Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Energy

Scoop: Iran War Has Already Cost Americans $17 Billion At the Pump

“It’s coming right out of your pocket.”

•
Donald Trump pulling a receipt.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The Iran war has sent fuel prices surging nationwide — and those higher prices are beginning to impose significant costs on the American economy, according to a new analysis from researchers at Brown University.

The war has cost the U.S. economy roughly $17 billion solely by increasing prices for gasoline and diesel fuel, the estimate finds. These higher prices have cost each household about $129 on average, researchers say.

“If you think about an individual paying $1 or $1.50 more for gasoline, that’s often just a nuisance,” Jeff Colgan, an author of the analysis and a political science professor at Brown University, told me.

“But as a country, we consume 370 million gallons of gasoline per day. So when you add that all up, this is more than just a nuisance for the country. This is a major cost,” he said.

The team has published a new website, the Iran War Energy Cost Tracker, to share their analysis and monitor the war’s rising costs over time.

“Of course, the most horrible costs are the casualties, the deaths,” Colgan said. “And there’s been discussion in the media of the fiscal cost and the new Department of Defense funding. But there is this other cost, and it’s coming right out of your pocket,” he said.

Many of the higher costs in their analysis come from surging diesel prices, which have risen nearly 48% since the war began. Although Americans consume almost twice as much gasoline as diesel every day — diesel is mostly used by things like trucks and trains in the U.S. — the cost of diesel has risen so significantly that it drives nearly half of the total price shock.

The analysis finds that Americans have paid an additional $8.8 billion for gasoline and an extra $8 billion for diesel fuel that they would not have had to spend otherwise. Those diesel costs will eventually work their way into prices paid by consumers by increasing shipping costs or packaging costs.

The higher costs haven’t been borne evenly across the country. Although much of the attention has focused on states where nominal prices are highest — such as California, where a gallon of gasoline now costs $5.93 — those states have not seen the sharpest increases since bombing started, Colgan said.

Utah has seen its gas prices rise by more than $1.50 per gallon since the war began, the tracker finds. Arizona and Kentucky have seen prices rise by more than $1.40.

“Utah used to have very cheap gasoline compared to the rest of the nation, and now it doesn’t,” he said.

The tracker doesn’t look at other commodities that have risen in price due to the Iran war and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz — such as jet fuel, naphtha, fertilizer, and petrochemical inputs — but Colgan said they want to do so over time.

“We wanted to show that what we’re seeing right now is a delta — an increase in what [the gas price] would have been if we hadn’t made this decision to go to war,” Colgan said.

To estimate where gas and diesel prices would be today had the war never happened, Colgan worked with John Perdue, a Brown student, to look at how gasoline and diesel prices have changed over the past five years to account for normal fluctuations and seasonal variation. They compared those average price increases both to average gas and diesel prices in February and to the price level on February 28, when bombing began.

“The truth is it doesn’t much matter” which of the two methods you use to calculate the counterfactual, Colgan said. (Viewers to the website can look at both estimates.) “The numbers are big either way.”

The costs will continue rising, even if the ceasefire that the United States and Iran announced earlier this week holds.

As long as Iran keeps the Strait of Hormuz closed, oil prices will keep rising as a large share of the world’s fossil fuels remain stuck behind a blockade. Even after the Strait is reopened, oil prices could remain elevated for months as the system accommodates the permanently lost supply, the analyst Rory Johnston told me on Heatmap’s podcast Shift Key on Thursday.

“The economic consequences of the decision the U.S. government has made will continue for Americans,” Colgan agreed. He contrasted the war’s $17 billion cost in gasoline and diesel prices with billions that the Department of Government Efficiency has claimed to save taxpayers — or the $6 billion annual budget for the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), the anti-HIV/AIDS program that Trump zeroed out last year.

“What else could we have spent that $16.7 billion on?” he asked. “Turns out there’s a lot.”

Blue

You’re out of free articles.

Subscribe to access Heatmap's exclusive climate and energy polling, award-winning journalism, and subscriber-only events, now just $99 $79.20/year.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
AM Briefing

Neutral, at Worst

On Chinese hydrogen, Fermi upheaval, and British offshore wind

Smokestacks.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Current conditions: The Pineapple Express, an atmospheric river originating in the Pacific near Hawaii, is arriving in the Southwest laden with heavy rain that’s set to flood the region • Indonesia has the worst air quality in the world as forest fires rage along Sumatra’s southern coast • A cross-country storm will soak much of the United States on Tuesday’s Election Day.


THE TOP FIVE

1. Permitting bill’s worst-case climate scenario is still carbon neutral

The Senate’s grand compromise to simplify federal permitting on energy projects would likely drop emissions slightly as the benefits to accelerating deployments of clean energy infrastructure outweigh the boost the legislation could give to fossil fuels. Even under the worst-case scenario, emissions remain on the same trajectory as today. That’s according to a hotly anticipated new analysis by the Rhodium Group, the consultancy whose U.S. emissions estimates are among the most widely cited in American politics. The report, shared first with my colleague Emily Pontecorvo, found that provisions in the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act largely counteract each other on climate. The bill makes building transmission lines much easier, a key step to patching more renewables onto the grid. But it also makes new gas pipelines simpler to permit, clearing the way for a buildout of the infrastructure for the fossil fuel already dominating U.S. electricity and heating systems. Still, under the best-case scenario, the legislation could cut U.S. economy-wide emissions by 5% below where they would otherwise go in 2040. The bill could also slash energy bills by $78 per year and support construction of more than 200 gigawatts of clean energy capacity, as compared to a world where it didn’t pass. The Rhodium report is at least the second analysis yet to find that the bill could modestly lower emissions. The first, as I reported last week, came from the think tank Resources for the Future, which saw a slight drop in power-sector emissions relative to a world without BAAJA.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue
Energy

Exclusive: New Modeling Finds Permitting Bill Would Likely Cut Emissions

Even in the worst-case scenario, BAAJA wouldn’t increase emissions, an analysis by the Rhodium Group concludes.

Pollution and the Capitol.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The bipartisan permitting reform bill is likely to slightly cut greenhouse gas emissions and lower electricity bills by 2040 — or at worst leave emissions on the same trajectory that they are on today — as compared to the status quo, according to a new analysis of many of its provisions by the Rhodium Group, an independent research firm.

The analysis examines the policies in the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act, or BAAJA, that would have the most-clear cut effects on climate pollution and the energy system. It is the most comprehensive account of the bill’s effects on emissions so far, although it does not examine all of its provisions.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue
Hotspots

Meta Data Center Federal Pipeline Review Due Early Next Year

And more of the week’s top fights around development.

The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. Richland Parish, Louisiana – Gird your loins for the coming fight over the Meta Hyperion data center’s gas pipeline.

  • On Wednesday, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission laid out plans for an environmental assessment of the Entergy pipeline for the Meta data center under the National Environmental Policy Act and stated it’ll be issued in early January 2027. Federal agencies have been ordered by the panel to complete any remaining decisions on authorizations by April.
  • The decision to do an environmental assessment under NEPA will be controversial. The Sierra Club filed comments to FERC stating they wanted an environmental impact statement instead that took into account the environmental impacts of the data center being fed by the pipeline, as well as a review of the project’s cumulative impacts, as the activist group said they’re explicitly linked to the data center’s operations. “The power stations and data center are not remote or speculative developments unrelated to the proposed action,” their comments read.
  • This is quite similar to what’s playing out with the Green Chile pipeline in New Mexico for Oracle and OpenAI’s Project Jupiter, which we recently explained could turn into litigation with high stakes for future gas pipelines linked to data centers. But to me, this conflict with Meta feels like it has more at stake for this individual project, as it’s playing out while construction on gas power plants for the data center has been underway for almost a year after earlier being blessed by state regulators.
  • I asked Sierra Club what could happen next. Eric Huber, one of their managing attorneys, told me on Thursday, “I heard the EA is expected in January, but we are in wait and see mode and will decide on further steps when it comes out.” Meta and Entergy did not respond to a request for comment.

2. Spartanburg County, South Carolina – I have one last data center race to tell you to watch on Tuesday: South Carolina’s 4th, on the northern rim of the state.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow