On 16 March 2026, Greenpeace USA held a mobile protest at the opening day of Nvidia’s flagship GTC conference. The message, delivered in the heart of Silicon Valley to expose the semiconductor giant for powering the “AI Revolution” with fossil fuels, demanded that the world’s most valuable company decarbonise its global supply chain through renewable energy.

Shortly before Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang’s keynote address, a triple-billboard truck began circulating around the SAP Center in San Jose, sending a direct message to the CEO: “Hey Jensen, your GPUs powering the AI boom are overheating. So is the planet.” The installation presented two clear paths for the tech giant: “Powering the Apocalypse” through fossil-fuel reliance, or “Powering the Future” through a transition to wind and solar.

Katrin Wu, Supply Chain Project Lead, Greenpeace East Asia, said, “While Nvidia promises to ‘surprise the world’ with its new AI chips at GTC, the true surprise Jensen Huang left unsaid is the staggering scale of Nvidia’s supply chain emissions. Its supply chain emissions now rival the carbon footprints of some nations, while the company has yet to take meaningful action to address them. A world-class new-generation chip should be produced using wind and solar, not fossil fuels. Nvidia must take action to mitigate the environmental dilemma its business has created.”

This activity follows the release of Greenpeace East Asia’s analysis, “Nvidia’s Green Illusion,” which concludes that the company’s supply chain emissions more than doubled in just three years. The environmental burden is concentrated in manufacturing hubs such as South Korea and Taiwan, where power grids remain heavily reliant on fossil fuels.[1] Despite reporting record-breaking revenue in its earnings report last month, Nvidia received an “F” grade in Greenpeace East Asia’s 2025 ranking of 10 global AI giants for lagging behind its peers in decarbonisation and renewable energy adoption.[2]

The San Jose protest is part of a global wave of resistance by Greenpeace organisations around the world against billionaires who prioritise uncontrolled business expansion over ecological limits and people’s well-being.

Susannah Compton, Civic Resistance and Freedoms Campaigner, Greenpeace International, said: “We can all share a dream for a peaceful, abundant future empowered by technological advancements, but profit-hungry Big Tech companies cannot be blindly trusted to get us there. Nvidia’s chips power the AI boom, but the company’s innovation obsession clearly doesn’t extend to a livable planet because its supply chain is still built on fossil fuels. While Big Tech billionaires like Jensen Huang cash in, people and the planet pay the cost of surging emissions in rising bills and extreme weather. Technology must make our collective future better, not worse.”

Greenpeace urges Nvidia to slash its global supply chain emissions by transitioning to renewable energy, invest directly in new wind and solar projects globally, especially in manufacturing regions, and publish transparent annual supplier electricity and emissions data.

ENDS

Notes:

[1] Nvidia’s Green Illusion, Greenpeace East Asia, March 2026[2] Supply Change: Tracking AI Giants’ Decarbonization Progress, Greenpeace East Asia, October 2025

Photos and videos are available in the Greenpeace Media Library.

Contacts:

Greenpeace International Press Desk, +31 (0)20 718 2470 (available 24 hours), pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org 

Amsterdam, Netherlands – Public transportation, improved recycling programmes, and advanced battery technologies are shown as crucial solutions to limit mineral demand for a green transition according to a new report.

‘Beyond Extraction: Pathways for a 1.5°C-aligned Energy Transition with Less Minerals’, was commissioned by Greenpeace International, and authored by academics at the Institute for Sustainable Futures at the University of Technology, Sydney (UTS) in Australia. Using different 1.5°C-compatible energy scenarios to explore pathways toward mineral sufficiency and efficiency, the report shows how Earth’s minerals can be administered for a clean renewable energy transformation that protects vital Earth support systems from terrestrial or deep sea mining of so-called ‘critical minerals’.

“Mining often brings environmental destruction and social harm. It is reportedly linked to child labour, workers’ rights violations, land grabs from Indigenous Peoples, ecosystem damage, and threats to communities. Around the world, the minerals ‘rush’ repeats extractivist and colonial patterns, disregards the rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, and threatens to undermine the very possibility of a just and green energy transition,” says Elsa Lee, Co-Head of Biodiversity at Greenpeace International.

“We all want a just world where energy is clean, affordable and available to everyone, rights are respected, peoples’ land access and livelihoods are protected, and our planet has a stable climate and rich biodiversity. With this report we underline that it is incumbent upon our governments who regulate the extractive industry to power an ambitious energy transition without mining critical ecosystems on land or at sea,” added Lee.

A key recommendation of the report is that decision makers must prioritise mineral use for essential energy transition purposes. In an era of eroding international cooperation and intensifying conflict, this underscores the importance of coordinated action to protect people and nature, and achieve climate objectives. 

Greenpeace International deep sea mining campaigner Ruth Ramos said: “Lines have been crossed on the land that need never be crossed in the deep ocean. Now we know: not only does deep sea mining run against science, ethics, people and the planet, it’s not even needed for a renewable transition. What is needed is for the nations of the world to unite against rogue actors like The Metals Company and Donald Trump and their affronts to international law and cooperation, and instead keep moving towards a moratorium on deep sea mining. Imagine if humans could have protected the world from the harms of the fossil fuel industry before it even started – that is the opportunity when it comes to deep sea mining: it is a historic privilege, and one we must now embrace wholeheartedly.”

As part of the report, potential mineral reserves areas were compared with areas that – due to their exceptional environmental, ecological, and social importance – must be off-limits to mining. The analysis finds that there is no need to mine these off-limits areas—including, amongst others, the global ocean and protected areas on land —for an ambitious energy transition.

Report author Professor Sven Teske said: “This research highlights how sound policies and innovative technologies can limit mineral demand in a 1.5°C-aligned energy transition. Realising this potential, however, requires responsible political leadership and decisive action today.”

ENDS

Notes:

Report: Beyond Extraction: Pathways for a 1.5°C-aligned Energy Transition with Less Minerals

Research briefing for Beyond Extraction report

Photos available in the Greenpeace Media Library

Contacts:

Greenpeace International Press Desk, +31 (0)20 718 2470 (available 24 hours), pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org 

Lithium, nickel, copper, and cobalt are often framed by States and industries as “critical minerals” – a reflection of political priorities rather than actual societal needs. As the demand for these minerals is predicted to grow for energy transition technologies as well as other sectors, such as big tech and the military sector, its supply chains have become a geopolitical battleground. This has governments scrambling to control supply chains, while companies opportunistically pursue extraction, which can infringe on the ancestral lands of Indigenous Peoples, and risk the destruction of vital ecosystems. 

We must achieve an ambitious, Paris Agreement-aligned energy transition that safeguards critical ecosystems and centers the rights of Indigenous Peoples and those of local communities. But it requires the right political choices and moral leadership.

“Beyond Extraction: Pathways for a 1.5°C-aligned Energy Transition with Less Minerals”, is a collaboration between Greenpeace International and the Institute for Sustainable Futures at the University of Technology Sydney.

The study focuses on nine key energy transition minerals: cobalt, copper, dysprosium, graphite, lithium, manganese, neodymium, nickel, and vanadium. 

Scenario analysis was used in this study to explore how different technological and policy pathways can shape future mineral demand from 2024-2050. 

The scenarios are: 

1) One Earth Climate Model Net Zero (OECM), aligned with the Paris climate goals and set as a base case for the study;

2) Progressive (PRO), and 

3) Progressive Accelerated Sodium-ion Battery (PRO-Na-ion). 

This global research – the first of its kind – shows that we can power an ambitious energy transition without sacrificing crucial ecosystems – whether on land or at sea. More public transportation, ambitious recycling programmes, and battery technology choices all contribute to reducing the mineral demand for energy transition. 

In an era of fraying international cooperation and intensifying conflict, this research underscores the importance of coordinated action to protect people and nature from the minerals “rush”, and achieve climate objectives. Responsible political leadership must prioritise mineral use for essential energy transition purposes and ensure that rights are respected, and peoples’ land access and livelihoods are protected.

Download the report and other materials: 

Download the research briefing. 

Download the report “Beyond Extraction: Pathways for a 1.5°C-aligned Energy Transition with less Minerals”. 

Download supplementary documents:
1) development of a restricted areas map and

2) minerals mapping approach and integration (reserve Proxy Area analysis)

On 8 March 2026, many neighbourhoods in Jakarta – one of the fastest-sinking cities in the world – were submerged by floods. Hundreds of residents displaced as relentless rainfall hit the metropolitan area and its satellite cities, including Bekasi, the one where I live now.

These floods happening exactly on International Women’s Day instantly reminded me of how I learned that the climate crisis is tougher on women. I know people don’t tend to think about gender when they think about extreme weather events, but the evidence shows that it’s connected.

And as a woman who experienced countless floods in Jakarta, I can testify: the climate crisis is not just. It’s not gender-neutral.

I didn’t figure it out by accident. I used to live quite comfortably as a little kid, I must admit. Then a few years later, life took an unexpected turn from what it used to be. Certain situations forced our family to let go of our childhood home and move to a densely-populated neighbourhood in one of the city’s alleys where reliable electricity was sometimes a luxury. We found out too late that it was also a flood-prone area until one morning, it came.

We didn’t get the opportunity to evaluate that sudden risk. My Dad and my little brother immediately laid some old clothes near our front door as barriers, while my Mom and I put our family’s important papers and documents in the cheap waterproof bags. We tried our best to avoid the water from entering without sandbags, but we failed. Most of the house was submerged. No clean water. No electricity. No access to buy food.

We slowly became familiar with such conditions as floods kept coming again and again occasionally during rainy seasons. As a teenage girl, I was often frustrated because I wasn’t able to buy sanitation supplies when I needed them the most, including menstrual pads. It never crossed my mind that dealing with numerous floods without proper resources while facing significant infrastructural and social challenges in Jakarta – with myriad threats like tidal floods, rising sea levels, water scarcity, and poor air quality – meant my health and hygiene were being compromised.

I talked to my female neighbours in that area during those years. Some of them were middle school students like me, some were single mothers whose children were sick from time to time due to constant flooding and polluted air, some were informal middle-aged workers with low-paid wages to support the family, and one of them even told me she had to suffer from domestic violence in the past as a result of increasing stress levels in the similar neighbourhood. All of us collectively agreed the same thing: when people romanticised the rain, we wholeheartedly cursed it.

This memory I once denied has become a part of my own story. I soon realised there are many other women exposed to environmental risks whose struggles are even made harder due to cultural norms, gendered-responsibilities, poverty, and systematically unjust oppression.

The burden of the climate crisis is not evenly distributed

The climate crisis disproportionately affects women who are already dealing with stigma and discrimination they are up against in their daily life, especially when they are also a part of other marginalised groups: low-income, BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color), disabled, or LGBTQ+, exposing the intersectionality of climate impacts, gender inequality and social injustice.

In some regions, women already lack access to healthcare, basic education, natural resources, or employment, making them less prepared than men when the climate disasters hit. The Indigenous Women communities in Brazilian Amazon have to spend more time in their fields to secure minimal harvests or walk longer distances to collect water when rivers run dry while they have to take care of family members who are sick due to the rising temperatures. Their burdens have physically and mentally multiplied.

Another fact that the relationship between women and the climate crisis has often been overlooked is that the effects of the crisis are intensifying the social and economic stresses that are contributing to violence against women and girls, just like what one of my former neighbours experienced above. Many women in Indonesia also have to face systematic violence from authorities as the exploitative management of natural resources which constantly causes climate disasters often uses methods that violate human rights.

Women are more at risk, but less in policy-making roles

Gender gaps in climate policy-making still persist across the world. Women make up less than 40% of environment ministers in wealthier societies, and the numbers are even considerably lower in locations where women are most vulnerable to environmental risk, particularly in low-income countries and environmentally-sensitive sectors.

As much as I support and encourage the acts of solidarity during women’s history month in which I was a part of as well, I think we need to remind ourselves that it’s important we should recognise and stand in solidarity with women who have enough resources and successfully thrive in male-dominated fields, but especially with women in minorities and those at the forefront of the climate crisis, such as single mothers in coastal communities without free access to healthcare and have low-paid jobs, or women human rights defenders experiencing intimidation and violence.

A better understanding on how gender equality intersects with social and climate justice plays a key role in order to call for real actions and implement solutions that work for our varied experiences. When gender equality is often treated as a symbolic celebration, it’s only a decoration. It’s time for actual representation and inclusion that ensures women’s voices are heard and their struggles are properly addressed.

Social justice and climate justice are about our planet and the lives of all people, so fighting for both is crucial to achieve a fairer, greener, more equitable, and more sustainable future for all.