The problem with the energy transition is not that it is insufficiently clean. It is that clean is the wrong question to begin with. 'Clean' suggests the absence of pollution, of harm, of consequence. It sounds reassuring. It implies that with the right technology, right policy, or even right targets, complexities can be engineered away. But energy systems have never worked that way. Every transition rearranges harm rather than eliminating it. What changes is not whether cost

The future is marketed as clean- electric vehicles glide silently through the cities, wind turbines turn against open skies, and solar panels promise abundance without smoke, soot or sacrifice. In political speeches and corporate reports alike, the energy transition is framed as an ethical upgrade- a departure from the extractive excess of the past. But the story does not end where the marketing begins. Beneath these clean images lies a less visible geography: mines, processi

Everything is personal, even politics The world isn’t black and white—but politics is too often reduced to that. We are always placed at...