To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Create a Free Account
Unlock your free articles
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey , you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
Login
To continue reading login to your account.
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
A broader regional war is looking unlikely after a speech by the secretary general of the Lebanese militia.
The global energy market breathed a sigh of relief after Hassan Nasrallah, the secretary general of the Lebanese militia Hezbollah, gave a widely anticipated speech that indicated the group would not escalate its current skirmishes with the Israeli military into a full-on conflict. Hezbollah maintains a large force on Lebanon’s border with Israel.
Ever since Hamas’s attack on southern Israel and the subsequent Israeli bombardment of Gaza, a lurking question has been whether other regional powers — specifically Iran, which supports Hamas as well as Hezbollah — would get involved.
“Nasrallah sent a pretty strong signal — Hezbollah won’t enter the fight to save Hamas. If the conflict remains contained to Gaza, there’s little chance we’ll see an escalation that could impact Iran or regional oil flows,” Greg Brew, an analyst at Eurasia Group, told me.
There have been fears that a regional conflagration would not only lead to widespread suffering, but hit the global oil market and broader energy sector as well.
Oil prices shot up after the October 7 attack, with Brent crude rising to roughly $88 a barrel on Monday, October 9, and hitting as high as $92.16 on October 20. It has since settled to around $85, falling over two dollars Friday. Crude prices peaked at $96.55 in late September, the highest they have been this year.
“Prices are still volatile and we’ll probably see more reactions based on changes to the conflict,” Brew told me. “But the consensus that this won’t spill over to markets has only strengthened; Nasrallah speech will reinforce it further.”
While the eastern Mediterranean is only a minor region for hydrocarbon extraction, both Iran and Saudi Arabia are major oil exporters, despite Iran being under sanctions for its nuclear program.
Saudi Arabia and Israel had been in talks about normalizing relations before the Hamas attack and there were even indications that Saudi Arabia would boost production next year to ease the path to a deal. After the attack, Republicans in Congress called on the Biden administration to tighten sanctions on Iran to limit oil exports.
In his speech, Nasrallah’s “general message was that Hezbollah was already doing enough,” according to The New York Times, a sign that escalation beyond the occasional clashes between Hezbollah and the Israeli military — let alone directly involvement by Iran — was unlikely.
Matthew is a correspondent at Heatmap. Previously he was an economics reporter at Grid, where he covered macroeconomics and energy, and a business reporter at BuzzFeed News, where he covered finance. He has written for The New York Times, the Guardian, Barron's, and New York Magazine. Read More
Read MoreTo continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Create a Free Account
Unlock your free articles
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey , you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
Login
To continue reading login to your account.
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
A new climate report says we must phase out fossil fuels — and ramp up CDR.
COP is always awash in new policy reports and scientific studies. It can be hard to figure out which are the most important. So I want to draw your attention to a particularly interesting report that came out in Dubai over the weekend. On Sunday, a consortium of climate science groups released this year’s "10 New Insights in Climate Science," a synopsis of the most recent climate research.
The report was written at the invitation of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, and it’s meant to keep negotiators up to date on climate science in between major reports from the larger Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (Some IPCC authors also work on the "10 New Insights" report.) But it does something interesting that I want to highlight. Here were its top three insights:
A. Overshooting 1.5 degrees Celsius [of global temperature rise] is fast becoming inevitable. Minimizing the magnitude and duration of overshoot is essential.
B. A rapid and managed fossil fuel phase-out is required to stay within the Paris Agreement target range.
C. Robust policies are critical to attain the scale needed for effective carbon dioxide removal (CDR).
The big news here, of course, is the continued message that we are on track to rapidly exceed 1.5 degrees Celsius of temperature rise, the level at which climate change will become especially disastrous. And probably the second biggest news is how the report — which was written before this week — appears to directly contradict recently surfaced remarks from Sultan Al-Jaber, the president of this COP and the head of the U.A.E.’s national oil company. In a video from November 21 first reported by TheGuardian, Al-Jaber said that there was “no science out there, or no scenario out there” to support the idea that fossil fuels must be phased out to stay within the 1.5 degree Celsius limit.
While Al-Jaber denied saying those remarks this morning, the remarks have been a huge deal at COP for the past few days, as they drive at the tension of an oil executive leading an international climate conference.
But I wanted to focus on one more aspect of the report: its endorsement of carbon dioxide removal. The report says steadfastly that carbon dioxide removal is essential to meeting our climate goals, and that we need to invest more in CDR technologies to scale them up fast enough. But it pairs that insight with the idea that we also need to phase out fossil fuels.
Instead of treating carbon dioxide removal as a tissue to cover up emissions — which is the role it can sometimes play in public discussions — it pairs it with the need to phase out fossil fuels.
I asked Oliver Geden, an author of the new report and the head of climate research at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, about that pairing — and about whether mentioning CDR at all would seem to apologize for future fossil-fuel emissions. Here’s what he told me:
“The report directly says that CDR can only be seen as a complement to emissions reductions, not as a substitute to emissions reductions. Of course in the general climate debate, it often appears that proponents of some continued fossil fuel use then evoke CDR. But if you look at the IPCC scenarios, and then you look at national net-zero emissions scenarios, it usually comes only on top — counterbalancing a net-zero pathway, often on hard-to-abate residual emissions from industrialized sectors.”
I think this pairing — a phaseout of fossil fuels and a get-serious moment about CDR — is promising.
In non-COP news, it’s now official: More than 1 million electric cars and light-duty trucks were sold this year in the United States, the largest number ever.
This is Robinson Meyer’s fourth dispatch from Dubai, where he is attending COP28. Read the first here, the second here, and the third here. You can also sign up to receive the next one in your inbox with Heatmap Daily:
Sign up for our free Heatmap Daily newsletter.
