalent of hostages (investments of influential Arab elites in Europe, attracting the Arab elites' youth into European universities and companies). * Northern Africa would possibly become an interest sphere for European foreign policy (and I think that such a common European policy would indeed be feasible in this context). We wouldn't allow third much country influence in this area. That could create conflicts with the PR China and the USA. * Several European powers would likely not agree that a high degree of dependence on Northern Africa is a good idea. Some or all European countries would limit the project to a small or no share of their energy supply (Norway, for example). * The company Desertec would be allowed its profits, but most likely become as politicized as Gazprom in Russia. I expect a very tight political control of the company and senior politicians in its boards.

Desertec - if realized only a quarter as big as planned - could become the most important factor in European grand strategy of the 21st century (unless the nuclear fusion power would really become practical in the 2nd half). Its effects would be as important as the Cold War for Europe - and might replace the oil riches for Arab countries. 

 

S O