Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Iran war energy shock sparks global push to reduce fossil fuel dependence

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 474 posts

Re: Iran war energy shock sparks global push to reduce fossil fuel dependence

#221

Post by slashdev »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #219
slashdev wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're talking about electricity, so I assume your answer is directed to the natural gas fields at Groningen. The EU imports a lot of natural gas. Don't you think it would be better to have a domestic supply? It's better for the environment too. Heck right now, Europe is still burning coal (and worse yet - lignite coal) for electricity. Natural gas would be a huge improvement on that. Note that drilling for oil in th…

No, everything can move to electricity, China is doing it, Europe can too. You are free to your opinion, but the facts and evidence are clear. If you would like an hour of time with an expert from Ember Energy to explain this, happy to pay for that hour of time for you to update your priors and mental model on the topic of Europe's energy transition trajectory. > Note that drilling for oil in the North Sea is a compl…

I agree that it can. I won't live to see it, and I hope I live 50 years more.

You're living in a fantasy world that doesn't exist.

Global consumption of coal, oil, and natural gas all rose in 2025. We've not even peaked yet.[1]

[1] https://news.mongabay.com/short-article/2025/12/record-fossi...

Re: Iran war energy shock sparks global push to reduce fossil fuel dependence

#222

Post by toomuchtodo »

slashdev wrote: post #221
toomuchtodo wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, everything can move to electricity, China is doing it, Europe can too. You are free to your opinion, but the facts and evidence are clear. If you would like an hour of time with an expert from Ember Energy to explain this, happy to pay for that hour of time for you to update your priors and mental model on the topic of Europe's energy transition trajectory. > Note that drilling for oil in the North Sea is a compl…

I agree that it can. I won't live to see it, and I hope I live 50 years more. You're living in a fantasy world that doesn't exist. Global consumption of coal, oil, and natural gas all rose in 2025. We've not even peaked yet.[1] [1] https://news.mongabay.com/short-article/2025/12/record-fossi...

I've done my best to educate with facts and citations. Appreciate the discussion regardless. My offer stands to pay for you to talk to a subject matter expert.

Edit (to respond to your edit):

> Global consumption of coal, oil, and natural gas all rose in 2025. We've not even peaked yet.

Do you think global LNG consumption will peak considering a material amount of production has been taken offline for the next five years as of today? If I am an LNG consumer on the global market, am I re-evaluating my options today for the next half decade of energy needs? And we are not even done yet with additional potential attacks on Middle Eastern fossil infrastructure as long as the conflict continues; there are more targets available, and more capacity that could be diminished for the foreseeable future.

Oil and gas prices jump after Iran and Israel attack gasfields - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47441351 - March 2026

Iran attack wipes out 17% of Qatar’s LNG capacity for up to five years, QatarEnergy CEO says- https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business/2026/03/19/iran-attack-... - March 19th, 2026

From your citation:

> Renewable energy continues to expand rapidly, but not fast enough for a total reduction in fossil fuels. Emissions from burning oil are projected to rise by 1% in 2025, while gas emissions are set to increase by 1.3%, and coal by 0.8%.

These increases are not material in a world where 1TW/year of solar PV is being deployed. Global solar capacity doubles every three years [!!] at current rates. If that rate holds, without accounting for increases of that rate as more PV manufacturing capacity comes online, it will replace all fossil energy globally (not just fossil electricity, all fossil energy use) in under twenty years when you consider the efficiency gains of not burning fuel for energy.

Highlights of the global energy transition in 2025 - https://ember-energy.org/latest-insights/highlights-of-the-g... - December 17th, 2025

> Solar and wind are now expanding fast enough to meet all new electricity demand, a milestone reached in the first three quarters of 2025. Ember’s analysis published in November shows that these technologies are no longer just catching up; they are outpacing demand growth itself. Together, solar and wind supplied 17.6% of global electricity in the first three quarters of 2025, up from 15.2% over the same period last year, pushing the total share of low-carbon sources to 43%.

> For the first time across a sustained period, renewables, including solar, wind, hydro and smaller sources such as geothermal, generated more electricity than coal. At the heart of this shift is solar, whose growth was more than three times larger than any other source of electricity so far in 2025, confirming its role as the dominant force reshaping the global power system. Another analysis showed that the world is set to add 793 GW of renewable capacity in 2025, up 11% from the 717 GW added in 2024. At this pace, only a modest increase in annual additions is needed for the world to stay on track to triple global renewables by 2030.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/installed-solar-pv-capaci...

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cumulative-installed-wind...

The exponential growth of solar power will change the world - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40746617 - June 2024 (66 comments)

Re: Iran war energy shock sparks global push to reduce fossil fuel dependence

#223

Post by nixon_why69 »

whacko_quacko wrote: post #193
krapp wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kamala was always obviously a better option than Trump. Let's not pretend people didn't know who and what Trump was, or that his behavior after 2024 came as a shock to anyone.

A majority thought differently. They knew who Trump was and who Kamala was, and they voted for Trump. That's how it goes in a democracy... Anyways, they're getting what they voted for

I'm not so sure that's true. Trump is making very different decisions in this term than his first term. I think a lot of his voters thought, "Everything was fine in his first term while all the liberals were crying all the time, I'd like more of that". This time around, things are not fine and we're seeing the regret show up in the polling numbers.

Re: Iran war energy shock sparks global push to reduce fossil fuel dependence

#224

Post by blitzar »

bdangubic wrote: post #190
coldtea wrote: post #48

> energy shock sparks global push to reduce fossil fuel dependence That would be the stupidest takeaway

if my country has 0 dependence on fossils, how many fucks would I have given for whatever is happening or will be happening in the future in shithole places like the middle east?

Won't someone think of the children, how are their schools going to get bombed if we dont do it?

Re: Iran war energy shock sparks global push to reduce fossil fuel dependence

#225

Post by anonymars »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #160
graemep wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Businesses are short termist these days. They will be happy to pull forward gains. Shareholder value, right?

Certainly, but you can solve for that with windfall taxes or nationalizing the oil industry in your jurisdiction, if there is the will. Based on all available evidence, the will does not exist. Broadly speaking, the overall system dependent on energy must adapt or die. The capital exists to decarbonize rapidly. How hard the arm must be twisted is the natural experiment to observe. In the meantime, all critical fossil…

Heh, depends on who's nationalizing the oil industry. Isn't that the common thread for the present-day situations of Venezuela, Iran, and Cuba?

Re: Iran war energy shock sparks global push to reduce fossil fuel dependence

#227

Post by blackguardx »

kuerbel wrote: post #38
jmclnx wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The bizarre thing is that our government still wants to close down the remaining nuclear power plants. That is very weird, even Germany stated recently that closing down their Nuclear Plants was a big mistake. For a very long time, I have always said France is smarter than what people give them credit for. Spain should take a peek over the mountains at France to see what a sane energy policy looks like.

No, we did not. Katharina Reiche and that guy from Bavaria are certainly not "Germany" or the majority of Germans. No atom reactor is going to be built, it's just typical rhetoric from both of them. Not even the major energy suppliers are interested in building new nuclear reactors. I was not against prolonging the phase out for a bit, but we don't even have a permanent storage solution after all this time. They aren…

You don't need rivers for nuclear reactor cooling, they are just very convenient.

Re: Iran war energy shock sparks global push to reduce fossil fuel dependence

#229

Post by [deleted] »

anonymars wrote: post #225
toomuchtodo wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certainly, but you can solve for that with windfall taxes or nationalizing the oil industry in your jurisdiction, if there is the will. Based on all available evidence, the will does not exist. Broadly speaking, the overall system dependent on energy must adapt or die. The capital exists to decarbonize rapidly. How hard the arm must be twisted is the natural experiment to observe. In the meantime, all critical fossil…

Heh, depends on who's nationalizing the oil industry. Isn't that the common thread for the present-day situations of Venezuela, Iran, and Cuba?

[deleted]

Re: Iran war energy shock sparks global push to reduce fossil fuel dependence

#230

Post by alvah »

Arnt wrote: post #180
davedx wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been arguing with Europeans on twitter (including an environmental scientist) who believe this war shows we need to resume drilling in the North Sea and Groningen. It feels like this collective insanity will never end

They're wrong. A couple of years ago the last of the exploration rigs in Norway left Norwegian waters. Because nothing that could be drilled (and hasn't already) can compete on price with solar etc. Lots of people think someone should do this or that. They don't invest their own money though, they just think someone else should do, etc.

How did 40 wells get drilled in the Norwegian shelf last year, and 42 the year before? You can't just make things up.
Post reply on HN