The ongoing development of the Kvanefjeld mining project in southern Greenland is analysed, using ideas drawn from STS and environmental sociology, as a means to investigate social dimensions of potential energy futures. The Arctic space is estimated to be home of one of the largest rare earth elements (REEs) deposits in the world, materials that are essential to much of everyday 21st century life and to the success of a ‘sustainable’, green energy revolution. The geological deposit also contains uranium and thorium, elements that are central to the pursuit of nuclear energy production. Debates over mining of the deposit, with protests led by environmental NGOs and support found across other social groups, have surfaced at different times over the past 60 years. Using a mix of fieldwork, interviews and documentary analysis, I sought to understand why certain aspects of the project e.g. uranium exploitation, have been heavily criticised, while others e.g. thorium exploitation, have received little scrutiny. I explored why the debates on nuclearity ebb and flow with time and what factors were at play at different times. I then layered this account by analysing the place of REEs and their contribution to the green technology industry. Taken together, I consider the environmental paradox this mining project creates. The story of uranium at Kvanefjeld is not new. The new era of development follows two previous phases that I have identified: one occurring from the 1950s to the 1960s, and one from the 1970s to the 1980s. These three phases of debate on uranium extraction each draw on the position of Denmark towards nuclear energy at different times, and I find that mining project discourse shifts around nationalism and the changing relations between Greenland and Denmark. Then, drawing from Actor-Network Theory, I show that the most recent occurrence of the controversy has mobilised a set of actants analogous to the previous phase, as well as (re)created similar power relations. I found that the current controversy over uranium extraction at Kvanefjeld is grounded on a resurgence of an older debate that many assumed was ‘closed’ in the 1980s. However, issues remain unresolved, making uranium the focal point of the most recent debate and crowding out discussion of other concerns. A major difference between these two phases, however, is the appearance of a new actant: the REEs. Portrayed as necessary for modern green technologies, the technological applications of REEs are used by globalised mining companies to legitimise their mining projects. Using Marx’s Metabolic Rift theory, I consider the evolution of mining techniques to show that projects such as Kvanefjeld are likely to increase the environmental burden caused by the mining industry. In particular, I argue that modern mining techniques, as the result of various technological innovations, have led to an increasing strain on the environment though production of increasing volumes of waste. This analysis of mining practices hints that the green economy located at the source of the commodities that feed it, is not so green. This creates an environmental paradox, as resource holding nations take the environmental burden of attempts to decarbonise the global economy. My findings posit that all such mining projects are environmentally problematic, even in the service of green futures. Furthermore, alternative streams for REEs could be found and yet attract little attention. I show that the exploitation of new deposits like Kvanefjeld may not be necessary: waste recovery from old mining waste is an alternative REEs sourcing option, for example. I show also how implementing such a recovery-focused technological option has been problematic in practice, due to the values embedded in the economic model on which they rely. A sociology of waste approach is useful to address the struggles that recovery approaches face and I highlight the shift needed toward a ‘moral economy’, grounded in values that deeply diverge with the dominant economic regime, and which makes it difficult for both models to cohabit. The contributions of this piece of research are intended to be multiple. It fits within extant STS work on materials, mining, nuclear energy, renewable energy, and offers a way to understand, contextualise and localise a complex issue that has globally been seen as problematic: energy futures. This work contributes to the field of environmental sociology as it attempts to put the Metabolic Rift theory into practice, placing socioecological relations at the centre of analysis.Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC)