Climate Science Glossary

Term Lookup

Enter a term in the search box to find its definition.

Settings

Use the controls in the far right panel to increase or decrease the number of terms automatically displayed (or to completely turn that feature off).

Term Lookup

Settings


All IPCC definitions taken from Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Annex I, Glossary, pp. 941-954. Cambridge University Press.

Home Arguments Software Resources Comments The Consensus Project Translations About Support

Bluesky Facebook LinkedIn Mastodon MeWe

Twitter YouTube RSS Posts RSS Comments Email Subscribe


Climate's changed before
It's the sun
It's not bad
There is no consensus
It's cooling
Models are unreliable
Temp record is unreliable
Animals and plants can adapt
It hasn't warmed since 1998
Antarctica is gaining ice
View All Arguments...



Username
Password
New? Register here
Forgot your password?

Latest Posts

Archives

The war in Iran shows us another cost of our fossil-fuel economy

Posted on 16 March 2026 by Guest Author

This is a re-post from The Climate Brink by Andrew Dessler

When people debate the cost of fossil fuels versus renewables, the conversation almost always centers on the price at the pump or the cost per kilowatt-hour on your electricity bill. That’s understandable — those are the costs you can see. But they’re not the whole story.

The rest of the story are subsidies. In most discussions, it’s laser-focused on subsidies for renewable energy, not fossil fuels. But fossil fuels get enormous subsidies. Those are deeply hidden, though, spread across government budgets, healthcare systems, and military spending in ways most people can’t connect back to their energy choices.

To the extent that they do get attention, most of it goes to the implicit subsidy for fossil fuels from climate change and air pollution, which economists have valued at trillions of dollars per year.

But there’s another hidden subsidy that few talk about: national security. And right now, as oil prices surge in response to U.S. strikes on Iran, that cost is impossible to ignore.

the subsidy nobody talks about

The United States spends more than $81 billion every single year just to protect the global supply of oil.

That figure comes from Securing America’s Future Energy (SAFE), a nonpartisan national security organization led by retired senior military officers. They calculated that about one fifth of the entire Department of Defense base budget exists, at least in part, to keep oil flowing through vulnerable choke points like the Strait of Hormuz, the Suez Canal, shipping lanes in the South China Sea.

That’s $81 billion — every year — and it doesn’t appear on your gas station receipt. It’s a subsidy, paid by taxpayers, that makes oil look far cheaper than it actually is. Spread across U.S. oil consumption, it works out to roughly $11 per barrel, or about 28 cents per gallon, hidden in the defense budget. For a typical fill up, that subsidy amounts to $5 per tank.

This subsidy is just to be ready to fight. Then there are the actual wars we’ve fought over the oil supply. For example, the 2003 Iraq War’s cost was estimated to be $3 trillion — nearly $10,000 per American.

When you add it all up, fossil fuels are not cheap. They’ve never been cheap. We’ve just been brilliant at hiding the costs — in the defense budget, in emergency rooms, in FEMA disaster relief, etc.

fossil fuels are our pimp

But despite spending trillions protecting global oil routes, we remain economically vulnerable to disruption in oil supplies.

Why? Because oil is a globally priced commodity: everyone pays the same price. When something disrupts supply anywhere in the world, prices go up everywhere — including in the U.S.

This occurs despite the United States being the largest oil producer in the world.

We saw this play out in real time just last week. Following U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran, oil prices surgedGas prices are following. And this was before the conflict escalated to directly threaten the Strait of Hormuz — a waterway through which roughly 20% of the world’s petroleum flows every day.

real energy security

Fossil fuel pushers don’t want you to understand this. And they particularly don’t want you to recognize that the price of solar energy and wind energy is not affected by events in the Middle East. A missile strike on Iranian oil infrastructure has zero effect on the cost of generating electricity from a solar panel in Texas or a wind turbine in Iowa. The “fuel” — sunlight and wind — is free, domestic, and geopolitically inert.

This is one of the key reasons China is pushing electric vehicles with government industrial policy so strongly. They import most of their oil and this has created an enormous geopolitical risk. Electric vehicles, charged by rapidly growing solar energy, is an important way China is addressing the national security problems of fossil fuels.

In many parts of the country and world, solar and wind are now the cheapest sources of new electricity generation — full stop. Not because of subsidies (though those exist but are likely smaller than those for fossil fuels), but because the underlying economics have shifted irreversibly.

Renewable energy is the only credible path to energy and economic security. “Drill, baby, drill” is a fantasy — and an expensive one. More drilling means more pain, not more security.

Trump’s Iran conflict cuts the world off from a crucial energy source  Liquified natural gas from Qatar was a safe energy bet for countries across Europe and Asia. Now they face an energy crisis. Updated March 5, 2026 at 10:19 a.m. ESTtoday at 10:19 a.m. EST 7 min Make us preferred on Google Qatar shut down production of liquefied natural gas this week at a plant in Doha after Iranian attacks targeting energy installations. (Getty Images) By Evan Halper and  Anthony Faiola  Countries across Europe and Asia are facing a potential energy crisis after an Iranian drone strike shut down Qatar’s exports of liquefied natural gas this week, cutting off nations from India to Italy from a crucial energy source and potentially increasing costs for key industries in the United States.
“the moral case for fossil fuels”

time to move on

It’s worth pausing to appreciate what fossil fuels made possible. They powered our civilization for the last 200 years. But the transition to renewable energy isn’t a rejection of that legacy — it’s the next chapter. And it’s a better one.

0 0

Printable Version  |  Link to this page

Comments

There have been no comments posted yet.

You need to be logged in to post a comment. Login via the left margin or if you're new, register here.



The Consensus Project Website

THE ESCALATOR

(free to republish)


© Copyright 2026 John Cook
Home | Translations | About Us | Privacy | Contact Us