this post was submitted on 25 Apr 2026
98 points (98.0% liked)

Europe

11061 readers
614 users here now

News and information from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
  10. Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.

(This list may get expanded as necessary.)

Posts that link to the following sources will be removed

Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com

(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)

Ban lengths, etc.

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the admin that applied the rule (check modlog first to find who was it.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
federalreverse@feddit.org
poVoq@slrpnk.net
anzo@programming.dev
EuroMod@feddit.org
98
‘The damage is done’: global oil crisis has changed fossil fuel industry for ever, IEA chief says (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 5 days ago by HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.org to c/europe@feddit.org
7 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The oil crisis triggered by the Iran war has changed the fossil fuel industry for ever, turning countries away from fossil fuels to secure energy supplies, the world’s leading energy economist said.

Fatih Birol, the executive director of the International Energy Agency (IEA), also said that, despite pressure, the UK should forgo much of its potential North Sea expansion.

Speaking exclusively to the Guardian, Birol said a key effect of the US-Israel war on Iran was that countries would lose trust in fossil fuels and demand for them would reduce.

[···]

This will have permanent consequences for the global energy markets for years to come.”

On exploring new oil fields in the North Sea:

Birol said: “It is up to the government, but these fields would not change much for the UK’s energy security, nor would they change the price of oil and gas. They would not make any significant difference to this crisis.”

I think the same will be true for fracking, what the German goverment is considering.

Birol also said:

  • Continuing high fossil-fuel prices could tempt developing countries to turn to coal, but solar was competitive with coal on cost and was growing faster.

  • Renewables offerred a no-regrets alternative and nuclear power was also likely to be increased. Building renewables was an option “I never heard that anybody ever regretted”, he said. “I don’t see any downsides for renewable energy.”

Experts and campaigners said the views of the IEA chief should be heeded. Ed Matthew, the UK director of the thinktank E3G, said: “Birol is simply reflecting what every sane, independent energy analyst can see. The UK’s fossil fuel reserves have been depleted by 90% and will do nothing to bring down bills.

He added: “The only effective path to energy and economic security is homegrown clean energy. All political parties should now be uniting around that mission. Their failure to do so tells you a lot about whose interests they truly represent.”

top 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Shellofbiomatter@lemmus.org 35 points 5 days ago

Well at least some good can come out of this conflict.

And for the shareholders: go cry harder while the world smallest violin plays.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 17 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

The only effective path to energy and economic security is homegrown clean energy.

Yes, and we have known that since the 70's. And most European countries actually acted on it. Which is why Europe now has about a third the CO2 emission of USA per capita.

USA has been slacking for half a century, and is a major reason we are in as bad a situation as we are regarding climate change.

[–] jenesaisquoi@feddit.org 13 points 5 days ago

Excellent!

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 10 points 5 days ago

[–] neukenindekeuken@sh.itjust.works 7 points 5 days ago

Anyone who thought trump knew wtf he was doing, deserves this, and so much more.

All those oil sycophants are finally getting what they've deserved all along.

[–] HenriVolney@sh.itjust.works 5 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I think the most important stated in this interview is the fact that it is not economically sound any more to persue new oil and gas fields.

Also, it seems the total amount of available oil and gas is going to shrink and we should plan accordingly.

[–] HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.org 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Also, it seems the total amount of available oil and gas is going to shrink and we should plan accordingly.

This is likely now.

Here is an article about earlier estimates when the oil production was going to peak, due to resource depletion and rising costs:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predicting_the_timing_of_peak_oil

We are or were anyway very close to that point. One central fact for what follows is that the large and cheaply to exploit oil fields were discovered first, exploited first, and also last much longer. New oil fields are much smaller, more remote or deep under the sea, need higher costs for development, have a much smaller ratio of energy-invested-on-energy-returned, and have a shorter life time. This already creates a kind of economic cliff.

Now, there are several new factors which all will accelerate the decline of oil:

  • the war has added high risks to oil production and transport. The global environment among oil producers is no longer a cooperative one, instead it is a war situation, including in economic terms. Put plainly, Iran probably also bombs its neighbors because it wants a larger share of the remaining business. With Venezuela, the US overturned the government of another competitor. Russia is bombed by Ukraine. This is in part precisely because the global oil bonanza or rush for "black gold" will end soon.
  • since the old, large, and cheap wells in the gulf coast countries are cut off and facilities damaged, prices will be high for the next years. In theory, this could inentivize new investments. But developing new fields is slow and very risky, because when the large, old, cheap fields around the gulf come back, this will lower prices, making some new investments unprofitable. The reason is that new oil fields are much smaller (thus have a shorter life time), and at the same time much more expensive than the old fields.
  • many countries are now accelerating the transition away from using oil and gas for electricity generation, heating, and transport. The technology is there, and it is cheaper and will continue to be much cheaper in the future. And this will make investments in new, expensive, small oil fields unviable, since they will not pay off.

Another factor that might happen by the way is that the reduction of shipping as a result of lacking oil in South Asian waters - and of reduced economic activity, will likely lower the albedo over this sea regions, which could make the effects of global heating there much more acute. (This nexus is not yet 100% scientifically assured but the most likely explanation for the rise of extreme weather in the Mediterranean). And specifically South Asia which has not only very hot but regionally also extremely humid weather is very vulnerable to heat waves. Adding to that that some electricity there is still produced by oil generators, and failure of electric grids during heat waves is a catastrophic danger. If that happens, this is likely to change the way many people there think about climate change, and will put more pressure on governments to do something about it.

Oil will of course still be used in the future, but in much less quantity, and more as an expensive, environmentally highly damaging, special chemical product that is a necessary evil for some purposes.