this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2026
1094 points (99.5% liked)

science

29901 readers
456 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

dart board;; science bs

rule #1: be kind

lemmy.world rules

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/54245880

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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Don't tease me. I once told my very conservative friend that I wanted to see the gas prices skyrocket, and he was dumbfounded at why I would want that. And my answer was exactly this, its the only reason people will stop using fossil fuels.

We've proven that people don't care about climate change unless it affects them directly.

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

This is why no US president has fucked with Iran in a meaningful way, until Dementia Don thought he could Captain America this shit and threw the world into chaos.

It is a sad truth that, at least in the US, the majority only ever cares about war when they're personally affected. It's why we have a "volunteer" military, though truly, our military is loaded with poor people who had no real option in their home communities other than joining up, and also why we're never having another draft.

Even so, it's still glad to see the majority becoming more anti-war even if only out of self-interest.

[–] TBi@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

But I was told it was Bidens Fault!

/s

And yeah it’s scary how selfish people are. I always think that people are like myself and look out for others, but no they’d fuck you over for a Klondike bar.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 27 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The Gang Solves Climate Change

[–] ghen@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Between covid and the Iran war, Trump is the most environmentally friendly president ever!

[–] fyzzlefry@retrolemmy.com 6 points 2 days ago

Task failed successfully

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Mrkawfee@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

Thank you, Iran.

[–] mister_flibble@sh.itjust.works 34 points 3 days ago
[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 212 points 3 days ago (31 children)

The only real way to fight climate change is to make fossil fuels more expensive than alternatives. The vast majority won’t do it for environmental reasons.

[–] realitista@lemmus.org 142 points 3 days ago (12 children)

It's really absurd that we are still subsidizing fossil fuels rather than increasing the tax rates on them.

[–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 85 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (21 children)

well france tried that and people rioted. Trump (unintentionally) made gas prices skyrocket and just caused one of the most lopsided elections in modern US history. Asking middle and especially lower class people to pay more for energy, even just in the short term, runs the risk of turning them against eco-conscious legislation.

So I think a better strategy is just more incentives and funding for clean energy.

load more comments (21 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (30 replies)
[–] TigerAce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 2 days ago (42 children)

So... Trump did something that had a positive effect? Not that it's a net positive, I mean, he started an illegal war and bombed schools with kids inside. And talking about children, don't forget he raped kids.

load more comments (42 replies)
[–] Ravenheart@lemmy.zip 25 points 3 days ago (12 children)

Sucks how our quality of life has been made inversely proportional to the health of the environment. Most of us have been locked in to fossil fuel dependence whether we like it or not.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] insanemantis@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

While the title is technically true, it's incredibly misleading to people who don't read carefully, which unfortunately makes up a huge part of the internet

We're gonna get a bunch of dumbasses thinking that the Iran war is somehow good for the environment

[–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 4 points 2 days ago

Clearly, we need to make it into WW3 for even more environmental friendliness

[–] NewSocialWhoDis@lemmy.zip 18 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (6 children)

I was almost excited, but then you (rightfully) crushed it, OP.

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

Sigh. Still on track for my children starving to death in the famines to come.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] LeftReddit2@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago

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

Well that's not good.

[–] bss03@infosec.pub 38 points 3 days ago (4 children)

This is why a carbon tax on fuel would help, and why ending fossil fuel subsidies would also help. Even both isn't the end of government action, but they would both be good way to incentivize using alternatives.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] KneeTitts@lemmy.world 69 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (33 children)

Dont forget demand destruction, I finally bought an electric car this year after years of putting it off. Since the oil companies jacked up their prices in response to a war for which they supported the very candidate who caused it, I said enough is enough. Hopefully I will never buy gas again in my life.

load more comments (33 replies)
[–] Malica@lemmy.zip 56 points 3 days ago (2 children)

So incompetent he even fails at killing clean energy

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] laranis@lemmy.zip 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I said 20 years ago that we should let gas prices rise. My target at the time was $10/gallon. If we believe capitalism works then let it work for us. You add another digit to the cost of regular unleaded and you watch how fast people adopt EVs.

Climate Change wasn't the focus of my angst back then but probably should have been.

[–] LemmySuxNow@reddthat.com 13 points 2 days ago (10 children)

EVs are only marginally better. Public transit is the answer.

[–] bountygiver@lemmy.ml 14 points 2 days ago (1 children)

just like reduce -> reuse -> recycle which is ordered in what you should do first.

Same can be said for transit, reduce the need for transit first (work from home), then use public transit, then use non-fossil fuel vehicles.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Oh we should give Iran a Nobel peace prize for actions that helped cut CO2 emissions. That'll drive trump crazy, I really want to see that I could do with a good laugh.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 23 points 3 days ago (4 children)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 3 days ago

"Iran solves Global Warming" was definitely not in my bingo card for this century.

load more comments
view more: next ›