Supporting climate security

This report is part of our project Strategic innovation for European security. It identifies ten emerging technologies the EU should invest in to safeguard its security and uphold European values in the face of rapid technological change, geopolitical instability, and economic uncertainty.

Amongst the ten technologies we identify, two of them fall within climate security.

Introduction

Europe is already experiencing significant economic and societal disruptions due to climate change, and these impacts are set to intensify over the coming years and decades. Even with current policy efforts to decarbonise the global economy, the world is on track for a rise in temperature of 3°C above pre-industrial levels, substantially overshooting the target set by the Paris Agreement^[1]. No matter the success or failure of present-day decarbonising efforts, states around the world must prepare for a world in which prolonged droughts, more frequent and intense heatwaves, extreme shifts in precipitation, and stronger storms are the new normal.

Europe is the fastest warming continent in the world. The average annual economic losses in the EU stemming from extreme weather events have risen at twice the rate of European GDP growth over the past 30 years, and show no signs of slowing. Between 1980 and 1989, the annual economic losses of extreme events was €8.5 billion^[2]. So far in the 2020s, that number has risen to €44,5 billion^[3]. In 2023 alone – the second hottest year on record behind 2024^[4] – natural disasters in the EU cost the economy an estimated €77 billion^[5].

Although estimates vary, current projections suggest that the global economy is committed to a permanent income reduction of 19% by 2049 due to climate change. Relative to a baseline without climate impacts, this corresponds to annual damages of $38 trillion in 2005 international dollars. Within Europe, a median income reduction of 11% is projected by 2049^[6].

As our colleagues argued last year, the EU needs a comprehensive climate security strategy in order to effectively prepare for the unavoidable consequences of the climate crisis, and any such strategy would need to consider solar radiation modification (SRM) and its potential effects on the EU’s security profile^[7]. We endorse that overall premise but, for this report, we looked specifically at emerging high-leverage climate adaptation technologies that are proven in concept and ready for development-type investments. In contrast, SRM requires more basic research before it could be considered in such a context. The measures considered here relate to water and food security, two central pillars to safeguarding European security and economic vitality amid accelerating climate change.

This brief focuses on desalination and controlled environment food production, two industries which have seen significant innovation in recent years. Together they hold transformative potential towards ensuring continued unqualified access to fresh water and nutritionally complete food in the face of climate change, and also represent potential pathways to economic growth in the EU.

Desalination offers a robust solution to Europe’s growing freshwater scarcity – exacerbated by recurrent droughts, diminishing river flows, and increased seasonal water stress – yielding a climate independent supply of fresh water for both private consumption and agricultural irrigation.

Controlled environment food production could be essential to secure a stable, self-sufficient food supply as traditional agriculture faces disruption from extreme weather events and shifting climatic patterns^[8].

With the European Green Deal, the Commission pledged “at least” €1 trillion in sustainable investments to support climate objectives^[9]. As our European water and food security continues to come under pressure from climate change, desalination and controlled environment food production are technologies which merit particular attention in this regard.

Together, these technologies can enhance the continent’s climate resilience and emergency preparedness, give the EU a larger share in two markets with strong growth potential, and ensure that both current and future generations have access to essential resources.

Reverse osmosis desalination

Introduction

Europe is experiencing increasingly frequent and severe droughts, placing water security among the continent’s most pressing concerns. In August 2022, the combination of a wide and persistent lack of rainfall and a series of heatwaves led to Europe experiencing its worst drought in 500 years^[10]. Water reservoirs in key agricultural and industrial regions dropped to critical lows, affecting millions of Europeans and incurring billions in economic losses. Climate models project these conditions will continue to become more frequent and severe^[11], underscoring the need for sustainable and climate-resilient freshwater sources to safeguard economic stability and societal well-being.

This new reality is forcing a paradigm shift where the EU must supplement its traditional water supplies with climate-resilient water sources. In this context, desalination is moving from a niche option to a necessary component of water security^[12].

Desalination has historically been controversial, viewed as a last-resort measure which was too costly and energy intensive to be relied upon at scale^[13]. Traditional desalination plants using thermal distillation^[14] have indeed been too costly to run at scale in most areas, except in regions like the Middle East with access to abundant fossil fuels and where drought conditions are particularly severe. Furthermore, the process’ high CO₂ emissions and the impact of brine runoff on local marine ecosystems has rightly incurred widespread criticism.

Recent innovations have made desalination far more efficient and sustainable. Breakthroughs within reverse osmosis, which pressurises feedwater and filters out salt and contaminants by passing it through semi-permeable membranes, have led to a 14-fold reduction in energy use.

The first thermal distillation desalination plants had an energy consumption of around 27 kWh/m³^[15]. In contrast, researchers in the EU-funded DESALRO 2.0 initiative were able to achieve an unprecedentedly low energy consumption of <2 kWh/m³ by utilising high-efficiency pumps, energy recovery devices, and better membranes^[16]. With these innovations, reverse osmosis desalination is cheaper and cleaner than ever before, making it a potentially viable and scalable solution for Europe’s emerging water deficits.

Water scarcity is also driving global demand for desalination, presenting a substantial economic opportunity^[17]. Whereas the EU has a strong preexisting position within the industry, it contributes only 3% of global R&D within reverse osmosis^[18]. In order to remain competitive in a strategically important and increasingly profitable market, the EU must invest in its desalination industry.

Security benefits

Water scarcity is an escalating security risk in Europe and beyond. Around 30% of people in southern EU Member States live in areas with permanent “water stress” – defined as when water demand exceeds water supply – and up to 70% face seasonal water scarcity each summer^[19]. Globally, half the world’s population is already experiencing severe seasonal water scarcity, and 25% of the global population face “extremely high” water stress, withdrawing 80% or more of their renewable freshwater supply every year^[20].

Water scarcity is not just an evident public health risk, but has significant social and political consequences. Regions facing chronic water stress experience heightened competition for water among agricultural, industrial, and domestic users, which in turn precipitates local conflicts and contributes to broader political tensions, as UNESCO described in 2024^[21]. In this way, lack of water becomes a threat multiplier – exacerbating social grievances, driving migration, or prompting states to secure resources unilaterally and undermining international relations. Internationally, “water conflicts” between states – including both disputes and wars – have risen substantially in recent years. Whereas most such conflicts are in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, they are also on the rise in Europe. As reported by a data journalist at Statista, there were 13 water conflicts in Europe between 2000 and 2009, and 19 between 2010 and 2019. However, between 2020 and 2023 alone, there were 89^[22].

Desalination provides a means by which the EU can secure stable and scalable freshwater supplies that are climate-resilient. Modern desalination plants can guarantee a baseline water supply to cities and farms regardless of rainfall and the state of water stocks, and are already in use in multiple countries who struggle with water scarcity and droughts, including Greece and Spain.^[23] This reliability has enormous security value: It keeps reservoirs and aquifers from being dangerously overdrawn during drought, it allows farmers to maintain irrigation for high-value crops, and ensures drinking water continues to flow for households even in the driest summers – easing the societal strain of droughts. 

While enhancing desalination capacity could be critical for mitigating water shortages, it must be integrated with effective water management regulations to prevent increased supply from driving higher consumption. Accordingly, investment into desalination must be coupled with effective water management regulations and investment in complementary infrastructure, including water storage, distribution networks, and wastewater recycling.

Beyond securing climate-independent freshwater access, desalination can have significant applications in improving water quality. Reverse osmosis does not only remove salt, but other contaminants increasingly found in traditional water sources, like PFAS and other “forever chemicals”^[24]. As the EU and the European Chemicals Agency are developing a new regulatory push to limit PFAS and other harmful pollutants in drinking water, reverse osmosis treatment is becoming a necessity to remove hazardous compounds for size scales spanning from household units to the largest water utilities^[25]. This adds a public health dimension to desalination’s security benefits: it can provide clean water in regions facing industrial pollution or seawater intrusion into groundwater.

Reverse osmosis is also a key enabler of improved water reuse, which is the lowest-cost option to sustainably increase water supplies. By stripping wastewater of contaminants, reverse osmosis ensures that recycled water can meet stringent quality standards while operating at a fraction of the energy consumption of seawater desalination. Consequently, utilising reverse osmosis in recycling water from sources like municipal wastewater offers a potentially scalable and resilient measure to address water scarcity and sustainability challenges – especially in inland areas without immediate access to large bodies of water^[26].

Economic benefits

Droughts now cost the European (EU + UK) economy an average of €9 billion annually and pose a serious threat to agricultural output^[27]. The 2022 drought caused insured losses of €19 billion, with total economic costs including uninsured losses on top of that^[28]. Annual losses are further estimated to reach €65 billion by 2100 under current climate projections. These figures underscore that failing to invest in our water security ahead of time carries with it enormous economic risk. In a world in which global trade is being undermined, these considerations become ever more pressing.

As global demand for desalination hardware and services increases, the global desalination market is projected to grow from €16 billion in 2024 to €28 billion in 2030, at a CAGR of 9.6%^[29]. By further investing in desalination, the EU can simultaneously ensure that its companies build upon their preexisting presence within the market, and help mitigate the global economic losses and security risks associated with water scarcity^[30].

Retrofitting existing desalination plants would also yield substantial returns. As estimated by Danfoss Engineering, if all the world’s reverse osmosis desalination plants in were retrofitted with the latest pumps, membranes, and energy recovery devices and achieve a <2 kWh/m³ efficiency rating, the world would emit 111 million metric tonnes less of CO₂ – equivalent to the annual emissions of  around 15 million homes^[31] – save 247 TWh of electricity and a total of €34.5 billion, every year^[32].

Europe’s position

Europe has a strong global presence in the desalination supply chain, plant building, and operations. Companies like the Spanish Acciona^[33] and the French Veolia^[34] and Suez Group^[35] are already operating world-wide, and have won contracts for some of the world’s largest desalination projects. Europe thus has a strong foundation to drive both technology development and plant buildout. By staying at the forefront of innovation, European firms can maintain a competitive edge amongst rising players from Asia and the US.

However, Europe’s technological leadership in desalination is in decline. Although European research and industry have historically driven innovation, recent trends indicate a significant geographical shift in R&D leadership. According to the EU’s Blue Economy report, the majority of new reverse osmosis innovation (patents, research publications) is now coming from Asia – with China accounting for ~45% of global reverse osmosis R&D output, and Japan ~27%​^[36]. To maintain competitiveness amongst emerging leaders from Asia and the US, European firms and policymakers must recommit to staying at the forefront of desalination innovation.

Controlled environment food production

Introduction

The EU must prepare for a future in which climate change undermines traditional agriculture. More frequent extreme weather – including droughts, heatwaves, erratic rainfall, and flooding – erodes soil fertility, disrupts planting and harvesting cycles, and diminishes yields. The European Environment Agency has warned that these events can sharply reduce crop output, increase food prices, and weaken overall food security^[37]. Accordingly, the European Commission recognised the need for investment in alternative food production methods in its Food 2030 – Pathways for action 2.0 report published in 2023^[38].

Controlled environment food production includes a broad range of food production methods producing a diverse set of products, ranging from already-commercialised to pre-revenue experimental technologies:

• For vegetables, leafy greens, and fruits, vertical farming utilises a range of technologies – including hydroponics, aeroponics and aquaponics – for growing plants in in-door facilities that can sustain production year-round, largely independently of climate conditions^[39].
• Within alternative proteins, cultured meat^[40] produces meat products in bioreactors, and precision fermentation^[41] can produce a range of products including milk, honey, eggs, and animal fats – in addition to meats.
• Biomass fermentation is furthermore able to produce a variety of foodstuffs from CO₂^[42] and algae^[43].

In combination, all of these technologies can be harnessed to improve the EU’s food security and the sustainability of its agricultural sector.

However, investment in controlled environment food should not be seen as an effort to replace the traditional European agricultural sector. Rather, with the development of this industry the EU can supplement traditional agriculture in a way that improves the climate-resilience of its food supply, the sustainability of its food production, and give it a greater market share in a growing global market.

Security benefits

Climate change is already causing recurring disruptions in European agricultural output. In 2018, droughts caused an 8% reduction of EU-wide cereal-yields compared to  the previous five year average, causing animal feed shortages and triggering sharp commodity price increases^[44]. In 2022, droughts contributed to an EU-wide spike in the price of cereals, eggs, and milk, exacerbating the impact of the Ukraine war and inflation^[45]. In 2024, severe droughts in Romania led to the EU paying out €400 million in aid to offset the losses of crop damage on over 2 million hectares of corn and sunflowers^[46]. Events of this kind have increased in both intensity and frequency, with EU crop losses owing to droughts and heatwaves tripling over the past five decades^[47]. Controlled environment food production can ensure a minimal viable food supply at all times and reduce the impact of supply shocks by being largely insulated from weather extremes.

Food security is an issue with far-reaching implications, as there is a strong connection between food prices and political instability^[48]. Therefore, diversifying the EU’s sources for protein can serve to enhance European security along multiple dimensions, supporting strategic autonomy and internal social cohesion. This point is underscored by the EU’s protein deficit, as the EU imports 19 million tonnes of plant protein per year to feed its livestock^[49]. This dependency is a strategic vulnerability, as it exposes the EU to trade disruptions and climate impacts in exporting regions.

Some non-agricultural food production methods can also help insulate Europe from the risk of global disasters. The list of possible disasters to that effect are numerous. In recent years, climate scientists have warned of the prospect of irreversible “climate tipping points”, such as the collapse of the AMOC current or the Subpolar Gyre^[50], which would bring about abrupt and severe regional cooling, decimating  European agriculture^[51]. Likewise, events of a cataclysmic volcanic eruption – like Mount Tambora’s eruption in 1815 which led to “a year without a summer” – can quickly disrupt agricultural output globally or regionally^[52]. Climate change further exacerbates the risk of a “simultaneous global breadbasket failure“, where multiple major food-producing regions experience crop failures concurrently due to extreme weather events^[53]. Such synchronized failures pose a significant threat to global food security, as they can lead to substantial reductions in food production and availability.

Controlled environment food production can also deliver significant climate benefits by decoupling food production from the challenges of traditional agriculture while optimizing resource use. For instance, commercial-scale cultivated meat and precision fermentation requires dramatically less land and produces considerably lower nitrogen-related emissions, thereby reducing acidification and fine particulate matter associated with manure and fertilizer applications^[54]. Similarly, indoor vertical farming facilities can minimize water consumption while using only a fraction of the land required for open-field agriculture^[55]. Although these methods are typically energy intensive and therefore not inherently less CO2 intensive than traditional alternatives^[56], when powered by renewable energy sources like solar, wind, or geothermal energy they can potentially achieve carbon footprints that are competitive with – or even lower than – those of traditional protein sources, making them beneficial in advancing the EU’s Green New Deal.

As global food storage remains limited, developing climate resilient food production systems that can continue uninterrupted in the event of a global or regional climactic crisis is vital for guaranteeing European food security under all circumstances – but they must be developed and scaled before such a crisis ensues.

Economic benefits

The market for controlled environment food production is predicted to grow substantially. The market for microorganism and cell-based meat is projected to reach a global market size of €24.9 billion by 2035^[57]. With proper investment, the market for cultivated meat alone could in a high case reach €22 billion by 2030^[58]. Vertical farming already has a market size of €5.8 billion, and is projected to reach €20 billion by 2030 with a CAGR of 20.4%^[59].

Consumer acceptance remains a critical factor in unlocking this growth and existing studies suggest high rates of acceptance already, which rise as people become more familiar with new products^[60]. The European populace also has a high consumer awareness of sustainability which has created receptive markets for alternative food products in the past. There are further around 27 million vegans, vegetarians, and pescetarians in Europe whose ethical beliefs pertaining to animal welfare and sustainability coincide with the production methods of alternative proteins^[61].

Europe’s position

Europe is already an active player within the non-agricultural food market, although no dominant players have yet emerged. Within vertical farming, multiple European companies like the Danish Nordic Harvest, the French Cycloponics, the Swedish Ljusgårda and the German InFarm are already producing commercially viable produce and mushrooms in indoor facilities^[62]. Within the less mature areas of precision fermentation, cultivated meat, and biomass fermentation, there are multiple European companies and startups like Mosa Meat, Meatable, Unibio, Solar Foods, and Formo which are at the forefront of research and development, yet few products have reached the European consumer market^[63].

The EU is already funding innovation and research in this domain. Notable examples include €25 million of funding from Horizon Europe towards alternative protein projects^[64], the Circular Bio-based Europe Joint Undertaking awarding €14 million for the SYNPLANT project^[65], and the European Innovation Council’s work programme awarding an indicative budget of €50 million^[66] for food from precision fermentation and algae, including €5.5 million for the Solar Foods-led HYDROCOW project^[67].

Continuing these efforts will be crucial for supporting the industry further. The technologies discussed here are still relatively nascent, and face continued challenges with respect to cost, energy efficiency, and scaling^[68]. Scaling production of climate resilient foods to price-parity with traditional agriculture will require continued investment^[69] Targeted public-private investment in R&D, pilot infrastructure, and renewable-powered production sites, can unlock the economies of scale needed to overcome these hurdles.

Scaling these technologies within Europe will also require regulatory updates. While Europe does have a significant presence within this technology, pioneers from the US, Singapore, and Israel are leading, in part because of more favourable regulatory conditions. The European Food Safety Authority’s (EFSA) novel food approval process, which is strict by international standards, remains lengthy and unpredictable, sometimes extending well beyond two years, creating uncertainty for start-ups and their investors by extending market entry timelines and increasing compliance costs. This pushes European companies to seek regulatory approval in other regions with faster pathways, potentially diverting investment and stifling the potential for Europe’s leadership in the field. To address this, in addition to increased investments and market incentives, a more agile regulatory framework would help European innovators to compete while staying within the bloc, creating jobs, and fuelling sustainable economic growth.

We’ll publish part 3 of this series soon. In the meantime, read part 1 on drones and counter-drone systems. 

Endnotes