Trump’s Iran war and energy policies outline ‘dangerous volatility’ of fossil fuel push

Critics contend that President Trump's reliance on outdated energy systems persists even as his commitment to oil and gas becomes increasingly precarious.

The military actions taken against Iran and the subsequent threats to seize oil have illuminated the inherent volatility of the fossil fuel-dependent age, according to critics.

The ongoing military operations by the U.S. and Israel against Iran and southern Lebanon have resulted in significant humanitarian and environmental consequences. The potential for further escalation threatens to exacerbate these issues, contributing to increased greenhouse gas emissions and further jeopardizing access to clean drinking water.

The blockade of the Strait of Hormuz by Iran, a vital conduit for one-fifth of the world’s oil transport, has triggered economic repercussions worldwide. Since the onset of the conflict last month, global consumers have collectively spent over $100 billion more on fossil fuels. In the U.S., the average cost of gasoline has approached $4 a gallon.

"This represents a substantial gamble on fossil fuels, and as of now, it isn’t yielding favorable results," remarked Alice Hill, an expert on energy and environment at the Council on Foreign Relations.

"This situation serves as a stark reminder of the long-term security benefits of transitioning to green energy. Countries that have positioned themselves in the renewables sector, like solar and wind, will be better equipped to handle such crises. In contrast, President Trump's approach increases our vulnerability."

Scientists have continuously underscored the urgent need to pivot away from fossil fuels to avert the catastrophic impacts associated with a warming planet. While carbon emissions are not declining at a pace sufficient to avoid severe repercussions, the decreasing costs of wind and solar technologies have catalyzed record investments in renewable energy globally.

Nevertheless, Trump has sought to prolong the fossil fuel era, often employing incendiary rhetoric to dismiss environmental concerns. “The environmentalists, I mean, they are terrorists,” he proclaimed. “They are terrorists. I call them environmental terrorists.”

Previously, Trump has characterized the climate crisis as a “hoax” and a “scam,” advocating not only for increased domestic oil and gas production but also for the appropriation of oil from other oil-rich nations, including Venezuela and now Iran. “Truth be told, my favorite thing is to take the oil in Iran, but some foolish individuals back in the U.S. question that. But they’re foolish individuals,” Trump stated to the Financial Times on Sunday.

The fossil fuel-centric nature of the conflict with Iran has been underscored by Trump's threats directed at Kharg Island, a strategic site where 90% of Iran's oil is processed. He indicated that should a deal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz shipping lane fail, the U.S. would consider destroying “all of their Electric Generating Plants, Oil Wells, and Kharg Island (and possibly all desalinization plants!).”

Such actions targeting civilian infrastructure like energy and water facilities would violate the Geneva Convention, amounting to a war crime, and are likely to further escalate global energy prices, including those in the U.S. While Trump pledged not to engage in a new conflict with Iran, he also promised to reduce costs for American citizens, a commitment that remains unfulfilled.

“The president is locking us into 20th-century energy systems at a time when wind and solar could ease our dependence on the Strait of Hormuz,” Hill noted. “This retreat from progressive energy policy is especially concerning as oil prices surge without a clear plan to resolve the war.”

The dangers associated with a persistent reliance on fossil fuels have become increasingly visible in both Iran and the U.S. Environmental damage from missile strikes on oil depots in Iran has led to toxic pollution that may affect communities for decades.

In the U.S., a series of record heat waves across the western states this month have been deemed “virtually impossible” without human-induced climate change, according to recent scientific reports. Additionally, it became apparent that an oil spill affected an extensive 600 km (373 miles) in the Gulf of Mexico.

March also featured a significant oil and gas industry conference in Houston, during which U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright urged producers to escalate drilling efforts. Simultaneously, an explosion occurred at a Texas oil refinery located just an hour away, resulting in a large plume of smoke and directives for local residents to remain indoors.

Despite these alarming risks, the Trump administration has actively pursued measures to suppress clean energy initiatives, including banning them from federal lands and revoking their subsidies. Last week, the administration made the controversial decision to allocate $1 billion in taxpayer money to the French company TotalEnergies to halt its plans for an offshore wind farm.

The administration has also targeted endangered species protections in its push to fulfill the “drill, baby drill” agenda. A unique meeting of senior administration officials is set to convene soon to modify protections for rare marine species to facilitate increased oil and gas drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.

The rarely employed “God squad” provision of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) empowers the president to assemble a committee of agency leaders to essentially nullify protections for species on the brink of extinction.