Highlights

• Greenland's ice sheet holds roughly 2.85 million cubic kilometers of fresh water.
• If fully melted, this water could raise global sea levels by 24 feet.
• Greenland's ice sheet is the largest freshwater reservoir in the Northern Hemisphere.
• This makes Greenland a strategic geopolitical asset.
• Greenland contains an estimated 36 million tonnes of rare-earth elements and critical minerals.
• These resources are essential for technology and defense.
• Mining and processing these resources require massive amounts of water.
• The U.S. has intensified its interest in Greenland due to these factors.
• Climate change accelerates Arctic ice melt, opening new shipping lanes.
• Greenland's dual appeal as both a freshwater source and mineral trove underscores growing U.S. ambitions.
• Denmark maintains a firm position that Greenland is not for sale.

---

In 2019 President Trump publicly mused about buying Greenland – a comment met with derision by Denmark and Greenland’s leaders. At the time the U.S. White House cited strategic and mineral interests, but some analysts noted a less-discussed motive: fresh water. Greenland’s ice sheet holds an astonishing water reserve, even if mostly frozen. Recent research documents that Greenland’s ice contains about 2.85 million cubic kilometers of fresh water – roughly 700,000 cubic miles – enough to raise global sea levels by some 24 feetif fully melted. (The ice sheet covers ~80% of Greenland’s656,000-square-mile area.) This makes Greenland the “largest and most pristine freshwater reservoir in the Northern Hemisphere”.

Icebergs in Greenland’s northern fjords. Greenland’s ice sheet stores an immense freshwater reserve (roughly 2.85 million cubic km).

Greenland’s government has even explored the prospect rather than actively supporting exploring exporting meltwater. A 2020 report by the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland (GEUS) noted that the authorities “actively support the prospect of drinking water export” and are mapping river basins for possible extraction. Meanwhile, satellite data show Greenland is losing ice rapidly: from 1992 to 2018, about 3,541 cubic kilometers of glacial meltwater (≈935 trillion gallons) poured off the island into the oceans. In a warming Arctic, this melt will only accelerate. One water-focused analyst observes that “Greenland’s geopolitical attractiveness is s increasingly amplified by its melting ice, underscoring that climate change has turned Greenland’s frozen store into a potential strategic resource.

Importantly, Meltwater currently flows to the ocean, not into reservoirs.

And capturing it would require massive infrastructure, which would necessitate large investments over the years.

Freshwater Superpowers: Comparing Green Havens

For perspective, most of the world’s accessible fresh water is held by a handful of large countries. Brazil (home to the Amazon basin) alone holds about 13% of the world’s renewable fresh water, while Russia accounts for roughly 10%, and each of Canada and the United States holds about 7%. (These four nations together contain over one-third of global freshwater.) China, by contrast, has only about 2,000 cubic meters per person – far below Canada’s ~85,000 m³ per person. Other big holders include

Indonesia and the Congo basin nations, but those shares are generally smaller.

• Brazil: ~13% of global freshwater (mainly Amazon rivers and tributaries).
• Russia: ~10% (vast Siberian river networks and Lake Baikal).
• Canada: ~7% (Great Lakes, northern rivers and wetlands).
• United States: ~7% (Great Lakes, Mississippiand other river basins).

Greenland itself is not traditionally counted in such lists because its water is locked in ice and its population is tiny (~57,000). Even if all its ice sheet water were available, Greenland’s total would be comparable in scale to top freshwater nations. The key difference is that water in Greenland is overwhelmingly frozen, whereas these other countries have liquid reservoirs, lakes and rivers that can be tapped more readily. In practical terms, Greenland is an unrivalled ice reservoir, but countries like Brazil and Canada currently dominate the water “market” with flowing water systems.

Minerals, Power, and the Thirst for Resources

Freshwater is only one part of the calculus, of course, as we have discussed. U.S. interest in Greenland has also focused on critical minerals and rare earth elements beneath the ice. Greenland is known to contain substantial rare-earth element (REE) deposits. Estimates suggest Greenland holds ~1.5 million tonnes of that are currently proven reserves of rare-earths. That would rank Greenland around eighth globally, and with further exploration, it could rival even China as a top REE source.

In fact, one analysis reports that Greenland’s REE prospects – including heavy rare earths like dysprosium and gallium – are “notable,” and that in 2024 Washington even intervened to block sale of a heavy-REE project to Chinese-linked interests. In short, experts say access to Greenland’s mineral potential is “one motivating factor” behind U.S. interest there.

Mining these minerals, however, is water-intensive. Globally, critical-mineraloperations often require massive water input for processing and dustcontrol, straining local supplies. For example, extracting lithium from South America’s salt flats can use up to half a million gallons of brine per ton of lithium. Greenland’s nascent mining sector faces similar challenges: infrastructure is sparse and local concerns run high. In 2021, Greenland even banned uranium exploration – a move that halted a proposed rare-earth project (Kvanefjeld) because uranium was mixed with the ore. Some observers suggest that under U.S. administration, such regulations might be loosened, potentially speeding development of Greenland’s resources.

Water is critical not just for mining but for industry and energy, as well as data centers. U.S. power plants (especially nuclear and coal) withdraw vast volumes for cooling, and modern tech infrastructure is increasingly thirsty. Data centers, which pack thousands of servers, can each require up to 5 million gallons per day for cooling. Collectively, America’s 5,426 data centers consume on the order of 160 billion gallons per year. In energy generation, water is similarly key: roughlyone-third of global energy demand is met by oil (a water-intensive fuel), and all major power plants use water in extraction, refining, and cooling. If the U.S. sees Greenland as a “guaranteed” water source, it is partly because domestic demand for cooling and processing is soaring.

The Deep Water Angle

In sum, Greenland’s appeal goes beyond its ice caps and polar vistas. In a world where half the population faces severe water stress, an enormous freshwater reservoir is strategically tantalizing. As the Circle of Blue water analysis bluntly puts it, “gaining access to one of the world’s largest reserves of clean water is a more logical response to warming temperatures” than ignoring the issue. Trump’s 2019 Greenland gambit – and even his January 2026 remarks about federal “legitimate interest” in the island – must be seen in that light.

Officially focused onsecurity and infrastructure, the U.S. push for Greenland coincides with Greenlandic ice melting and new shipping lanes opening, and possibly new threats in the Arctic via the Chinese and Russians.

But it is hard to dismiss that water itself is now a strategic resource of mission-critical importance. Greenland’s frozen stockpile is unique, and as climate change delivers more meltwater, control of that water (and the critical minerals/REEs unlocked by it) could indeed be yet another factor in America’s Arctic ambitions.

None of this alters the fundamental political reality: Greenland is a sovereign territory of Denmark, a long-standing U.S. ally and NATO member. Polling and public statements indicate limited support among Greenland’s population for any U.S. acquisition, and Denmark’s government has repeatedly and unequivocally stated that Greenland is not for sale.