The U.S. war with Iran has raised fossil fuel prices so much that the resulting drop in oil demand has put the world on track to see a rare dip in carbon emissions from these sources in 2026.

Between 2019 and 2025, carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels grew by about 0.8 percent annually, according to a new study published in Nature Climate Change. But 2026 is set to buck that trend: high oil prices, as well as the continued rise of green technology—solar power, wind and electric cars—will cause a “short-term” 0.4 percent drop, according to the study.

“The high petrol prices following the war in Iran are reducing oil use and keeping emissions low,” says the study’s lead author Corinne Le Quéré, a professor of climate change science at the University of East Anglia in England. “But that’s not the whole story: The expansion of renewable energy has progressed a lot in recent years, led by China. And [along with electric vehicles], this is offsetting two thirds of the growing demand for energy.”

With all sources of carbon considered, including deforestation, total global CO2 emissions are set to continue increasing.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] SpaghettiMaster@feddit.uk 14 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Its a little depressing that it's the only argument that has a chance on most people. Killing millions? Don't care. Saving a bit of money? Ohh yeah!

[–] pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Yeah I hate people too

[–] SpaghettiMaster@feddit.uk 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

If I could be dictator for a day, climate change would be solved and so many would hate me.

[–] bss03@infosec.pub 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

https://play.half.earth/ ?

[–] SpaghettiMaster@feddit.uk 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Huh. Mostly just the consumerists and authoritarians who ended up hating me. The poorer parts of the world became more prosperous too.

[–] bss03@infosec.pub 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I can usually assuage the consumerists by implementing champagne socialism, but the authoritarians (and usually the accelerationsists and Malthusians) never get along with me.

But, depending which disasters hit and how quickly I have also been deposed several times, even once after restoring the climate to pre-industrial quality.

[–] SpaghettiMaster@feddit.uk 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Yeah, accelerationists and malthusians were not my fans either. I did champagne socialism but that didn't stop the consumerists becoming my nemesis first.

Interestingly it took me longest to reduce temperature but biodiversity was improving very early on.

Happiness was higher than I expected it to be and early game political capital was what held back my more extreme ideas like banning cars. People were mostly chill with it thanks to other things, I think massively improving the poorer countries meant globally at least people must have overall liked it.