Depending on whom you ask, the war in Iran could be a boon for renewable energy globally, a windfall for U.S. fossil fuel companies, a revival of coal (the dirtiest fossil fuel), a global recession or all of the above.
It’s no wonder then that the conflict in Iran loomed large over CERAWeek, a major annual gathering of U.S. energy executives and policymakers.
As President Trump once again used threats to try to get Iran to make a deal to end the war, my colleagues Rebecca Elliott and Brad Plumer were on the ground at the gathering in Houston trying to understand how “the largest oil supply disruption in history” would affect fossil fuels and renewables.
Rebecca, you wrote this week about how war in Iran meant bigger profits for U.S. fossil fuel companies, but also big risks. What are oil and gas executives saying?
It’s something that executives are studiously trying to avoid talking about. It’s this weird time where it’s the biggest energy shock that we’ve seen in anyone’s lifetime, but people are worried about talking about it.
There’s a lot of concern now, as there has always been, about criticizing the Trump administration. This has been described by many people, including us, as a war of choice. It’s a war of choice that is totally disrupting the flow of oil and gas around the world.
If this is such a big energy shock, why aren’t oil prices higher?
The chief executives of Chevron and Shell expressed a great deal of concern that the futures market for oil, which we have all been watching very closely, doesn’t fully capture the scale of the disruption to the physical trade of oil and the physical trade of products like jet fuel and diesel in particular.
We’re getting really mixed messages about the trajectory of the war moving forward. My sense is that traders are having a hard time making sense of that.
Are U.S. oil and gas companies planning to drill new wells or expand production in response to the conflict, now that oil prices have neared $100 a barrel?
No one I have spoken to expects a meaningful pickup in activity in the United States.
What I’m hearing is a fair amount of hesitancy within the U.S. industry about speeding up. That runs the gamut from very small private producers all the way up to the big guys. It would take several months of sustained high oil prices for companies to respond in a meaningful way.
What does all this mean for the future of oil and gas?
There has been a lot of conversation and excitement from the U.S. gas companies about what they see as an opening for U.S. gas given the attacks on QatarEnergy, which is a major natural gas exporter whose facilities sustained damage from missile strikes. The counterpoint to that is, well, does this hurt demand for liquefied natural gas? It’s still going to grow. But does it grow less than it otherwise would have because it’s more expensive longer term or countries say they want to rely less on imports?
There’s a feeling among many that the answer will very likely depend on how long this lasts, and how severe it becomes. But all things being equal, higher oil prices and higher natural gas prices are good for renewables, which are more competitive when the alternative is more expensive.
Let’s talk about renewables. Brad, how’s the mood among renewable developers this year?
This has never been a huge conference for the renewable energy industry, and there’s even less of an emphasis this year. The Trump administration has been hostile to wind and solar power, so that has set the tone.
But there are a lot of companies here that strongly believe that demand for renewable energy is going to keep going up. In the United States, electricity demand is rising because of all the A.I. data centers being built, and while that will drive up demand for natural gas, gas alone probably can’t meet all that demand. And many of the big tech companies still have big climate goals, and they are still interested in using more clean energy.
The other thing we’ve heard repeatedly here is that in the wake of the current oil and gas shocks triggered by the conflict with Iran, energy security will become increasingly important for countries around the world. Many may look at diversifying away from imports of oil and gas.
In some places, that could mean burning more coal, but it could also mean developing wind, nuclear and solar resources. The Chinese have basically done that, and they’ve also developed a huge domestic electric vehicle industry, and that combination has set them up relatively well to deal with the current disruptions in the oil and gas markets.
Interior Secretary Doug Burgum took the opportunity to announce that the government would pay TotalEnergies, a French energy giant, almost $1 billion to cancel two offshore wind leases and invest in U.S. fossil fuels instead. How did that go over?
The remarks from Patrick Pouyanné, the chief executive of TotalEnergies, were interesting. He basically said that once the Trump administration came to office last year, Total realized that its offshore wind leases weren’t likely to be developed. So they were looking for ways to get back the money they spent on those leases and they struck this deal with the administration.
While Total is planning to take that money and invest in oil and gas, the company also said that it wasn’t pulling back from renewable energy altogether. Pouyanné said that the company has realized that offshore wind was getting more expensive, particularly since 2022 as a result of supply chain disruptions, and it was tough to make the economics work.
But he said that onshore wind still made a lot of sense, and that the company would continue to pursue technologies like solar and batteries in addition to oil and gas.
Watch
Scientists filmed a whale’s birth and found Mom had helpers
At first, the researchers on the boats didn’t understand what they were witnessing in the waves below. A group of 11 sperm whales huddled together at the surface, strangely still and taking occasional shallow dives. After about an hour, the animals seemed to start thrashing, and a plume of blood reddened the water. The researchers feared trouble, maybe a shark attack. But it was something else.
Suddenly, a much smaller, 12th whale appeared, lifted to the surface by the others so it could breathe.
The event, analyzed in two studies published on Thursday in the journals Science and Scientific Reports, provides the latest evidence in a growing body of research indicating that humans are not the only species in which mothers receive some form of help during and after birth. — Catrin Einhorn
Quote of the day
“You’ve got to have some fear that if you vote against the clean energy industry, you may pay a political price.”
That’s from Michael Brune, a former leader of the Sierra Club who now serves as chief executive of the Clean Break Fund, a climate investment group. He’s describing a new push by a group of wealthy clean-tech executives that is going on the offensive against Republicans in Congress who rolled back incentives for clean energy last year.
The executives’ first target is Chip Roy, a Republican representative from Texas who led the push to end subsidies for clean tech in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
Clean-energy backers have already bought $650,000 of TV ads bashing Roy, who is running for attorney general in Texas, and that helped force him into a primary runoff this month. They plan to announce this week that they’ll put another $500,000 into the runoff and develop a list of other races they’ll engage with this fall, too. — Lisa Friedman and Brad Plumer
Read more.
Related: Schumer Says Democrats Will Try to Restore Clean Energy Tax Credits.
Lost science
Nearly 100,000 workers have left federal science agencies
An estimated 95,000 workers have left federal science agencies through layoffs, retirements or resignations since President Trump returned last year to the White House. Of those, an estimated 10,000 held doctorate degrees in the sciences, Eric Niiler reports.
Among them: Kate Marvel, a widely known climate scientist and author who resigned from her position at NASA, citing the Trump administration’s attacks on climate science in the United States.
Dr. Marvel said that the administration’s actions had made it impossible to remain at an agency that she loved. “It wears you down after a while,” said Dr. Marvel, who announced her resignation on Tuesday.
Read more. And see our series on the cuts to scientific research under the Trump administration.
One last thing
Is Alaska a ‘failed petrostate’?
Juneau, Alaska, takes pride in providing services that some larger cities would shy away from — child care and housing assistance, arts grants, three libraries, two public pools, an arboretum, a ski area and a pledge that all 250 miles of borough roads will be plowed, if possible, within 48 hours after a snowstorm ends.
But the system that has made that possible — a steady flow of revenue from oil production — is cracking across the state. Even with the war in Iran sending oil prices sky high, the oil-dependent model that has financed generous public services while giving Alaskans annual checks from a Permanent Fund can no longer keep both promises.
And a political year that includes a wide-open governor’s race and one of the most watched Senate contests in the country could help decide the future of what has become known in some circles as a petrostate, for its public reliance on oil production, on the brink.
“The petrostate hasn’t quite failed yet,” said Joseph Geldhof, a Juneau lawyer, but “it will if something does not change.” — Anna Griffin
More climate news from around the web:
-
Several countries in Africa could face fuel shortages within weeks, The Financial Times reports. Reuters also reports that South Sudan’s capital, Juba, has begun electricity rationing.
-
Emissions from the U.S. have caused $10 trillion in global damage since 1990, according to a new study highlighted by The Guardian. The U.S. has inflicted a quarter of that damage on itself, the study found.
-
The Texas Tribune has a guide to how Corpus Christi is trying to address an increasingly urgent water crisis.
Read past editions of the newsletter here.
If you’re enjoying what you’re reading, please consider recommending it to others. They can sign up here.
Follow The New York Times on Instagram, Threads, Facebook and TikTok at @nytimes.
Reach us at [email protected]. We read every message, and reply to many!
Claire Brown covers climate change for The Times and writes for the Climate Forward newsletter.
The post What the Energy Industry Is (and Isn’t) Saying About the War in Iran appeared first on New York Times.
