SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
350.org
Climate Group Says Rich Nations 'Must Tax Fossil Fuel Windfall Profits' Tied to Iran War
"If G7 countries are serious about stabilizing the market, they need to stop protecting profits and start taxing companies which fuel the climate crisis."
Mar 10, 2026
Campaigners with the global climate movement 350.org argued Tuesday that Group of Seven countries "must tax fossil fuel windfall profits" from price hikes related to the US-Israeli war on Iran.
"Wars expose a deep flaw in our energy system: When prices spike, fossil fuel companies stand ready to cash in while households and businesses struggle," said the group's global campaigns manager, Clémence Dubois, in a statement. "That's not just market volatility, it's the result of governments allowing fossil fuel companies to keep the power to shape the energy system and pass the costs onto everyone else."
In addition to the US, the G7 includes Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom. Dubois declared that they all "must stop reinforcing this model with fossil fuel tax cuts that only inflate corporate earnings. Cutting fossil fuel taxes during a crisis is not a relief for families, it's a subsidy for companies that are already enjoying windfall profits."
"The right response is a strong windfall tax, which should be redirected to support households and accelerate the transition to clean energy that reduces our dependence on the very fuels driving both climate disruption and global instability," she stressed, just days after new research revealed that the pace of global heating from fossil fuels has accelerated over the past decade.
While advocates have long called for taxing oil and gas companies to pay for a swift transition to clean power and the impacts of the climate emergency on communities around the world, the Trump administration and Israel's assault on Iran has generated fresh demands for an urgent transition away from dirty energy.
The US and Israel have bombarded civilian infrastructure, including Iranian oil facilities, sending clouds of smoke and black droplets falling over Tehran. Iran has threatened to fire upon ships crossing through the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial pathway for both oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman.
The shutdown of both the key waterway and Qatari liquefied natural gas facilities damaged by Iranian attacks has sent oil prices soaring and led to estimates that US LNG companies could soon see $20 billion in monthly windfall profits, as they direct exports to the highest bidders.
As Politico reported: "News early Monday that the United States and other G7 countries were discussing a possible coordinated release of oil from their strategic petroleum reserves halted a panic-driven market spike that briefly pushed US oil to nearly $120 a barrel overnight. The French government later in the morning walked that back, saying the G7 was 'not there yet' as far as tapping oil stockpiles."
Speaking in Cyprus on Monday, French President Emmanuel Macron said that "we are in the process of setting up a purely defensive, purely escort mission, which must be prepared together with both European and non-European states, and whose purpose is to enable, as soon as possible after the most intense phase of the conflict has ended, the escort of container ships and tankers to gradually reopen the Strait of Hormuz."
Meanwhile, Fanny Petitbon, 350's France country manager, said Tuesday that "releasing emergency oil reserves is just a Band-Aid on a gaping wound. If G7 countries are serious about stabilizing the market, they need to stop protecting profits and start taxing companies which fuel the climate crisis."
"Working people shouldn't be paying the price while oil majors treat the war in the Middle East like a winning lottery ticket. We need the G7 to step up and establish a windfall tax now to put those profits back into the pockets of the people," Petitbon asserted. "The French government, as president of the G7, must also confront the elephant in the room—the urgent phaseout of fossil fuels. It can no longer look away from the reality, which is that we cannot stay addicted to oil and gas."
Among the countries significantly impacted by the Strait of Hormuz closure is Japan, which relies on the route for around 70% of its oil and 6% of its LNG imports, according to Reuters. Masayoshi Iyoda, a 350 campaigner for the country, said that "Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi has moved to calm fears over rising energy and food prices, but reassurances and stopgap measures like releasing oil reserves are not enough."
"Fossil fuel companies are cashing in on this crisis. A windfall tax on polluting industries would make them pay by taking responsibility, not ordinary families already stretched by years of stagnant wages and price surges due to climate impacts," Iyoda continued, before looking toward Takaichi's planned meeting with US President Donald Trump next week.
"We urge her to reconsider Japan's alignment with the Trump administration's fossil fuel agenda," the campaigner said. "The attack on Iran has shown, once again, how that agenda means prosperity for oil and gas corporations, and higher bills for everyone else. Accelerating a just transition to renewable energy and phasing out fossil fuels is Japan's best option to secure affordable and sustainable energy based on democracy and peace."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump's Unprovoked War on Iran Triggers 10% Spike in Global Oil Prices
"When global energy security can be upended by a single flashpoint, it shows how unstable and risky our dependence on oil and gas is," said one critic.
Mar 02, 2026
President Donald Trump's unprovoked, unconstitutional, and politically unpopular war against Iran is about to cause pains for Americans at the gas pump.
CNBC reported on Monday that Brent crude oil prices surged by 9.3% to a 52-week high of $79.40 per barrel, while US West Texas Intermediate crude oil prices spike by 9% to $73.10 per barrel.
This spike in oil prices is projected to directly lead to an increase in gas prices in the coming days.
Petroleum industry analyst Patrick De Haan noted in a Monday update on his Substack page that gas prices in the US had already risen by roughly six cents in the last week, and that war with Iran would drive these prices higher.
"Developments surrounding Iran—particularly any threat to regional production or shipping flows—are likely to remain the dominant driver of oil prices," wrote De Haan, "and could keep crude elevated or push it higher if tensions intensify further."
A Sunday research note from Wells Fargo cited by CNBC drew attention to the importance of the Strait of Hormuz, which the Iranian government closed off over the week and which is used to transport roughly 20% of the global supplies of petroleum and liquified natural gas.
According to Wells Fargo, a "prolonged" closure of the strait would result in "an oil shock to $100+ per barrel," which it described as the "worst-case scenario" for global stock markets.
In addition to closing off the Strait of Hormuz, Iran has also been launching attacks on other nations' energy infrastructure.
According to a report from Bloomberg, Saudi Arabia’s largest oil refinery at Ras Tanura had to cease operations on Monday after being struck in a drone attack.
"An attack on major energy infrastructure is a nightmare scenario for global markets," noted Bloomberg, "with maritime traffic through the crucial Strait of Hormuz all but halting."
Olivia Langhoff, managing director at climate justice organization 350.org said that the global economic disruptions being caused by the Iran war shows the folly of continuing to rely on fossil fuels for energy needs.
"When global energy security can be upended by a single flashpoint, it shows how unstable and risky our dependence on oil and gas is," Langhoff said. "Renewable energy provides homegrown power that remains secure and affordable regardless of geopolitical shocks."
Langhoff's comments were echoed by Mads Christensen, executive director of Greenpeace International.
"As long as our world runs on oil and gas, our peace, security and our pockets will always be at the mercy of geopolitics," Christensen explained. "Increasing output may temporarily ease price pressures, but it does not address the structural vulnerability at the heart of this recurring crisis: the world’s continued dependence on fossil fuels."
The increase in gas prices comes at a time when US voters have been expressing widespread dissatisfaction with the economy under Trump, as polls show voters have been particularly anxious about the prices of groceries and utilities, among other essentials.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump's AI Data Center 'Ratepayer Protection Pledge' Derided as Unenforceable, 'Theatrical Stunt'
"These pledges are nothing more than desperate damage control for companies who only now realize that voters see them as the villains of this story," said one progressive advocate.
Feb 25, 2026
Climate action advocates and energy experts alike said Wednesday that President Donald Trump's "ratepayer protection pledge," introduced during his State of the Union address Tuesday night, will do little to alleviate rising household electricity costs brought on by the White House's mandated artificial intelligence expansion and the construction of thousands of hulking data centers across the country.
During his address, the president acknowledged that many Americans are "concerned that energy demands from AI data centers could unfairly drive up their electric utility bills," as they already are.
A CNBC analysis published last November found that in addition to average electricity prices rising by more than 6% across the country, according to the Energy Information Administration, households in states with high concentrations of data centers—including Virginia, Illinois, and Ohio—have seen their rates climb by as much as 16% in the past year.
The National Energy Assistance Directors Association also said last year that about 21 million American families were behind on their utility bills, with the average overdue amount about a third higher than it was in 2023.
Trump said Tuesday that he had negotiated a deal with major tech companies, ensuring they "have the obligation to provide for their own power needs and can build their own power plant as part of their factory, so that no one's prices will go up."
Energy industry experts told Politico on Wednesday that if enforced, the pledge—which Trump and the White House offered few details about—would still only partially address rising household costs associated with the AI expansion, which are being caused by the AI industry's rapidly growing demand for power lines, fuel, natural wind turbines, and other energy needs to run massive data centers.
The data centers require energy equivalent to that of 186 large nuclear power plants, according to the data firm Cleanview, and some of them have electricity needs that could power millions of homes.
But Ari Peskoe, director of the Electricity Law Initiative at the Harvard Law School Environmental and Energy Law Program, told Politico that in seeking lower costs for consumers, the White House is "putting this pledge on the wrong entities," as the details of how energy costs are distributed among millions of ratepayers are determined by utilities and state regulators—not tech giants like Microsoft, Google, and Anthropic, which lauded the president's announcement and announced their own pledges to ostensibly protect households from rising costs.
“Most of today’s cost pressure is coming from transmission, distribution, and system readiness, not energy supply,” Brandon Owens, a grid expert and founder of advisory platform AIxEnergy, told Politico ahead of the speech. “Those costs remain even if a data center self-supplies generation.”
With Trump fast-tracking AI data center expansion, utilities are spending far more than they have previously to set up electricity infrastructure. As Politico reported, PJM, which operates the grid for 13 states in the eastern US, has approved $11.8 billion for new transmission projects, with data centers being the largest recipients of new electricity. About 67 million people in the region covered by PJM will split the cost of the new projects, paying roughly double what they did for the company's last two transmission budgets.
Emily Peterson-Casson, policy director for the progressive advocacy group Demand Progress, said in a statement ahead of the State of the Union address that Trump's ratepayer protection pledge amounts "to worthless pinky swears from the multi-billion dollar corporations who are trying to force us to sacrifice our jobs, our children, our privacy, and our communities for an uncertain, AI-powered future that they can control and we won’t."
Rising electricity costs, she said, are just one of many concerns Americans have expressed about AI in numerous recent polls. One taken by YouGov last week found that nearly two-thirds of Americans believe the expansion of AI will reduce the number of jobs available to workers, and another by Bentley University and Gallup found 79% of respondents didn't trust companies to use AI responsibly.
"In addition to providing a dubious balm to skyrocketing electricity bills, these pledges do nothing to address out-of-control AI that caused outages at Amazon Web Services, creates sexualized images of minors, and has led teens in need of help to take their own lives," said Peterson-Casson. "These pledges are nothing more than desperate damage control for companies who only now realize that voters see them as the villains of this story.”
The climate action group 350.org also derided the ratepayer protection pledge as a "theatrical stunt with no enforceable mechanism," and said it would only worsen the ramp up of costly fossil fuel production that Trump has overseen by delaying the closure of expensive, polluting coal plants; blocking solar and wind projects; and approving more liquefied natural gas exports.
Trump said the his address that the US is experiencing a "Golden Age," noted 350.org executive director Anne Jellema, but that's true "only for fossil fuel companies that poured $96 million into the Trump administration."
"For the millions of Americans who cannot afford to pay their energy bills, it is like heading back to the dark ages. The Trump administration cannot claim to stand for American consumers while blocking progress in renewables, the cheapest form of energy available today. It cannot champion affordability while doubling down on a highly volatile gas market and driving conflicts that inevitably increase energy prices everywhere,” said Jellema. “Trump’s bravado cannot disguise the fundamental insecurity at the heart of his administration: Fossil fuels are increasingly unviable, and even businesses want to move on. Around the world, people are demanding and building a clean, affordable energy future, with or without the US government."
350.org also pointed to a recent poll by E3G, Beyond Fossil Fuels, and We Mean Business that showed 97% of nearly 1,500 business executives supported a transition away from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources, citing "competitive edge and long-term energy security."
Journalist Ray Locker added on social media, "The best way to protect ratepayers is to not shackle them to using fossil fuels to generate electricity."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular