The war in Iran has been very good for renewable energy. More than 40 countries have started or accelerated projects involving wind, solar, electric and other low carbon technologies.
South Korea unveiled a plan to spend about $747 billion to develop at least 100 gigawatts of wind and solar power by 2030. Britain and the Philippines saw a massive surge in rooftop solar installations, Thailand introduced a plan for data centers to source at least 60 percent of electricity from clean energy, and Vietnam accelerated the deployment of battery storage systems. Across Europe, Australia and India, demand for electric vehicles surged.
But the pivot to clean energy is only part of the story. The disruption of a once reliable trade of oil and gas in the Middle East has caused much of the world to double down on fossil fuels in a desperate scramble for secure, and immediate, supplies.
Countries are using more coal, the dirtiest fossil fuel. Nations with oil and gas in abundance went to extraordinary lengths to export crude to their customers, investing to strengthen infrastructure and build new trade routes to outlast the current crisis. All along, governments tapped their budgets for billions of dollars used to shield consumers from higher energy costs, money that did nothing to dampen demand.
This week, diplomats from nearly 200 countries will gather in Antalya, Turkey, for the 31st annual round of United Nations climate change negotiations. Many participants will argue strenuously that the moment calls for nations to accelerate an end to the dependence on fossil fuels — the burning of which is the biggest driver of planet-warming greenhouse gases.
The summit, known as COP31, falls in the shadow of a profound paradox. The war in Iran has simultaneously demonstrated the urgent need for a clean energy transition to secure alternative fuel supplies, while in many cases pushing countries closer to the fossil fuels driving climate change.
For world leaders meeting in Antalya, the central challenge will no longer be negotiating abstract emissions targets, but answering whether a pledge nations made in 2023 to abandon fossil fuels can survive the political reality of a world hungry for secure sources of power.
“The world will become a low-carbon, no-carbon economy over a period of time,” John Kerry, who served as the United States climate envoy during the Biden administration, said in an interview. “The question is, will it make that transition in time to avoid the worst consequences of the crisis?”
Increasing Oil Demand
Beneath chandeliers dripping with crystals in the Ritz-Carlton Riyadh last month, Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman, Saudi Arabia’s energy minister, told an audience that his country was determined to keep oil flowing, no matter the circumstances.
A day earlier, a cruise missile launched by Houthi militants struck King Khalid International Airport in Riyadh, the capital. At least 13 people were killed and more than 300 injured in the deadliest attack in the kingdom in a decade.
Prince Abdulaziz made a show of strength, stressing the kingdom’s ability to recover quickly from disruptions.
So confident is Saudi Arabia in its ability to reliably deliver crude for decades to come, he said, that the government intends to expand its pipeline to carry 10 million barrels of crude daily. It is also investing in more oil storage abroad and on major offshore oil fields.
And while the minister touted the development of “lower-emission solutions,” he dismissed the notion that the war in Iran would give more urgency to the energy transition.
Prince Abdulaziz called national goals to achieve net zero emissions a “religion” and an “obsession.” The war, he argued, has made governments “more realistic” about trying to abandon fossil fuels.
Other Gulf oil producing executives were similarly confident that the war had shown the world the folly of trying to wean itself off fossil fuels and oil in particular.
“The oil industry bends toward increasing demand,” said Sheikh Nawaf S. Al-Sabah, the deputy chairman and chief executive of the Kuwait Petroleum Corporation.
The International Energy Agency once suggested that the world’s use of oil, gas and coal could start to decline by the 2030s as nations carried through on their goals of cutting emissions. But last year the energy agency began backing away from that assumption in its World Energy Outlook, a comprehensive report on global energy trends, and included a scenario in which oil and gas demand steadily rises through 2050.
The agency, a multinational body established in response to the 1970s oil crisis, has also reversed its projection that global coal demand would decline this year. It now expects coal consumption to rise 1.2 percent from 2025 to a record high.
The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, the cartel of influential oil-producing nations, this year predicted “robust growth” in global demand, noting that governments are now prioritizing “energy security” and “affordability” alongside climate goals. Oil demand is projected to rise to 113.3 million barrels a day in 2030, up from 105.1 million barrels last year, the organization found.
Even in Europe, home to the world’s most aggressive decarbonization targets, some are softening their stance.
“We have climate goals but energy security, which has been underestimated for the last couple of years, is now becoming one of our most important matters,” Katherina Reiche, Germany’s minister for economic affairs and energy, said in Riyadh.
Speaking in London recently, Fatih Birol, the head of the I.E.A., acknowledged that reality.
“I think we still see with the current policies in place it looks like the world will use oil and gas for some years to come,” he said.
Pursuing Self-Reliance and Security
And yet it is undeniable that the shock to global fuel supplies has supercharged the push for clean technologies.
Since February, roughly 60 nations have enacted policies designed to permanently curb oil consumption, with about half focusing squarely on electrification, according to Rystad Energy, a consultancy. Governments have delayed retiring older coal plants but are breaking ground on fewer brand-new ones. Countries are seeking self-reliance through domestic renewables, nuclear power and electrified transport.
A separate policy tracker developed by climate and energy think tanks, including Ember and E3G, documented policy accelerations in dozens of capitals, spurred less by climate targets than by sheer vulnerability.
On Friday, the I.E.A. found that “intensified energy security concerns” are driving faster deployment of renewable power — particularly across India, Southeast Asia, Africa and the Middle East.
Over the next five years, the agency concluded, global renewable capacity will grow by almost 4,800 gigawatts, equivalent to today’s global power capacity of fossil fuels and nuclear energy.
“People are looking at the Middle East and seeing a complete and utter lack of security,” said Nick Mabey, founding director of E3G. “It doesn’t matter how many pipelines they build or how many new routes they find— the risk premium on that region is going up.”
The shift was already accelerating for certain clean technologies like electric vehicles, analysts said.
Even before the Strait of Hormuz was choked off, battery-powered cars had begun undercutting diesel and gasoline alternatives on the cost to owners of vehicles in emerging economies. When fuel prices spiked, consumers stampeded to electric cars.
The war “has effectively shown a much deeper reason to accelerate the energy transition than just the moral obligation to do something,” said Daan Walter, principal energy strategist at Ember.
Still, the hard math of global power generation threatens to temper the momentum for clean energy the war has kicked off.
Over the past decade, the cost of batteries and solar modules has plunged by roughly 90 percent. And electricity demand from industrial growth, cooling needs, and data infrastructure has soared.
The result is that renewables are expanding at breakneck speed, as overall consumption of traditional oil, gas, and coal remains near their highest levels.
Jason Bordoff, founding director of the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University, said the war has shown the steep challenge the world faces in moving to renewable fuels.
“You can’t pledge to phase out fossil fuels if you don’t have viable alternatives that protect the world against the security and affordability shocks as you do it,” he said.
The post Can the Transition to Clean Energy Survive the War in Iran? appeared first on New York Times.
