The first months of 2026 have laid bare the fragility of global climate progress. The escalating war in Iran that has now killed around 3,375 people has not only taken innocent lives, but has destabilized global energy markets internationally, while flagging momentum on international climate assistance has deepened environmental injustice.
Despite decades of climate commitments, the global economy remains deeply tethered to fossil fuels.
The ongoing conflict has triggered what the International Energy Agency has described as the most severe energy disruption in modern history. The closure and militarization of the Strait of Hormuz (through which roughly 20% of global oil flows) has sent shockwaves through energy markets, pushing oil prices above $110 per barrel and driving U.S. gasoline prices nationally to an average of $4.10 per gallon, with projections of $5 if the conflict persists. Gasoline prices have risen as high as nearly $9 in California. This volatility underscores a persistent truth: despite decades of climate commitments, the global economy remains deeply tethered to fossil fuels.
Domino effect from rising fuel prices
The consequences are cascading. Rising fuel prices are increasing the cost of food, transportation, and basic goods, disproportionately burdening low-income households both domestically and globally. Economists warn that households may pay hundreds more annually for energy alone, while fertilizer and supply chain disruptions are already driving food insecurity in vulnerable regions.
Meanwhile, major fossil fuel producers are profiting from the crisis, reinforcing a system that rewards emissions while forcing everyone to pay for them.
For developing countries, this crisis compounds existing inequalities, forcing governments to divert scarce resources from climate resilience toward emergency energy subsidies. At the same time, international and domestic climate assistance are under mounting strain. As governments respond to inflation and geopolitical instability, climate commitments risk becoming collateral damage.
Equally troubling is the resurgence of fossil fuels under the guise of energy security. In the United States and elsewhere, policymakers are using rising gas prices as an excuse to weaken or roll back climate policies, despite clear evidence that clean energy investments, not fossil fuel expansion, offer long-term price stability. Meanwhile, major fossil fuel producers are profiting from the crisis, reinforcing a system that rewards emissions while forcing everyone to pay for them.
Communities left behind again
This dynamic has profound implications for environmental justice. For many communities, this instability isn’t new; it’s a pattern. The neighborhoods that have spent decades dealing with pollution and lack of investment are being hit again, now with rising energy costs, dirtier air, and fewer investments in clean systems that could improve their quality of life.
In addition, the President’s Fiscal Year 2027 budget proposal would eliminate $4 billion in funding for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP), cutting off vital support to approximately 6 million low-income households that rely on the program to afford home heating and cooling. Globally, energy-importing nations face acute shortages and price shocks: those who contribute least to climate change are often those who suffer from their worst consequences.
Within this crisis lies a clear lesson: fossil fuel dependence is not just climate liability; it is a national security risk. Analysts increasingly describe the current moment as a “energy paradox,” where geopolitical instability both worsens reliance on fossil fuels and strengthens the case for accelerating the clean energy transition.
Moral imperative to maintain climate funding
For policymakers, the path forward must be deliberate and urgent. Short-term crises should not derail long-term climate commitments. Instead, this moment should catalyze increased investment in renewable energy, strengthen international climate assistance, and renew a commitment to environmental justice. Maintaining funding for programs such as renewable energy, adaptation, and sustainable landscapes is both a climate and moral imperative.
2026 has made one thing clear: society cannot build a stable and equitable future on unstable and inequitable energy systems. To meet this moment, we must confront the root causes of climate change and energy insecurity by accelerating the transition away from fossil fuels and toward a more equitable, restored, and resilient world.
