Energy

The United States-Israeli war on Iran could leave consumers and businesses worldwide facing weeks or months of higher fuel prices even if the conflict, which is now in its eighth day, ends quickly, as suppliers grapple with damaged facilities, disrupted logistics, and elevated risks to shipping.

The outlook poses a global economic threat and a political vulnerability for US President Donald Trump leading into the midterm elections, with voters sensitive to energy bills and unfavourable to foreign entanglements.

Global oil prices have surged by more than 25 percent since the start of the war, driving up fuel prices for consumers worldwide.

The national average petrol price reached $3.41 per gallon ($0.9 a litre) on Saturday, according to the American Automobile Association (AAA), rising by $0.43 over the past week. Goldman Sachs warned oil prices could climb above $100 per barrel if shipping disruptions continue.

The US crude oil settled at just below $91 per barrel on Friday – its largest weekly gain on record in data dating back to 1983, indicating prices could continue to rise.

“The market is shifting from pricing pure geopolitical risk to grappling with tangible operational disruption, as refinery shutdowns and export constraints begin to impair crude processing and regional supply flows,” JP Morgan analysts said earlier this week, according to the Reuters news agency.

The conflict has already led to the suspension of about a fifth of global crude and natural gas supply, as Tehran targets ships in the vital Strait of Hormuz between its shores and Oman, and attacks energy infrastructure across the region.

A nearly complete shutdown of the strait means the region’s top oil producers – Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq and Kuwait – have had to suspend shipments of as much as 140 million barrels of oil – equal to about 1.4 days of global demand – to global refiners.

More than 80 percent of global trade moves by sea, according to the World Bank, meaning disruptions in the waterway could increase freight costs and delay deliveries of goods.

Storages in the Gulf filling

As a result, oil and gas storage at facilities in the Gulf is rapidly filling, forcing oilfields in Iraq and Kuwait to cut oil production, with the UAE likely to cut next, analysts, traders and sources told Reuters.

“At some point soon, everyone will also shut in if vessels do not come,” a ⁠source with a state oil company in the region, who asked not to be named, told Reuters.

Oilfields forced to shut in across the Middle East as a result of the shipping disruptions could take a while to return to normal, said Amir Zaman, head of the Americas commercial team at Rystad Energy.

“The conflict could be ended, but it could take days or weeks or months, depending on the types of fields, age of the field, the type of shut-in that they’ve had to do before you can get production back up to what it once was,” he said.

Iranian forces, meanwhile, are targeting regional energy infrastructure, including refineries and terminals, forcing them to shut down too, with some of those operations badly damaged by attacks and in need of repairs.

Qatar declared force majeure on its huge volumes of gas exports on Wednesday after Iranian drone attacks, and it may take at least a month to return to normal production ‌levels, sources told Reuters. Qatar supplies 20 percent of global liquefied natural gas (LNG).

Saudi Aramco’s mammoth Ras Tanura refinery and crude export terminal, meanwhile, has also closed due to attacks, with no details on damage.

Economists warn that the situation could create a combination of higher prices and slower growth.

March 6 (UPI) — The military escalation in the Middle East has shaken global energy markets and put Latin America on alert. The rise in oil prices opens an uncertain scenario if the conflict drags on, but it also generates expectations among the region’s exporting countries.

In that context, Argentina is following the crisis with caution, but also with interest. A more expensive barrel of oil can translate into higher export revenues, which is important for an economy that seeks to increase foreign currency inflows and strengthen its fiscal accounts.

Attention is focused on Vaca Muerta, one of the world’s largest reserves of unconventional oil and gas. The field is in the Neuquén Basin in Argentine Patagonia, and has become the country’s main energy bet.

From there, companies and analysts are closely watching every signal coming from the Middle East. In the sector, a cautious attitude prevails, summed up in the logic of wait and see.

According to data from consulting firm Gas Energy Latin America, the price of a barrel rose from about $64 to nearly $76 after the escalation of the conflict. The jump of around $12 benefits countries that sell crude abroad. Brent Crude was trading at about $93 on Friday as prices continue to rise largely because of oil tanker disruption in the Strait of Hormuz.

Álvaro Ríos Roca, former hydrocarbons minister of Bolivia and director and founder of the firm, told UPI that many Latin American countries depend on selling raw materials such as oil, minerals or agricultural products.

He said these countries earn money mainly from those resources because they do not produce or export much science or technology.

For that reason, when the price of oil rises, countries that produce it earn more money and the state also receives more taxes. That money helps them maintain their public finances, which are often weak.

In this scenario, the analyst identified three clear beneficiaries: Brazil, Guyana and Argentina. All three export more oil than they import, so the price increase is directly reflected in their revenues.

Even so, Ríos Roca believes Argentina has an advantage within the region.

“Argentina has the best prospects in oil and gas. Its exports will continue growing because the international market is demanding more energy,” he said.

Part of that expectation is explained by energy projects already underway. One of them is a mid-scale liquefied natural gas initiative led by Pan American Energy that aims to begin exports in the second half of 2027.

In parallel, another larger project promoted by YPF plans to start large-scale sales between 2030 and 2031. Both projects aim to turn Argentina into a significant exporter of natural gas in the global market.

The situation is different in Brazil. The country exports large volumes of oil, but does not have the same capacity to export gas. Much of the gas it produces is reinjected into oil fields to maintain the pressure that allows crude extraction to continue. Another portion is used in the domestic market.

Argentina, by contrast, bases its production on a technique known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. This involves injecting water, sand and chemicals at high pressure to fracture deep rock and release oil and gas trapped underground. It is the same system that fueled the U.S. energy boom over the past decade.

For now, the analyst believes oil prices will continue to be shaped by developments in the Middle East conflict.

“I don’t think it will reach $100. On the other hand, if the crisis eases in the coming weeks, the price could stabilize near $70 per barrel,” Ríos Roca estimated.

Daniel Dreizzen, former secretary of energy planning of Argentina, agrees that rising prices benefit all producing countries.

“Export revenues could increase by about 20%, in line with the rise in oil,” he told UPI.

Deizzen also pointed to a key factor in Argentina’s case: The country’s refining capacity is practically at its limit. That means any additional oil produced will be destined for international markets.

“Argentina cannot refine much more. So the extra crude is exported,” he said.

That scenario also benefits oil companies, which sell the same product at a higher price. If the domestic market follows the so-called “export parity,” internal prices tend to align with international ones. That improves profitability and may encourage new investments in the energy sector.

While some countries gain from the new scenario, others face a more complex outlook. That is the case of Mexico.

According to Ríos Roca, Mexican production will continue declining due to a lack of investment. State-owned Petróleos Mexicanos, or Pemex, carries heavy debt with contractors and has little room to finance new exploration projects.

“Mexico had very strong production for decades, but it has been in decline for years. Even Venezuela now has better prospects,” he said. In Venezuela’s case, some analysts see a possible return of international investment, which could reactivate part of its energy industry.

In contrast, several Latin American countries would be on the losing side if high prices persist. Net energy importers such as Central American countries, as well as Bolivia, Paraguay, Uruguay and Chile, will have to pay more for the fuel they consume. The same applies to many Caribbean economies, where energy costs have a direct impact on inflation and growth.

Beyond the current situation, analysts agree on a global trend: demand for natural gas will continue growing.

“There is no decarbonization of the planet without natural gas,” Ríos Roca said. In that context, liquefied natural gas trade is expanding rapidly and opening opportunities for new exporters.

Argentina seeks to position itself in that market through LNG projects being developed around Vaca Muerta. The same trend could also emerge in Venezuela, where initiatives to export gas in the coming years are under evaluation.

However, the immediate direction of the energy market largely depends on what happens in the Middle East. Both analysts concurred that the key factor is not only the duration of the conflict, but also the damage that oil and transport facilities may suffer.

“Productive infrastructure is being destroyed amid the attacks,” Ríos Roca said. If those facilities are seriously damaged, the effects on the market could last much longer than the conflict itself. In that case, the impact on oil prices would be deeper and more prolonged.

As the United States and Israel’s war on Iran unfolds over the coming days and weeks, the scale of the fallout for the global economy will be measured at the petrol pump.

The biggest threat the conflict poses to global economic health lies in rising energy prices.

Iran’s effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz and Iranian attacks on key energy production facilities in Qatar and Saudi Arabia have paralysed a substantial chunk of the world’s energy supply.

For a global economy already rattled by US President Donald Trump’s tariffs and what many see as his unravelling of the post-World War II order, much now depends on how long the disruption lasts.

A sustained surge in energy prices would drive up the cost of everyday goods.

Central banks would then likely raise borrowing costs to curb inflation, dampening consumer spending and dragging down economic growth.

“It’s really a question on how long the disruption of flows through the Strait of Hormuz lasts and whether there will be destruction of physical assets,” said Anne-Sophie Corbeau, an analyst at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy.

“For the moment, the market is pricing a short disruption and no destruction. But that may change in the future. We simply do not know right now how this whole crisis ends.”

While Iran’s threats to shipping have halted traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, the conduit for one-fifth of the world’s oil, crude prices have seen relatively modest gains so far.

Brent crude hovered about $84 a barrel on Friday morning, US time, up about 15 percent compared with pre-conflict prices.

That gain pales in comparison with past crises.

During the 1973-74 oil embargo led by OPEC’s Arab members, prices quadrupled in just three months.

Since then, the world’s dependence on Middle Eastern oil has declined substantially.

Today, the US is the biggest producer globally, producing some 13 million barrels a day, more than Iran, Iraq and the UAE combined, according to the US Energy Information Administration.

But if supply disruptions extend beyond a few weeks, oil prices could rise precipitously.

Storage capacity constraints

The seven oil-producing Gulf nations – Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE – are likely to run out of crude oil storage capacity in less than a month if the Strait of Hormuz remains closed, according to an analysis by JPMorgan Chase.

With storage capacity depleted, producers would be forced to cut production.

“While there will be some capacities elsewhere, and some options to use pipelines rather than shipping, it is incredibly difficult to replace the sheer volume as we are talking about an average of 20 million barrels of oil per day that usually cross the Strait of Hormuz,” said Sarah Schiffling, a supply chains expert at the Hanken School of Economics in Helsinki.

“This important maritime chokepoint provides very significant leverage in the global economy.”

This week, Goldman Sachs analysts estimated that global oil prices will likely hit $100 a barrel – a threshold not seen since Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine – if shipping through the waterway stays at the current reduced levels for five weeks.

In an interview published by The Financial Times on Friday, Qatar’s energy minister Saad al-Kaabi warned that producers in the region could halt production within days and that oil could soar as high as $150 a barrel.

Such increases would reverberate through the global economy.

The International Monetary Fund has estimated that global economic growth is reduced by 0.15 percent for every 10 percent rise in oil prices.

The pain would not be spread evenly.

About 80 percent of the oil shipped through the strait goes to Asia.

India, Japan, South Korea and the Philippines, which are all highly dependent on foreign energy imports, would be among the economies most vulnerable to spikes in the cost of necessities such as food and fuel.

“The effect would be felt in Asia and Europe in particular,” said Lutz Kilian, an economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.

“Some countries, such as China, have ample oil reserves to help weather a temporary outage, while others do not.”

Liquefied natural gas (LNG), which is also shipped through the strait and has fewer alternative suppliers outside the region than crude oil, has already seen much steeper price rises.

European prices of LNG surged by as much as 50 percent on Monday after state-run QatarEnergy, which ships about one-fifth of global supply through the waterway, announced a halt to production following drone attacks blamed on Iran.

“Gas will be more impacted because the market was still relatively tight and stocks are low in Europe as we are at the end of winter; also, there is no replacement for the LNG lost,” Corbeau said.

Prolonged uncertainty

With US President Donald Trump signalling that he intends to continue the assault on Iran for at least several more weeks, the extent to which Tehran is willing – or able – to keep the strait closed will be critical to the global economy.

At least nine commercial vessels have been targeted in attacks in or near the strait since the start of the conflict, prompting multiple insurance firms to cancel coverage for vessels in the Gulf.

While traffic through the strait has not halted, it is down about 90 percent compared with normal levels, according to ship tracker MarineTraffic.

“The uncertainty itself is probably the most dangerous part. Supply chains hate uncertainty,” Schiffling said.

“It is possible to plan for almost anything, but not knowing what will happen makes it really challenging to adapt operations.”

On Wednesday, Trump said he had ordered the US International Development Finance Corporation to start insuring shipping lines in the region in order to keep trade flowing.

Trump also said the US Navy could begin escorting vessels through the strait if necessary.

“As long as Israel and the US are able to suppress Iranian drone and missile attacks in the strait to the point that the bulk of the oil tankers gets through, and as long as the United States provides back-up insurance for shippers and their cargo, the global economy may make it through this war without a recession,” Kilian said.

“On the other hand, if there is a severe disruption of oil traffic, the economic costs will grow the longer the disruption lasts.”

March 4 (UPI) — Venezuela state oil company Petróleos de Venezuela S.A. announced signing new contracts to supply crude oil and refined products for the U.S. market.

The agreements were signed with several international trading companies to ensure a stable flow of energy to refineries along the U.S. Gulf Coast, according to a statement from the company.

Although PDVSA did not disclose the names of the parties, the contracts add to existing operations involving major companies such as Chevron, which plans to increase exports to about 300,000 barrels per day this month.

PDVSA said the agreements maintain a “historic commercial relationship” with the United States and reaffirm the company’s “commitment to the stability of the international energy market.”.

The newly signed contracts mark the official return of Venezuelan crude to U.S. refineries after the United States captured former President Nicolás Maduro on Jan. 3.

The agreements were facilitated after the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control issued licenses, signaling significant changes in Washington’s licensing policy this year.

The authorizations allow U.S. entities to participate in lifting, transporting, storing and refining Venezuelan oil. The current regulatory framework favors companies from the United States and Western countries, while maintaining strict restrictions on entities from countries such as China, Russia and Iran.

In addition to Chevron, four other oil companies — BP, Eni, Shell and Repsol — have received authorization to resume operations and sign investment agreements in Venezuela.

In its statement, PDVSA reiterated the Venezuelan government’s call for the removal of sanctions on the country’s energy industry.

“The Venezuelan nation reiterates the need for a hydrocarbon industry free of sanctions in order to boost national production and strengthen international trade,” the company said.

Through these contracts, PDVSA aims to restore its position as a strategic supplier in a global market that continues to demand heavy crude, while Washington seeks to use Venezuelan oil to stabilize domestic fuel prices and reduce dependence on other suppliers.

During his State of the Union address, President Donald Trump highlighted the arrival of 80 million barrels of Venezuelan crude, describing Venezuela as a “new friend and partner” in energy cooperation.

U.S. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum visited Venezuela on Wednesday, marking a new step in the energy and diplomatic agenda between Washington and Caracas.

Since January, Burgum has led discussions with executives from Chevron, ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips aimed at granting general licenses that would allow private operations in the country, local outlet Efecto Cocuyo reported.

The plan aligns with Trump’s “Energy Dominance” policy, a central strategy of the administration designed to position the United States as a global energy superpower.

Under the approach, U.S. companies would provide private capital without federal subsidies, while the government would guarantee security and stability for investments.

US Navy ‘will begin escorting’ oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic waterway, if necessary, US President Trump says.

President Donald Trump has announced that the United States government will offer insurance to ships in the Gulf after Iran largely succeeded in shutting down the Strait of Hormuz, sending oil prices soaring.

The US president added that the US military will accompany ships through Hormuz if necessary.

“Effective IMMEDIATELY, I have ordered the United States Development Finance Corporation (DFC) to provide, at a very reasonable price, political risk insurance and guarantees for the Financial Security of ALL Maritime Trade, especially Energy, traveling through the Gulf,” Trump wrote in a social media post on Tuesday.

DFC is the US government’s development finance agency. Its mission is to “advance US foreign policy and strengthen national security by mobilising private capital” across the world.

Trump added that the discounted risk insurance will be available for all shipping lanes.

“If necessary, the United States Navy will begin escorting tankers through the Strait of Hormuz, as soon as possible,” he wrote.

“No matter what, the United States will ensure the FREE FLOW of ENERGY to the WORLD.”

The Strait of Hormuz is a vital trade artery that connects the Gulf to the Indian Ocean. Around 20 percent of the world’s oil flows through it.

The price of oil has shot up by more than 15 percent since the US and Israel launched strikes on Tehran that started a war with Iran three days ago.

Costs are expected to rise even higher as oil supplies decrease as a result of Iran’s closure of the strait, as well as attacks on energy instalments in the Gulf.

Some insurance companies were reported to have cut back coverage amid the Iranian attacks.

Although the US is largely self-sufficient with its oil production, an uptick in prices globally could hike the cost for Americans at the gas or petrol pump, and could boost inflation.

The average price of one gallon of gas (3.8 liter) in the US jumped more than 11 cents overnight to $3.11 on Tuesday, according to the AAA Gas Prices website.

Earlier on Tuesday, Trump stressed that the attack on Iran “had to happen” despite its human cost and the strain it is putting on the energy market.

“We have a little high oil prices for a little while, but as soon as this ends, those prices are going to drop – I believe – lower than even before,” he told reporters.

Opinion polls show that the attack on Iran is unpopular among the US public. Increasing economic costs from the war could further diminish support for the war, months ahead of the US midterm elecitons.

March 3 (UPI) — Cuba began March facing a historic energy crisis, with an electricity deficit left 64% of the island in the dark due to fuel shortages and technical failures at its thermoelectric plants.

An electricity deficit is the condition in which demand exceeds the amount of electricity available to supply it. The grid simply doesn’t have enough generation at that moment to meet what homes, businesses and infrastructure are trying to draw.

Cuba’s National Electric System reported a deficit exceeding 2,000 megawatts, resulting in rolling outages lasting up to 20 hours a day, according to figures published on X by the state-run Electric Union, known by its Spanish acronym UNE.

For Tuesday’s peak demand period, UNE forecast maximum consumption of 3,150 megawatts, while available generation capacity was expected to reach only about 1,890 megawatts. The resulting shortfall has forced authorities to disconnect circuits across the country to prevent a total and uncontrolled collapse of the grid.

Eight of Cuba’s 16 thermoelectric plants are offline due to breakdowns and fuel shortages, according to reports. The plants, which process domestically produced and imported crude oil, operate within a system widely considered obsolete and underfunded.

Cuban authorities have blamed U.S. sanctions for worsening the crisis. Government officials have denounced what they call an “energy asphyxiation” by Washington, accusing the United States of restricting oil shipments and limiting access to fuel supplies from abroad.

“The electrical system begins 2026 in worse conditions than it had at the same date in 2025. Thermal plants enter and leave service, oil is scarce and going forward there will barely be diesel and fuel oil for distributed generation,” José Luis Reyes, an analyst specializing in Cuba’s power system, told Diario de Cuba.

“The fragile web of energy production and distribution depends on all kinds of unpredictable factors. Blackouts are guaranteed,” he said.

Independent experts estimate that restoring and modernizing Cuba’s electrical grid would require between $8 billion and $10 billion — a figure seen as out of reach for an economy that has contracted by more than 15% since 2020.

Amid the worsening shortages, Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel on Tuesday called for “urgent transformations” to the island’s economic and social model.

During a meeting of the Council of Ministers, Díaz-Canel said the proposed changes include expanding autonomy for state enterprises and municipalities, resizing the state apparatus and boosting domestic food production.

He also urged progress in shifting the country’s energy matrix, promoting exports, easing rules for foreign direct investment and encouraging partnerships between the state and private sectors, including ventures with Cubans living abroad, according to state media outlet Tribuna de La Habana.

The president said the measures must contribute to “macroeconomic stabilization,” increase hard currency revenues and strengthen domestic production, particularly food.

The call for reforms comes amid prolonged economic contraction, high inflation and deteriorating public services, as well as continued political pressure from President Donald Trump, who has advocated for political change on the island.

Trump on Friday raised the possibility of a “friendly takeover” of Cuba, saying the island’s government has been in talks with his administration about the country’s future.

“They are going through major problems and we could very well do something good, I think, something very positive for the people who were forced out, or worse, from Cuba and who live here,” he told reporters at the White House, though he did not specify any potential action against the country.

March 3 (UPI) — The price of Brent crude oil rose to $80 a barrel and the price of natural gas jumped 30% to $1.97 per therm on Tuesday after Iran effectively shut the key Strait of Hormuz shipping lane, with an official threatening its forces would “set fire to anyone who tries to pass.”

Prices continued their upward trajectory from Monday when markets reopened following the military strikes over the weekend on Iran by the United States and Israel and Tehran’s strikes on its oil and gas producing neighbors across the Gulf.

Concerns over supply disruptions are growing as the conflict widens across the region with Iranian strikes going beyond military bases used to launch attacks on Iran to target oil and gas production facilities, as well as Amazon data centers in the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain.

On Monday, Qatar Energy, one of the world’s largest exporters of liquefied natural gas, shut down production following “military attacks” on its Ras Laffan plant and Saudi Arabia’s state-run Aramco shuttered its giant Ras Tanura refinery near the port city of Dammam after it was set ablaze in a drone strike.

Analysts warned the oil price could surpass $100 a barrel if the disruption continued for very long — translating to a 25-cent-a-gallon rise in U.S. petrol prices.

The risk to maritime traffic was also pushing up the cost of moving oil from the Gulf to Europe and Asia and around the world with the leasing cost of a tanker to ship Middle East to China doubling to $400,000 a day on Monday.

The president of logistics technology platform Flexport, Sanne Manders, told the BBC that while Iran had not physically blockaded the strait, through which 20% of the world’s oil and gas transits, it was closed as far as global shipping was concerned.

Manders said it was partly that shipping lines were simply unwilling to expose their vessels, cargo and crews to potential jeopardy and partly insurance companies “not being willing to insure this risk anymore.”

He warned that expectation of higher fuel costs would feed through to movement of all goods by sea with carriers hiking rates “for any shipping in the world.”

That all fed into investor fears over the consequences for inflation and interest rates, sending global stock markets tumbling overnight, led by Japan’s Nikkei 225 Index, which ended Tuesday down more than 3%.

In mid-morning trade London’s FTSE 100 was down 2.8 %, Germany’s blue-chip DAX was trading 4% lower, down more than a thousand points, and the CAC 40 in Paris was off by 3.2%.

The pan-European Stoxx 600 Index continued its retreat, with across-the-board falls in all sectors pulling it 2.9% lower, while the blue-chip Euro Stoxx 50 was even lower, down 3.1%.

However, hotels, airlines and utilities took the biggest hits while energy firms and defense contractors performed better.

Ahead of the opening of U.S. markets, S&P 500 futures fell by 1.8%, Nasdaq 100 futures were down 2.3% and Dow Jones Industrial Average-linked futures moved lower by around 1.7%, or 821 points.

Defense and energy stocks rose on Monday led by Northrop Grumman, up 6%, and Palantir, up 5.8%, which together with a surge in NVIDIA’s share price, helped the overall market erase big losses early on to end the day in the black.

U.S. President Donald Trump was due to discuss the economic and cost-of-living impacts with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Energy Secretary Chris Wright on Tuesday while Secretary of State Marco Rubio trailed administration plans to cope with energy price spikes.

“We knew that going in would be a factor. Starting tomorrow you will see us rolling out those phases to try to mitigate against that,” said Rubio.

“This is the very lifeblood of the Qatari economy.” Qatar has announced it is halting liquid natural gas (LNG) production because of Iranian attacks on key facilities. Al Jazeera’s Zein Basravi explains the impact in Doha.

Qatar’s state-run energy firm says it has halted liquefied natural gas production after Iranian attacks, sending gas prices soaring in Europe, as Saudi Arabia announced it was temporarily shutting down some units of the Ras Tanura oil refinery located near the country’s eastern region after a fire broke out following a drone attack.

“Due to military attacks on QatarEnergy’s operating facilities in Ras Laffan Industrial City and Mesaieed Industrial City in the State of Qatar, QatarEnergy has ceased production of liquefied natural gas (LNG) and associated products,” the world’s largest LNG producer said in a statement on Monday.

Shortly after the announcement, natural gas prices in Europe soared by almost 50 percent.

Earlier, Qatar’s Defence Ministry said the country was attacked by two drones launched from Iran. “One drone targeted a water tank belonging to a power plant in Mesaieed, and the other targeted an energy facility in Ras Laffan Industrial City, belonging to QatarEnergy, without reporting any human casualties,” it said in a statement.

“All damages and losses resulting from the attack will be assessed by the relevant authorities, and an official statement will be issued later,” it added.

The Saudi Ministry of Defence, in reports carried by the state-run Saudi Press Agency (SPA), said two drones had “attempted to attack” the Ras Tanura refinery on Monday morning, and that a “small” fire had broken out after they were intercepted.

Footage verified by Al Jazeera showed plumes of smoke rising from the oil facility, located on Saudi Arabia’s Gulf coast. The ministry said the refinery “sustained limited damage”, but there were no casualties.

Ras Tanura oil refinery, one of the world’s largest oil processing facilities located near the eastern city of Dammam, has a capacity of 550,000 barrels per day. The facility is home to one of the largest refineries in the Middle East and is considered a cornerstone of the kingdom’s energy sector.

The attacks come as oil tankers have been piling up on either side of the Strait of Hormuz, through which about a fifth of the world’s seaborne oil and the bulk of Qatari gas flows.

The maritime disruptions and fears of a prolonged conflict have led to a sharp rise in global oil prices, which will have a significant impact on the global economy.

Iran has been launching retaliatory strikes, mainly targeting Israel and military facilities of the United States across the Middle East, after the US and Israel launched massive air strikes on the country.

In a statement published by SPA, the Saudi Ministry of Energy said some operations had been halted as a “precautionary measure” and that it did not foresee “any impact on the supply of petroleum products to local markets”.

Saudi Arabia had earlier said it would “take all necessary measures to defend its security and protect its territory, citizens, and residents, including the option of responding to the aggression” after Iran targeted the capital Riyadh and the country’s eastern region with strikes over the weekend.

The US, Bahrain, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates issued a joint statement on Sunday condemning Iranian attacks across the region and affirming their right to self-defence.

Rob Geist Pinfold, lecturer in defence studies at King’s College London, told Al Jazeera that Iran “knows exactly what it’s doing” by attacking the Gulf countries.

“These countries have less of an appetite for a fight because, at the end of the day, this is not their war. So, Iran is banking that they will want a ceasefire as soon as possible, that they will be pressuring the Trump administration. But we have no signs of that whatsoever so far,” he said.

Pinfold added that there seems to be a “show of force” and “of unity” coming from the Gulf states, at least rhetorically.

“They’re trying to get the message across that they are one and that they are united and that they are resilient,” Pinfold said. “But under the surface, there are profound disagreements here about how to engage with Iran and whether to engage with Iran at all.”

Published on
02/03/2026 – 6:42 GMT+1

Oil prices climbed on Monday morning as investors assessed the economic impact of US and Israeli attacks on Iran, which triggered swift retaliation from Tehran targeting assets in multiple Middle Eastern countries.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

In early trade, the price of a barrel of US benchmark crude initially surged by about 8%. It later traded 5.9% higher at $71.00 per barrel. Brent crude rose 6.2% to $77.38 per barrel.

Traders were betting that oil supplies from Iran and elsewhere in the Middle East could slow or grind to a halt. Attacks across the region, including on two vessels travelling through the Strait of Hormuz — the narrow mouth of the Persian Gulf — have restricted countries’ ability to export oil to the rest of the world.

“Roughly one-fifth of global oil and LNG (liquefied natural gas) flows squeeze through the Strait of Hormuz. This is not an obscure canal. It is the aorta of the global energy system,” Stephen Innes of SPI Asset Management said in a commentary note.

A prolonged war would likely result in higher prices for other fuels and petrol, and could ripple through the global economy, adding to overall production costs.

Likewise, prolonged interruptions to oil flows through the Middle East would have “huge implications for oil and LNG and every market everywhere if it occurs. Energy is an input to all production,” RaboResearch Global Economics & Markets said in a report.

Iran exports roughly 1.6 million barrels of oil a day, mostly to China. Beijing may need to look elsewhere for supply if Iran’s exports are disrupted — another factor that could push energy prices higher.

However, China has ample oil reserves of up to 1.5 billion barrels and could offset a decline in Iranian oil by increasing imports from Russia, said Michael Langham of Aberdeen Investments.

The attacks had been anticipated, following a significant build-up of US forces in the Middle East, so traders had already adjusted their positions to account for that risk.

In other early trading on Monday, the price of gold — usually viewed as a safe haven in times of uncertainty — rose 2.4% to about $5,371 per ounce.

Elsewhere, futures for the S&P 500 and the Dow Jones Industrial Average were down about 0.8% by mid-morning in Bangkok.

Asian shares also opened lower. Japan’s Nikkei 225 initially fell more than 2%. In Hong Kong, the Hang Seng lost 1.6% to 26,215.91, while the Shanghai Composite was flat at 4,163.01.

Taiwan’s benchmark index fell 0.6% and Singapore’s dropped 1.9%. In Bangkok, the SET declined 2.1%, while Australia’s S&P/ASX 200 shed 0.3% to 9,173.50.

SEOUL, Feb. 27 (UPI) — OCI Energy, a U.S. affiliate of South Korea’s OCI Holdings, said its joint venture with Arava Power has secured nearly $400 million for Project SunRoper, a 347-megawatt solar project in Wharton County, Texas.

OCI Energy joined with Israel’s Arava Power for the project. As sole lead arranger, ING Capital will underwrite the financing package, which includes a mix of loans and letters of credit.

The total investment is estimated to be about $394 million, according to OCI Energy. The construction financing is backed by a 20-year power purchase agreement with a Fortune 100 company, whose identity OCI Energy did not disclose.

Situated some 60 miles southwest of Houston, Project SunRoper is expected to begin commercial operation in the third quarter of next year, supporting grid reliability and emissions reduction.

“The close of construction financing for Project SunRoper represents an important milestone for OCI Energy and our partners,” OCI Energy CEO Sabah Bayatli said in a statement.

“This transaction reflects our continued commitment to delivering high-quality, utility-scale solar projects that strengthen grid reliability and provide affordable energy infrastructure,” he said.

ING Capital Managing Director Sven Wellock said the new initiative would deliver reliable, affordable clean energy for years to come.

“This project exemplifies the high-quality renewable infrastructure we seek to finance — a strong sponsor partnership, a long-term contracted revenue profile and a well-located asset in one of the most dynamic power markets in the United States,” he said.

This is not the first time that OCI Energy has collaborated with ING. They previously worked together on financing for the Alamo City Battery Energy Storage System project in Texas.

It started as a gift for their daughter’s 9th birthday. Jennifer and Michael Reese wanted to surprise their gymnast-in-training with a trip to Westwood to see the UCLA women’s gymnastics team.

From that moment on, they became fans. They were captivated by the choreography on the floor and the balance on the beam, by the work each gymnast puts into their routine and by the thrills of the best show in Los Angeles.

Ten years later, while their daughter cheers from a distance at Oregon State, the couple remain loyal to the Bruins and are a staple of Section 103 at Pauley Pavilion as season-ticket holders. And their devotion isn’t grounded in Southern California. When the team travels for meets away from home, the Reeses often follow to cheer on the Bruins.

“They just welcomed us with open arms just as if we were a part of them just because we became so faithful and true fans,” Jennifer said. “They called us their super fans.”

Michael and Jennifer Reese, from Victorville, join parents and friends of the gymnastics team at a rally before the Bruins’ meet against Michigan at Pauley Pavilion on Feb. 14.

(Genaro Molina/Los Angeles Times)

That sense of belonging has been their favorite part of supporting UCLA women’s gymnastics. The Bruin Bubble — an affectionate term for the close-knit, insulated community, culture and social scene among UCLA students, alumni and sports fans — added them to their email chains, inviting them to banquets and fundraisers.

“We just love it,” Jennifer said.

With every pike in midair, every perfect landing, every Yurchenko off the vault, the Reeses’ connection with each gymnast grows and their commitment to the team becomes deeper.

Watching it from the comfort of their Victorville home is an option, but the energy in Pauley is unmatched, Michael said.

“You have tons of people doing the same thing and being on the same accord for that one athlete,” he said. “Whether it’s Jordan [Chiles] or whether it’s freshman Ashlee Sullivan or whether it’s, back in the day, Kyla Ross, it’s just amazing to feel that thrill there.”

But if they must watch from their living room, they make sure to bring the same energy as if they were watching in person.

UCLA super fan Michael Reese gives high-fives to members of the Bruins gymnastics team at a send-off before a meet against Michigan at Pauley Pavilion on Feb. 14.

(Genaro Molina/Los Angeles Times)

“We’re hopping and hollering in our living rooms,” Michael said, “but it’s nothing like being in person.”

Before every meet, the Bruins and their family members convene outside the arena a few hours early for a send-off. Think of it as a pep rally where family members hype the gymnasts. They cheer as the team makes its way to the arena.

“It lets us go into competition with a lot of energy,” coach Janelle McDonald said.

In 2018, during a meet in Michigan, their Bruins’ previous coach, Valorie Kondos Field, started chanting “We’re ready,” which Michael gravitated toward. As a former military man, he picked up the cadence of the cheer and started to hype the team with the chant. Now, anytime he’s available, he makes sure to be there and send off his favorite team.

Throughout the years, he’s added his own flavor to it by adding the acronym W.I.N. to the end of the rallying cry — Work, Intensity and Never quit.

“We just have fun with it, whatever pops at the time,” he said.

When the Bruin Bubble gets together to send off the team, whether it’s with the UCLA eight-clap, silly wigs or pom-poms, the energy passed sets the gymnasts up to be the best they can be, junior Katelyn Rosen said.

“Gymnastics is really hard to make it go perfect every single time,” she said. “So if you can kind of get similar pieces of each day to anchor to, to make you feel calm, to remind yourself that it’s still you, and you’re still in your own body, and you still have control over it, is something really helpful.”

Having familiar faces of friends and family in the crowd, even when they are competing away from Pauley Pavilion, means a lot to the gymnasts, McDonald said. Fans like Jennifer and “Big Mike,” as the team calls him, are part of the consistency they have throughout the season.

With the help of the Reeses, UCLA is breaking records. So far, the Bruins have been a part of four meets with record attendances in Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota and Washington. Their Feb. 22 meet at Illinois had to be moved to State Farm Center to accommodate the larger crowd.

Bruins fans don’t see the travel as a sacrifice.

It’s “the thrill of your life,” Jennifer Reese said.

And while grid physics remains the starting point, the innovations shaping the 2030 landscape extend far beyond conductors and transmission lines. The energy transition of the early 2020s was framed as a moral and political imperative. But from 2026 onward, the debate shifts decisively. The center of gravity moves from ideological declarations to hard technical realities, material constraints, and industrial competitiveness. The path to 2030 is no longer about announcing targets; it is about solving the physical, economic, and infrastructural parameters that will determine whether decarbonization can advance without destabilizing grids or bankrupting entire sectors.

EU deserves a clear reminder. LNG corridors from the Atlantic and the Mediterranean are helpful, but they cannot resolve Europe’s energy challenges. They remain complementary measures. They do not correct the structural difficulties created over decades. A persistent green ideological rigidity limited the role of firm capacity. Domestic hydrocarbon production was phased out. Permitting essential infrastructure slowed significantly. These choices had predictable effects. They overlooked grid physics, materials, storage, reliability, and industrial policy. They weakened the system Europe now relies on. Three forces now shape the landscape. Grids must remain stable under very high RES penetration. Critical materials, from copper and aluminum to gallium, are becoming scarce and expensive. Existing fossil infrastructure must be used strategically to avoid premature asset stranding. Innovation is adjusting to these realities. New conductors, new storage solutions, new fuels, and updated regulatory frameworks are emerging because the previous assumptions no longer hold.

Materials and Conductors: The Silent Revolution in Grid Reinforcement

The rapid expansion of data centers and large RES clusters has exposed the limits of traditional copper‑based infrastructure. Prices, weight, and installation requirements make the full network reconstruction prohibitive. Aluminum, meanwhile, cannot handle the required current densities. This is where copper‑clad aluminum (CCA) becomes critical: it offers higher conductivity than aluminum, lower cost and weight than copper, and reduced thermal load in dense electrical environments. By 2030, CCA will be widely deployed in data centers, EV fast‑charging networks, and medium‑voltage grids across Europe and North America. Instead of rebuilding entire networks, operators turn to targeted CCA upgrades to ease congestion and unlock dormant capacity. Yet another constraint emerges: transformer shortages and slow permitting, now as acute as the bottlenecks facing RES deployment.

Hydrogen and Methane Pyrolysis: The End of the Universal Green Solution

The myth of the early transition collapses in the 2020s. Hydrogen is no longer viewed as a universal green solution. Life‑cycle analyses show that green hydrogen is only as clean as the electricity feeding the electrolyzers, while methane leakage undermines the value of blue hydrogen. This opens the door to methane pyrolysis, which produces hydrogen and solid carbon with lower emissions, provided methane leakage is tightly controlled. Yet its economic viability depends on stable, low‑cost methane supply. The shift from blue to pyrolytic hydrogen changes the chemical approach, and the geopolitics. Pyrolysis does not free Europe from geopolitical exposure because the continent still depends on external methane suppliers, such the US, Qatar, Algeria, East Med producers, and African exporters. Europe’s pursuit of low‑carbon hydrogen therefore intersects with the strategic interests of actors whose priorities do not always align with EU climate policy.

Hard Carbon and Sodium‑Ion Batteries: The New Geopolitics of Storage

As hydrogen is reconsidered, another development is quietly reshaping the storage landscape. Research from 2024–2025 shows significant advances in sodium‑ion batteries (SIBs). They use hard‑carbon anodes and improved electrolytes that extend performance, safety, and lifespan. Their cost structure is attractive, and their reliance on abundant materials makes them resilient to supply‑chain shocks. They remain short‑duration technologies, typically up to 10 hours, but they offer a robust alternative for stationary applications where energy density is less critical. Lithium keeps its lead in mobility and high‑power applications, yet it gradually loses its monopoly in grid storage.

The absence of lithium, cobalt, and nickel drastically reduces dependence on unstable or concentrated supply chains. Sodium, abundant and low‑cost, makes SIBs ideal for stationary applications. By 2030, SIBs will be deployed across industrial sites, distribution grids, substations, and hybrid long‑duration systems, often combined with hydrogen or thermal storage. China leads production, while Europe attempts to build its own supply chain to reduce import dependence. Sodium‑ion technology is emerging as a strategic counterweight to China’s dominance in lithium refining and cathode materials. By shifting to sodium, a resource with no geopolitical constraints, Europe and India seek to dilute China’s leverage over global battery supply chains. Storage is no longer just a technical field; it is a geopolitical chessboard.

Long Duration Storage Beyond Lithium

Lithium batteries remain essential for short‑duration storage, but the 2030 system increasingly depends on Long Duration Energy Storage (LDES). The cause is simple: high RES penetration creates multi‑day and multi‑week imbalances that no battery chemistry can economically cover. Hydrogen becomes the backbone of these long‑duration needs, not because of efficiency, but because it provides security of supply and seasonal flexibility. In shipping, e‑methanol emerges as the most practical ambient‑temperature hydrogen carrier, balancing energy density, safety, and infrastructure readiness.

The LDES ecosystem expands rapidly. Iron‑air and zinc‑air systems offer multi‑day discharge at low cost. Flow batteries provide long cycle life and deep‑discharge flexibility. Thermal storage and mechanical systems add further diversity. Together, these technologies form a portfolio that complements lithium and sodium‑ion, each serving a different segment of the duration curve.

Hydrogen‑Ready Infrastructure and the Management of Stranded Assets

This shift toward hydrogen‑compatible combined‑cycle gas turbines (CCGTs) is not ideological but economic. It allows investors to continue amortizing fossil infrastructure while gradually reducing emissions. Technical challenges such as, flame speed (much higher than natural gas), NOₓ formation, and material stress, are significant. By 2030 many such units will operate with 20–30% hydrogen blends. They will not eliminate emissions but provide a transition bridge and prevent massive asset write‑offs while stabilizing the grids during low‑RES periods. In fact, dispatchable capacity is becoming a strategic asset in a world where energy security is increasingly weaponized. From Russia’s pipeline leverage to Middle Eastern LNG politics, the vulnerabilities are unmistakable. In this environment, hydrogen‑ready CCGTs are not merely engineering choices; they function as geopolitical insurance policies.

SMRs and the Return of Firm Power

Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) will move from concept to implementation in the late 2030s. Their value lies not only in nuclear physics but in industrial standardization, factory manufacturing, harmonized licensing, and integration into industrial heat networks. By 2030, the first SMRs will operate as firm‑power anchors for mining regions, isolated grids such as data centers, and large industrial sites. In a world of tightening supply chains and rising geopolitical competition, their role becomes both technological and strategic.

CBAM and the New Era of Tariff Diplomacy

As the transition moves from engineering constraints to system‑wide restructuring, the pressures are no longer purely technical. Materials, grids, storage, and firm capacity define what is physically possible and the global environment in which these technologies operate is increasingly shaped by trade policy, industrial strategy, and geopolitical competition. This is where the next layer of the transition emerges: the regulatory and commercial instruments. They determine who captures value, who bears cost, and how global supply chains realign. Among these instruments, none is more consequential than the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism. This mechanism does not offer technical solutions, it turns decarbonization from a voluntary commitment to a tool of trade. Exporters of steel, aluminum, cement, fertilizers, and electricity must prove low carbon intensity or pay tariffs that erase their competitiveness. For the European Union, CBAM is expected to accelerate investment in low‑carbon processes, often supported by IPCEI programs. Yet the counter‑argument gains weight: CBAM relies on ideological rather than technocratic CO₂ accounting. It ignores life‑cycle emissions, methane leakage outside the EU, the energy intensity of European grids, and emissions embedded in imports. Instead of reducing global emissions, it risks creating carbon leakage under another name.

CBAM sits at the intersection of great‑power competition and the emerging fracture lines of the global economy. For the United States, it is both challenge and opportunity. First, a challenge because European border carbon pricing can collide with U.S. industrial and trade interests. Secondly, an opportunity because, together with the Inflation Reduction Act, it can support a transatlantic low‑carbon industrial block capable of setting de facto global standards. Whether Washington and Brussels coordinate or drift into regulatory rivalry will shape investment flows for decades.

For China, CBAM is more than a tariff, it signals that the EU is prepared to weaponize market access in the name of climate policy. Beijing reads it alongside export controls on critical technologies and restrictions on Chinese clean tech in Europe. In response, China accelerates its own standards, consolidates its dominance in batteries, solar and critical materials, and secures long‑term offtake agreements with countries that feel penalized by European rules. CBAM thus reinforces Beijing’s narrative of Western “green protectionism” aimed at containing China’s industrial rise.

The BRICS expansion adds another layer. Many BRICS and “BRICS‑plus” countries, from India and Brazil to Gulf and African states, view CBAM as a unilateral imposition of European norms on their development paths. As they deepen South‑South cooperation, build alternative financial mechanisms, and explore their own carbon accounting systems, CBAM risks catalyzing parallel regulatory ecosystems: one centered on the EU, another around a looser BRICS‑led bloc rejecting externally imposed climate conditionality.

For much of the Global South, CBAM reinforces a long‑standing grievance: that advanced economies, having built their prosperity on cheap fossil energy, now deploy climate policy in ways that restrict others’ industrial development. Many fear it will confine them to raw‑material roles while eroding the competitiveness of their energy‑intensive sectors. This perception fuels diplomatic pushback, draws some countries closer to China or BRICS frameworks, and complicates Europe’s attempt to position itself as a partner in a “just transition. In this sense, CBAM is more than a tool of market protection or climate ambition. It is a lever that can either place Europe at the center of a rules‑based low‑carbon trade system or accelerate the fragmentation of the global economy into competing regulatory and geopolitical blocks.

Conclusion

The energy transition is not a single technological narrative. Some innovations concern grid physics, conductivity, stability, and thermal management; others shape the energy mix, storage, and industrial architecture of the coming decade. The energy system of 2030 will not be shaped by slogans but by physics, materials, and economics. The question is whether Europe will adapt in time, or whether reality will violently adjust its ambitions.

The Ecuadorian government has declared that it will significantly raise tariffs on imports from Colombia, increasing the rate from 30 percent to 50 percent starting March 1.

The decision, announced on Thursday, represents a major escalation in the intensifying trade and security dispute between the two neighbouring Andean countries.

Ecuador’s right-wing president, Daniel Noboa, has been pressuring his left-wing counterpart in Colombia, Gustavo Petro, to crack down on border security.

Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, Ecuador has seen a surge in violence linked to the expansion of organised crime in the country.

Noboa, echoing President Donald Trump in the United States, has blamed Petro for not acting aggressively enough to combat narcotics trafficking. Colombia has, for many years, been the world’s largest source of cocaine.

And like Trump, Noboa has increasingly relied on tariffs against Colombia to force adherence to Ecuador’s national security strategy.

His government has accused Petro’s of failing to cooperate with border security measures. The two countries both sit on the Pacific coast, and they share a land border that stretches roughly 586 kilometres, or 364 miles.

Questions about electricity

Thursday’s announcement follows an initial 30 percent tariff imposed by Quito in early February.

Ecuadorian officials have also justified the protectionist measures by citing a growing trade deficit.

According to the Observatory of Economic Complexity, a data analysis firm, nearly 4 percent of Colombian exports go to Ecuador, worth roughly $2.13bn. Ecuador imports significant quantities of medicines and pesticides from Colombia.

Fewer exports go from Ecuador to Colombia, though. Roughly 2.3 percent of Ecuador’s exports abroad go across the shared border, amounting to a value of $863m.

Ecuador’s trade deficit with Colombia sits at roughly $1.03bn through 2025, according to government data, excluding oil.

But in spite of the anticipated tariff hike, it is unclear whether Ecuador will apply the new tariffs to Colombian electricity — a critical resource for the country.

In a retaliatory move following the initial tariffs, Colombia suspended all energy sales to its neighbour.

That suspension risks fuelling tensions in Ecuador against Noboa’s government. Recent droughts have created disruptions to Ecuador’s hydroelectric dams, which provide nearly 70 percent of the country’s power.

Those disruptions have caused widespread power outages in recent years, which in turn have prompted antigovernment protests. In the past, Noboa has responded by buying electricity from Colombia.

Pipeline standoff

The transportation of fossil fuels has also become a flashpoint between Ecuador and Colombia in the aftermath of February’s tariffs.

Noboa’s government has hiked fees for Colombian crude delivered through the Trans-Ecuadorian System Oil Pipeline (SOTE) by 900 percent.

That raises the cost to approximately $30 per barrel. Colombia has responded by halting all oil shipments through the line.

Despite high-level diplomatic efforts, tensions between the neighbouring countries remain at an impasse.

Officials representing foreign policy and security held a meeting this month in Ecuador, but the gathering concluded without a breakthrough.

In announcing the latest tariff hike, Ecuador’s Ministry of Production and Foreign Trade levelled criticism at Colombia for failing to implement “concrete and effective” measures to curb drug trafficking along the border.

Once considered a bastion of stability, Ecuador has seen a spike in homicide and other violent crimes.

According to the Geneva-based Organized Crime Observatory, the Andean nation recorded a homicide rate of approximately one murder every hour last year.

Feb. 26 (UPI) — The U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control said it will allow certain operations to resell Venezuelan-origin oil destined for Cuba, provided the fuel is used by citizens and private companies on the island.

The island nation relied for years on Venezuela for fuel, but shipments stopped after the United States captured Nicolás Maduro on Jan. 3 and took control of Caracas’ energy industry.

After the operation, President Donald Trump repeatedly warned that Cuba was on the brink of economic collapse, and he threatened to impose further economic pressure on the country to reach an agreement with the United States. Trump has not publicly defined what kind of agreement he seeks.

The trade measure, published Wednesday, says that the transactions must comply with the conditions of General License 46A for Venezuela. This license is an authorization issued by foreign assets office that allows companies to conduct operations involving Venezuelan oil under specific terms, despite the sanctions in place against that country’s energy sector.

Companies that seek authorization will not need to have an entity established in the United States, and the usual Cuba-related restrictions set out in that license will not apply.

The Treasury Department specified that the policy will cover only exports for commercial or humanitarian purposes that benefit Cuba’s private sector.

Operations involving the Cuban armed forces, intelligence services or other government entities will not be permitted, including those listed on the U.S. Department of State’s Cuba Restricted List.

The Treasury Department recalled that the Commerce Department primarily regulates the export or re-export of U.S.-origin oil to Cuba.

Under the Support for the Cuban People License Exception, certain exports of gas and other petroleum products intended to improve living conditions and support independent economic activity in Cuba do not require separate authorization from foreign assets office provided the applicable terms are met.

The agency referred to its Frequently Asked Question 1226 for the definition of “Venezuelan-origin oil,” which includes petroleum products.

Preliminary data from the Energy Information Administration show that Venezuela exported 339,000 barrels per day of crude to the United States in the third week of February.

At the same time, regional fuel supply to Cuba has been limited. On Jan. 29, the Trump administration declared a national emergency with respect to Cuba, creating a new mechanism to impose tariffs on imports from any country that provides oil to Havana.

On Feb. 17, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said her government would not send fuel to Cuba “for now” amid the current situation and potential U.S. trade measures.

Cuba faces fuel shortages that have affected electricity supply, transportation and other basic services, and it relies heavily on oil imports.

Separately, the Russian Embassy in Havana confirmed two weeks ago that Russia will send crude oil and refined products to Cuba as humanitarian assistance.

Russia is sending the oil directly, not through intermediaries, and the shipments are considered to be aid, not commercial sales.

Energy affordability was in the spotlight during President Trump’s lengthy and at times rambling State of the Union address Tuesday evening as the president promised to bring down electricity prices in an effort to assuage voter concerns about rising costs.

The president announced a new “ratepayer protection pledge” to shield residents from higher electricity costs in areas where energy-thirsty artificial intelligence data centers are being built. Trump said major tech companies will “have the obligation to provide for their own power needs” under the plan, though the details of what the pledge actually entails remain vague.

“We have an old grid — it could never handle the kind of numbers, the amount of electricity that’s needed, so I am telling them they can build their own plant,” the president said. “They’re going to produce their own electricity … while at the same time, lowering prices of electricity for you.”

The announcement comes as polling shows Americans are dissatisfied with the economy and concerned about the cost of living. Experts on both sides of the political spectrum have said the energy affordability issue could translate to poor outcomes for Republicans in the midterm elections this November, as it did in a few key races in New Jersey, Virginia and Georgia last year.

While Trump has focused on ramping up domestic production of oil, gas and coal, residential electric bills have been soaring — jumping from 15.9 cents per kilowatt-hour in January 2025 on average to 17.2 cents at the end of December, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Through one year into his second term as president, Trump has vastly changed the federal landscape when it comes to energy and the environment, reversing many of the efforts made by the Biden administration to prioritize electrification initiatives and investments in renewable energy via the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.

Among several changes, Trump’s administration has slashed funding for solar programs, ended federal tax credits for electric vehicles and canceled grants for offshore wind power — even going so far as to try to halt some such projects that were nearing completion along the East Coast.

Trump has also championed fossil fuel production and on Tuesday doubled down on his “drill baby drill” agenda, touting lower gasoline prices, increased production of American oil and new imports of oil from Venezuela.

Many of the president’s efforts are designed to loosen Biden-era regulations that he has said were burdensome, ideologically motivated and expensive for taxpayers.

Trump has taken direct aim at California, which has long been a leader on the environment. Last year, the president moved to block California’s long-held authority to set stricter tailpipe emission standards than the federal government — an ability that helped the state address historical air quality issues and also underpinned its ambitious ban on the sale of new gas-powered cars in 2035.

Trump also slashed $1.2 billion in federal funding for California’s effort to develop clean hydrogen energy while leaving intact funding for similar projects in states that voted for him. In November, his administration announced that it will open the Pacific Coast to oil drilling for the first time in nearly four decades, a move the state vowed to fight.

But perhaps no issue has come across voters’ kitchen tables more than energy affordability.

So far this term, Trump has canceled or delayed enough projects to power more than 14 million homes, according to a tracker from the nonprofit Climate Power. The group’s senior advisor, Jesse Lee, described the president’s data center announcement as a “toothless, empty promise based on backroom deals with his own billionaire donors.”

“Making it worse, Trump is continuing to block clean-energy production across the board — the only sources that can keep up with demand, ensure utility bills don’t keep skyrocketing, and prevent massive new amounts of pollution,” Lee said in a statement.

Earlier this month, Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency repealed the endangerment finding, the U.S. government’s 2009 affirmation that greenhouse gases are harmful to human health and the environment, in what officials described as the single largest act of deregulation in U.S. history. The finding formed the foundation for much of U.S. climate policy. The EPA also loosened guidelines around emissions from coal power plants, including mercury and other dangerous pollutants.

The president’s environmental record so far is “written in rollbacks that put the interests of some corporate polluters above the health of everyday Americans,” read a statement from Marc Boom, senior director of the Environmental Protection Network, a group composed of more than 750 former EPA staff members and appointees.

Further, Trump has worked to undermine climate science in general, often describing global warming as a “hoax” or a “scam.” During his first year in office, he fired hundreds of scientists working to prepare the National Climate Assessment, laid off staffers at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and dismantled the National Center for Atmospheric Research, one of the world’s leading climate and weather research institutions, among many other efforts.

In all, the administration has taken or proposed more than 430 actions that threaten the environment, public health and the ability to confront climate change, according to a tracker from the nonprofit Natural Resources Defense Council.

The opposition’s choice for a rebuttal speaker is indicative of how seriously it is taking the issue of energy affordability: Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger focused heavily on energy affordability during her campaign against Republican Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears last year, including vows to expand solar energy projects and technologies such as fusion, geothermal and hydrogen. Virginia is home to more than a third of all data centers worldwide.

CORTINA D’AMPEZZO, Italy — It takes an immense amount of energy to power venues and make snow for the Winter Olympics and, for the 2026 Milan-Cortina Games, organizers pledged that virtually all of the electricity would be clean.

The organizing committee said that electricity use was where it could make the most meaningful impact, since it has been one of the main drivers of planet-warming emissions at major events. And Italy’s largest electricity company, Enel, guaranteed the supply of entirely certified renewable electricity for event venues.

Here’s a look at what that meant:

To guarantee 100% renewable energy, Enel bought certificates

The organizing committee said in its sustainability report from September that its Games-time electricity would be 100% green, fed by certified renewable sources. In rare cases where temporary power generation is required, hydro-treated vegetable oil would be substituted for traditional diesel fuels, it said.

“This is also an opportunity to contribute to a broader shift — showing athletes, spectators and future host cities that cleaner energy solutions are increasingly viable for events of this scale,” the committee said Friday in a statement to the Associated Press. “We hope the steps taken for these Games can support ongoing progress across major events.”

Enel said it was supplying 85 gigawatt-hours of power for the Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games. It bought “guarantee of origin,” or GO, certificates on the market from renewable energy plants to cover the entire Games’ energy demand.

GO certificates are a European mechanism created in 2001. Each certificate corresponds to 1 megawatt hour of electricity produced using a certified renewable source.

Certificates are a way to prove your energy is green

These certificates are traded on the power market, in negotiations between companies or through brokers.

Once used, they are canceled to prevent the same megawatt hour from being claimed twice. This system is meant to support the development of renewable sources by helping companies meet their green energy targets.

Enel told the AP in a statement that its commitment to cleanly lighting up the events “translates the values of sustainability and inclusion inherent in the Games into concrete terms, combining technological innovation and environmental protection.”

Although many say GOs are vital to promote the Earth’s decarbonization, the system has its detractors. Matteo Villa, who leads the data lab at the Italian Institute for International Political Studies, said it is a “great way to promote your event,” but it’s not making Italy cleaner or more renewable.

The Games can only be as clean, or as sustainable, as the whole of Italy, Villa added.

Enel says it produces a lot of clean electricity in Italy

Nearly three-quarters of the electricity Enel produced in Italy in 2025 was carbon-free, according to its preliminary full-year operational data. About 50% came from hydropower, followed by 17% geothermal and less than 10% from wind, solar and other renewables. The remainder was mostly from gas-fired power plants.

Many power plants that use water to produce electricity are in northern Italy, where mountains and rivers make for highly productive facilities. But Italy’s national grid is still largely reliant on fossil fuels, according to country-specific data from the International Energy Agency.

Enel built new primary substations in Livigno and Arabba, so electricity could be distributed throughout the territory. It also built and upgraded distribution infrastructure in the Livigno, Bormio and Cortina areas, which will benefit residents after the Games.

Enel has a spot in the fan village in Cortina, where events are livestreamed.

Another challenge: emissions from spectators and athletes traveling

Sustainability was a major focus of the Games, as the organizers and the International Olympic Committee sought to model how to cut carbon pollution while running a major event. Researchers say the list of locales that could reliably host a Winter Games will shrink substantially in coming years.

“Every Games we strive to push innovation in sustainability, reduce the overall impact and the carbon footprint,” Julie Duffus, the IOC’s head of sustainability, told the AP on Friday. She highlighted the use of clean power, upgrades to the energy system and the way these Games were designed so that most venues would be existing or temporary.

Matteo Di Castelnuovo, a professor of energy economics at the SDA Bocconi School of Management in Milan, said he expected the Olympics to stay committed to clean energy, and that “the challenge lies somewhere else to make them greener.” The thornier issue for Olympic organizers, and for any business, is figuring out how to reduce the emissions stemming from transportation, he added.

The amount of greenhouse gases estimated to be released into the atmosphere as a result of the Games was similar to the emissions of 4 million average-sized, gasoline-fueled cars driving from Paris to Rome, the organizing committee said in its greenhouse gas management strategy. The largest share of the carbon footprint were activities indirectly related to the Games, such as accommodations and spectator travel. Air travel is a significant contributor because burning jet fuel releases carbon dioxide.

Karl Stoss, who chairs the Games’ Future Host Commission, has said they may need to eventually reduce the number of sports, athletes and spectators who attend.

Many skiers, including Team USA members Lindsey Vonn and Mikaela Shiffrin, expressed concern during the Games about climate change accelerating melt of the world’s glaciers.

McDermott writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Colleen Barry and video journalist Brittany Peterson in Milan contributed to this report.

SEOUL, Feb. 23 (UPI) — South Korea’s Samsung SDI said Monday it collaborated with Columbia University to publish a paper on what it described as a major advance in futuristic lithium-metal batteries.

The study, published in Joule, one of the world’s leading peer-reviewed journals in energy science, discussed the development of a new electrolyte formulation designed to improve the lifespan and safety of lithium-metal batteries, according to Samsung SDI.

Lithium-metal batteries have been regarded as a next-generation technology because they can offer very high energy density, around 1.6 times that of conventional lithium-ion batteries.

However, their commercialization has been constrained by limited charge-discharge lifespans. Samsung SDI expected that the new findings could help address the challenges.

Once commercialized, Samsung SDI projected that lithium-metal batteries could bolster industries that require high energy density, including advanced wearable devices.

“The publication in Joule provides academic validation of our technology that improves the safety of lithium-metal batteries, which had long been considered a key weakness,” Samsung SDI Executive Vice President Joo Yong-lak said in a statement.

“We will continue to accelerate the development of next-generation battery technologies based on our global research network,” he added.

Yuan Yang, an associate professor of materials science and engineering at Columbia University, echoed the sentiment.

“This study represents a major improvement in lithium-metal battery performance through a new electrolyte formulation and brings commercialization of next-generation batteries one step closer,” he said.

The share price of Samsung SDI fell.61% on the Seoul bourse Monday. As a major affiliate of Samsung Group, the company is one of the world’s largest battery manufacturers.

Main target was the energy sector, but residential buildings and a railway were also damaged, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says.

Russia has launched dozens of missiles and hundreds of drones at Ukraine, killing at least one person, according to Ukrainian officials.

The most powerful attacks were reported in the regions of Kyiv, Odesa and Kharkiv, the officials said on Sunday.

Ukraine’s air force said Moscow launched 50 ballistic and cruise missiles and 297 drones overnight, the majority of which were intercepted.

“Moscow continues to invest in strikes more than in diplomacy,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said, adding that this past week alone, Russia launched more than 1,300 drones, ‌more than 1,400 guided aerial bombs and 96 missiles against Ukraine.

The president added that Sunday’s attacks targeted the Dnipro, Kirovohrad, Mykolaiv, Poltava and Sumy regions.

The main target of the attack was the energy sector, but residential buildings and a railway were also damaged, he noted.

In a separate incident in the western city of Lviv, which has been largely spared the worst of the conflict, a policewoman was killed and 25 people were injured in the detonation of explosive devices inside a shop on a central shopping street.

Hours later, law enforcement said it had arrested a Ukrainian woman suspected of carrying out the bombing, without providing any further details and saying an investigation was ongoing.

Kyiv attack

Mykola Kalashnyk, head of Kyiv’s military administration, said on Telegram that Russian forces targeted five districts in the Kyiv region, injuring at least 15 people, including four children, and killing one person.

Russian attacks were also reported in the eastern region of Kharkiv, where Governor Oleh Syniehubov said at least 12 settlements were targeted and six people injured.

In southern Ukraine, fires broke out in the region of Odesa as Russian drones struck energy infrastructure, according to Governor Oleh Kiper.

“Fortunately, there were no deaths or injuries. An assessment of the state of energy facilities and elimination of the consequences is ongoing,” Kiper wrote on Telegram.

Attacks on Ukraine’s energy facilities have become a near-daily occurrence in winter during Russia’s war in Ukraine, which started almost four years ago when Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered a full-scale invasion of the neighbouring country.

These attacks deprive millions of Ukrainians of heat, power and running water as temperatures have dropped below minus 10 degrees Celsius (14 degrees Fahrenheit), causing thick ice to cover roads and the Dnipro, Europe’s fifth largest river.

Last week, Russia unleashed a barrage of nearly 400 drones and 29 missiles on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure on the first day of two days of peace negotiations in Geneva, its second large-scale blow in six days.

On February 12, another attack had left 100,000 families without electricity and 3,500 apartment buildings without heat in Kyiv alone.

Sunday’s attacks come as the United States is trying to reach a ceasefire between Kyiv and Moscow.

But these efforts – including the talks in Geneva last week and two earlier sessions in the United Arab Emirates – have failed to reach any breakthrough.

A core sticking point is territory. Russia wants Ukraine to pull out from the remaining 20 percent of its eastern region of Donetsk that the Kremlin’s forces have failed to capture – something firmly rejected by Kyiv.

Ukraine does not want to make territorial concessions and is demanding clear security guarantees that it will not be attacked by Russia again if a ceasefire is reached.