Iran Shock Jolts Asia and Europe to Speed Up Energy Transition
bloomberg.com
bloomberg.com
https://reneweconomy.com.au/households-still-going-big-on-so...
(I have a battery though, so I rarely pay full tote - which is one of the reasons I got a battery)
Looks like California's maximum peak rate is US$0.74/kWh (without including the baseline credit), which is equivalent to AUD$1.04/kWh
Yeahnah, I don't know what I'm complaining about then.
Get solar panels, get batteries!
None of this touches on standing charges, I don't know how that works in the USA, in Australia for an average household it runs at AUD 1.00/day to AUD 1.50/day (USD 0.70/day to USD 1.00/day). For an average household the standing charge is going to add 15 to 20% to the tariff.
Pushes glasses up nose well actually, we should use GWp, but that's not really a unit and good ol' watts should suffice.
It'd sure be awesome if regulations and regulators in Western countries weren't stupid. This whole game is just insane.
Let's just pawn it of on China, arbitrage the regulatory and human rights differential, and pretend the value is the same as if it's locally manufactured. Then we pocket the difference! Number go up!
E.g. the US specialises in software; China in PV and batteries; EU in industrial equipment; the Middle East, oil; Australia IIRC is minerals; each trades what they're optimised for in exchange for what the others are optimised for, and are better off for it.
This works only so long as nobody is dominating a strategic sector, something that everyone needs but they are such a major player they get to set the prices. Monopolistic behaviour, but from a nation that cannot be sued for it rather than a corporation which can be ordered broken up.
Unfortunately, OPEC was already a thing even before Hormuz, the MAGA tariffs are confused and seem to be trying to make the US into an autarky but also keeping trade open so it can be taxed, and China seems to want to be dependent on nobody else while also keeping everyone else dependent on them, which currently leaves the EU and similar currently holding this particular hot potato and goodness only knows in which direction and on what schedule we'll yeet it elsewhere.
What about Africa and the rest of Asia? Surely they merit mention more than Australia?
Also, Australia's number one export are Hollywood actors.
This isn't a term paper, I'm just giving illustrations from a handful of places to demonstrate how comparative advantage works.
And sure, other Asian nations are significant (India: Petroleum; Japan: Cars; South Korea: Integrated circuits; Taiwan's defence policy is making TSMC too important to be allowed to be invaded).
But Africa? No. The continent's exports are mostly dominated by South Africa, which is about one third of Australia's; even in aggregate, the entire continent's exports are only at about the level of Canada's.
> Also, Australia's number one export are Hollywood actors.
Australia's three largest exports are iron ore, coal, and education: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_exports_of_Australia
It's a perfect storm for China, they're leading in EVs, battery production, renewables. While the US is busy undermining itself from all directions: as a military superpower, cultural, political, economical.
Europe is waking up slowly, but it is shackled by high internal energy prices, not enough labor, and low desire for innovation.
No amounts of deportations meaningfully affect the demographics. They can at most slow down the new immigration. For all his bluster, Trump deported barely more people than the long-term average in 2025.
But more importantly, the "far right" in Europe is far less crazy than in the US, and they support re-establishing local industry.
> police speech
Europe has never had absolutely free speech like the US. It's by design.
They don't have it in the US either, they just love to flex it while not understanding how it's implemented in practice
Just look at the post brexit UK or Meloni's Italy...
(they wouldn't do this unless they were desperate to stop extreme right. Obviously, for migrants, this means war with immigration services)
To me it seems it is a dictatorship with cult leadership again. Xi reminds me more of a modern version of Mao Zedong (without the focus on starving millions to death though). The main reason I see China having a dictator again is so that he can push ahead with his plans of invading Taiwan.
> Europe is waking up slowly
Where do you see that? I don't see it anywhere. They are sleeping.
Chinese solar exports double in a month to hit record high amid energy crisis - https://ember-energy.org/latest-updates/chinese-solar-export... - April 23rd, 2026
Is there anything there about Chinese share?
I had the understanding they produce the vast vast majority as well, but that seems belied by exports doubling near instantaneously with demand? That made me wonder if there’s a lower cost floor producer(s) with, say, 10-20% of production that quickly got booked
My comment points out that, yes, China is wildly benefiting from this. They have 80%+ of the global solar PV market. They also have a deflationary macro environment encouraging persistent exports, along with 1/3rd of global manufacturing capacity.
TLDR China has enough manufacturing capacity slack to support scaling exports at this scale immediately.
(tangentially, they have the capacity to build 20M EVs per year, roughly 1/4th of annual global demand for light vehicles: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48379805)
China’s Solar PV Export Explorer - https://ember-energy.org/data/chinas-solar-pv-export-explore... (“The latest solar PV export data from the world’s largest exporter, China, by country or region of destination. Data updated on a monthly basis.”)
> The IEA has stated that China’s solar photovoltaic exports account for 80% of the global market. While there is a wide variety of products that make up the solar supply chain, panels, cells and wafers make up the majority of exports by trade value, and can be expressed in GW terms. Ember tracks these products to give a clearer picture of the global solar supply chain.
https://www.iea.org/reports/solar-pv-global-supply-chains/ex...
> China has invested over USD 50 billion in new PV supply capacity – ten times more than Europe − and created more than 300 000 manufacturing jobs across the solar PV value chain since 2011. Today, China’s share in all the manufacturing stages of solar panels (such as polysilicon, ingots, wafers, cells and modules) exceeds 80%. This is more than double China’s share of global PV demand. In addition, the country is home to the world’s 10 top suppliers of solar PV manufacturing equipment. China has been instrumental in bringing down costs worldwide for solar PV, with multiple benefits for clean energy transitions. At the same time, the level of geographical concentration in global supply chains also creates potential challenges that governments need to address.
Many Democracies have learnt that politics cannot be trusted in certain fields due to this reason many governments ensure interest rates are not controlled by politicians such as the Federal Reserve. Perhaps we should treat education as something that cannot be trusted by politicians and controlled by an impartial independent organization.
I think many democracies have been struggling though, to find a good leader, lots of democracies been replacing their leaders over and over in recent times. That's definitely something to worry about, why aren't good leaders applying to be on the ballot or being voted in?
It's Iran turning the strait into a wedge between US and the rest of their previous partners. The US has enough oil for themselves, but the hurt is felt everywhere else. And the cause of that hurt points in one direction (the US)
This is pure terrorist tactics, taking innocents hostage in the hope that makes the police go away.
What we need, sorry, is another round of sniper shots, making it clear to the IRGC what the correct response is to hostage taking.
So ... this guy and his cronies that got killed. They had it coming.
The reaction was predictable and very much understandable from a human psychology perspective. So in my mind the responsibility for the strait being closed rests mostly with the US.
> The president is fine, btw. It was the "supreme leader" that got killed
In Iran the supreme leader is the head of state. In the US it's the president.
> he is known to have ordered the extermination of 600,000 Syrian muslims
Do you mean the Syrian civil war? According to Wikipedia it's 650,000 deaths on all sides together (more than half being combatants). I'm not sure it's fair to attribute all these deaths to Iran. By the way these numbers are similar to those of the Iraq War of GWB.
First, the Iranian state was (and is) collapsing. In other words: even though Trump changed the timing of their closing of the strait (not by much), he did not cause it. Iran's government has no choice but to continue the war. Which is another way of saying: the west has no choice but to destroy them. This is just a bunch of little kids arguing: "that's hard! you do it".
Iran is, by the way, not just closing the strait. They are holding Lebanon hostage. They are trying to hold Syria hostage. They are holding the Bab El-Mandeb strait hostage. They are holding (and executing) people as hostages. They are looking to hold internet cables and satellites hostage. They are only limited by their capabilities, which are increasing. Obviously, ignoring the Iran problem will not work even in the medium term.
Plus I hate it when people defend the indefensible, such as Iran's government. Besides, you care about 1 thing: that the oil price rose a bit. As I said, unless the US left the middle east, conflict with Iran was and is unavoidable. US presence was always going to lead to conflict with Iran, only the timing was in question. Iran holding the strait hostage was unavoidable, and the oil price rise was unavoidable.
So what will you do when the inevitable happens? The problem Iran has with Israel, aside from Iran being murderous racists, is that, as the supreme leader has put it, "it is a US military base in the middle east". In other words: Iran's problem with Israel is that Israel prevents Iran from holding Europe hostage (notice that Iran's rockets can obviously reach Israel ... and they're continuing to extend the range, why is that, you think? They are looking to target Europe with nukes). This will mean other countries will have no choice but to do the same. Indonesia, China, they must attack and take control of the Malacca strait if the US retreats. They must conquer oil sources.
You do realize that if a country like Iran acquires ICBMs, nuclear war is the next step, right? That is also what Trump is trying to prevent (in fact that's what the US created the UN for all the way back in 1945, when all that existed of Donald Trump was his father looking very interested at his mother)
In other words, what you're advocating for, US retreat, will not cause a local conflict in the middle east. Let's just call it what it is: you are advocating for is WW3, a nuclear WW3. You're calling in doubt it will be WW3, because it's so much easier and cheaper to let a German dictator run rampant (sorry, I mean Iranian) than it is to deal with the problem ...
And yes, I'm very sorry how inconvenient it is that the rest of the world does not just let you live in peace.
Regarding the nuclear threat posed by Iran: the deal Obama made with Iran was not perfect but it was working, at least on that aspect. Quoting the New York Times[1]: "Under the deal, Iran shipped 98 percent of its uranium stockpile out of the country. Iran previously had enough uranium to fashion eight to 10 atomic bombs once fully processed; afterward it was left without enough for even one". It also enabled an unprecedented level of inspections by the IAEA.
Compare that with what Trump has achieved so far... It's really sad that he had to tank that deal because he couldn't stand Obama having a great lasting diplomatic achievement. So Trump effectively manufactured the conditions for Iran to be a nuclear threat again.
I also don't see evidence that Iran wants to target Europe. The Iranian government does have a despicable rhetoric (mostly against Israel) but their actions have been limited. Israel talks less but inflicts far more harm. Iran has indeed been messing around the region and in particular "holding Lebanon hostage" to some extent with the Hezbollah... We'll see if that gets better after this war.
As for holding internet cables hostage and such: they are just playing the only cards they have, as they are being forced to, by the US.
> Besides, you care about 1 thing: that the oil price rose a bit.
I'm personally rather happy that oil prices are rising. We should get off oil as fast as possible for geopolitical and ecological reasons.
> And yes, I'm very sorry how inconvenient it is that the rest of the world does not just let you live in peace.
Not sure what you mean. We had international institutions and international law to try and avoid conflicts. The UN is a beautiful project created by the US at a time when they had good thinking people in charge. Trump hates and tries to dismantle international institutions. He likes the law of the jungle. It puts us all closer to WW3.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/21/us/politics/2015-iran-nuc...
Iran’s doing orders of magnitude more absolute economic damage to the west and its allies than vice versa.
Even the drone strikes followed this math: The patriots were intercepting drones that cost 1% as much as the interceptor.
As far as I can tell, Iran has won every tactical and strategic engagement so far in this war.
Which is more or less what's happening here.
1. OPEC/OPEC+ meet every 3 months to adjust output based on expected demand to keep oil prices relatively stable. That is, they want to maintain a floor and a ceiling. Too low and they don't make enough money. Too high and it causes political instability and threatens oil-for-security guarantees that have existed since FDR agreed to such with King Faisal of Saudi Arabia in 1945;
2. Oil has different flavors based largley on how light or heavy the hydrocarbon blend is (called API Gravity) and the sulfur content. this is what Brent and West Texas Light Crude means. Generally, lighter crude is more valuable because it makes more valuable products like avgas and gasoline;
3. Oil is traded on both spot (physical) markets and future (paper) markets. A futures contract is a standardized contract for 1000 barrels of oil of a particular blend delivered or received (depending on which side you're on) on a given date. Generally, when we see oil prices in the news we are looking at futures prices. Historically short-dated futures prices and spot prices have been pretty similar. Spot prices are proprietary but this didn't matter. Now it does as that link has been broken [1]
3. When the world shut down in March 2020 due to the pandemic oil demand fell off a cliff and supplies backed up in production facilities. People weren't taking delivery and oil prices briefly went negative (technically, this was an "extreme contango" market);
4. Because of this, the Trump administration cajoled MBS to get OPEC to cut oil production [2][3][4]. This was a 2 year agreement that initially cut oil production by 9.7 million barrels per day ("Mbpd") going to to 6.3Mbpd ultimately. IMHO the administration panicked that US oil producers would go belly up. This represented ~10% of the world's crude oil supply;
5. In 2021 oil demand came roaring back. Prices went through the roof; and
6. Republicans blamed Biden. The Biden administration tried to get OPEC to increase production [5] and Biden never blamed OPEC or even Trump. Democrats took the "oil companies bad" approach.
This 2 year deal was completely unnecessary. OPEC would've cut production as necessary anyway. And it entirely matches the increase in oil and gas prices and inflation for this 2 year period and nobody ever mentions it.
Russia invading Ukraine in early 2022 was just the cherry on the cake.
Look at that chart. Where it's marked as "COVID-19" is March-April 2020. The deal begins in June 2020. It ended in June 2022, which is at the exact point of the big red bar to the right of the Russian invasion, after which oil prices dropped despite the fact that the war was still going on (and still is).
[1]: https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/iran-war-has-sha...
[2]: https://www.reuters.com/article/economy/special-report-trump...
[3]: https://www.reuters.com/commentary/reuters-open-interest/tru...
[4]: https://www.reuters.com/article/business/opec-agrees-largest...
[5]: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/us-call-opec-its-a...
Macroeconomics 101 says this will cause inflation on a few year delay, which is what happened, and Biden was also blamed for that.
1. After the OPEC oil shock of 1973, the US banned crude oil exports (in 1974 I believe);
2. In the early 2010s, hydraulic fracturing ("fracking") was invented, which created the US oil boom in the Permian Basin (from west Texas up to the Dakotas). Almost all oil wells in the last 10-15 years have been fracked. This was a massive capex outlay by oil companies at the time. This is important;
3. Obama, facing a hostile Congress in 2015, wanted solar and wind subsidies so he made a deal with Congress that included lifting the 1974 crude oil export ban. Oil production quickly went up and ever since we've been exporting ~3Mbpd of crude oil, which is essentially excess demand, and this is how the US became the largest single oil producer in the world;
4. OPEC but really Saudi Arabia in particular crashed the oil market in 2015-2016. There are two competing theories on why they did this. A lot of people think it was to kill the frackers. I don't think this makes sense. It was years after fracking came about. I think it was to punisht he US for becoming a crude oil exporter. And it worked. Roughly half of oil producers and services companies went bust [2];
5. When oil prices are low, producers will generally suspend production until prices increase because they're selling at a loss. They'll layoff staff and come back when prices improve. So this is self-correcting. But oil companies had to keep selling because of their massive debt;
6. Because of (5), oil inventories exploded and when Trump took office in 2017, oil experts believed that oil prices would remain low because of persistently high crue oil inventories [3];
7. Trump pulled out from the JCPOA in 2018. To counter expected Iranian sanctions, Trump got OPEC to increase production [4];
8. In October 2018, Saudi agents, allegedly on the orders from MBS, killed Saudi citizen and US permanent resident Jamal Khashoggi in a Saudi embassy in Istanbul. I actually believe this is relevant to what happened subsequently; and
9. In November 2018, Trump granted 8 waivers to Iranian oil exporters to continue exporting [5]. This crashed the oil markets [6] and basically screwed over OPEC. But I think MBS had to eat it because of the Khashoggi fallout.
So come 2020, it is my belief that when Donald "Art of the Deal" Trump got MBS to cut oil production and then MBS later refused to increase production (to both Trump and Biden), it was payback for 2018.
So I don't think there's any causation between ZIRP and the inflation shock. It was a combination of two things: the oil price shock and the pandemic became the perfect environment for companies to raise prices, something many believed they'd get punished for prior. This is the era when dynamic pricing really took off.
[1]: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-oil-producers-pac...
[2]: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FEDFUNDS
[3]: https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=29532
[4]: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/22/opec-ministers-strike-deal-o...
[5]: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/02/trump-will-grant-8-waivers-t...
[6]: https://www.cbsnews.com/detroit/news/the-great-oil-crash-of-...
* 15% of British power generation is already de-linked from the gas power price. This is from 10 GW of operational renewable capacity currently covered by the price-setting Contracts for Difference scheme.
* A third (36%) of power generation in Britain will be priced independently of gas by 2030, according to forecasts of generation from the Contracts for Difference scheme. Up to 36 GW of competitively-priced new wind and solar is under development by 2032 through the scheme.
* Hours where gas was below 20% of Britain’s electricity mix averaged £60/MWh in 2025, compared to £130/MWh in hours where gas made up more than 50% of the mix.
* The gas share of power generation fell to a second record monthly low in a row in Britain in April 2026. The gas share in both March (27%) and April (19%) was the lowest per month in over a decade. In March, wind supplied a monthly record 42% of all power generation.
(As more wind, solar, batteries, and transmission are deployed in the UK, fossil gas power share will continue to decline until pushed out of the generation mix)
Then in UK somebody calculated that a house needs 1MWh battery to last over winter using only solar panels that a typical suburb house can install. In 5-10 years that would cost 40K USD making it rather realistic to have. This ignore availability of industrial-scale wind which is the strongest in winter.
https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Irans-Oil...
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Persian-Gulf-Oil-...
https://www.cnbc.com/2026/05/28/oil-inventory-exxon-strait-h...
However, if you were financially struggling before this happened, you are in for a world of hurt. Food, fuel, fertilizers, and dozens of downstream refined products are going to see large price increases for months to years.
But the economics of renewables itself (let alone the environmental impact), are compelling: utility solar is cheaper than anything else (without storage), and while battery costs take it significantly higher, those prices are plummeting and by 2030 will likely be cheap enough so that pure solar + battery beats everything else.
This was only way to get them to use renewables and re-think that maybe electric vehicles are not just 'woke' but also can help 'national security'.
Create Crises, to swing economy to electric and renewables faster than EV subsidies ever could.
He can't even stay consistent in 1D.
Am I being downvoted by Trump Fans? For making fun.
or
Am I being downvoted by Trump haters because even a satirically positive view of him, is too positive. Don't even make fun, if the fun is showing him in too positive a light?
I'm afraid you need to go fit inside one of the echo chambers and conform to a given narrative good sir.
Renewables don't have the same level of external dependence on a constant flow of instantaneously used fuel. So while I do agree with you, it is an energy issue regardless of your politics.
I mean that might be true for you, but its been on the radar over here for a number of years. (it was also a key risk with Iran identified by a number of key intelligence think tanks. especially around the time of the anti-nuclear treaty negotiations)
But to your point, youre right its not an energy issue, its an energy and materials issue. There are lots of pre-cursor chemicals and products that come out of that region that the modern world needs to function.
The more pressing issue is the fertiliser price spike: https://ycharts.com/indicators/fertilizers_index_world_bank which has yet to fully mateirlaise.
You'll note that spike corolate with lots of civil unrest
What a mess.
Their planning is so good it's turned this into the largest strategic embarrassment in the last... 80 years?
They also now know they will beat the US in an all out conflict, which was unthinkable before this war started.
The main loss seems to be that with the Iranian / US supply lines into Ukraine slowing down, Ukraine has been able to build a domestic military drone complex that’s arguably more advanced than Iran’s.
U.S. PPI is in the double digits as is MoM CPI. And while Republicans are seeing losses in polling, the IRGC is consolidating power. Both Iran and America are bleeding. But it seems clear that it’s in the IRGC’s interest to draw this one out for goodies. That’s why Tehran escalating while Trump desperately tries and fails to run home.
It would be neat if there was some tracking of these kinds of political catch phrases sources and timelines, maybe that exists already.