This handout photo taken on March 11, 2026 and released by the Royal Thai Navy shows smoke rising from the Thai bulk carrier ‘Mayuree Naree’ near the Strait of Hormuz after an attack. “AFP PHOTO / ROYAL THAI NAVY
ROYAL THAI NAVY/AFP via Getty Images
The war in Iran has done more than rattle oil markets. It has once again exposed the fragility of the global fossil fuel system: too much economic power concentrated in too few places, all of which must travel through the same maritime—and militarized—chokepoints. Nearly everyone feels the ramifications of this disruption.
Indeed, if this war proves anything, it’s that renewables are needed now more than ever—not just for climate and environmental reasons but to break up volatile supply chains and reduce the leverage of oil and gas states. For years, clean energy has been sold as a moral imperative. Now it is simply an economic and geopolitical necessity. It’s not about emissions. It’s about resilience and price stability.
“Once you build the green infrastructure, you don’t have to worry about fuel supply,” says Fox Swim, senior solar industry researcher for Aurora Solar, in a conversation with me. “No one can embargo the sun or the wind.” Yes, solar and wind require raw materials and rare earths. But once the facilities are up and running, they free countries from the endless cycle of extraction, shipment, and price shocks.
Brent crude has surged past $126 a barrel since the start of this war on Feb. 28th. The Strait of Hormuz—where Iran has its most leverage—funnels at least 20% of the world’s seaborne oil. It is a loaded weapon, and Tehran is pointing it at the global economy.
The economics of wind and solar have always been compelling, even before the first missiles flew. Solar PV now produces power at 4.4 cents per kilowatt-hour, and onshore wind at 3.3 cents. In contrast, fossil fuel alternatives cost about 10 cents. According to the International Renewable Energy Agency, 92% of the world’s installed renewable capacity is cheaper than fossil-fuel alternatives. Countries added a record 700 gigawatts of new renewable capacity in 2025.
Meanwhile, liquefied natural gas prices remain hostage to the same geopolitical shocks now rippling through the Strait. Think long and do the math: you pay once to build a solar or wind installation; you pay forever—and unpredictably—to ship fossil fuels through contested waters. Undoubtedly, decentralized renewable energy systems reduce geopolitical risks. That matters because oil and gas prices reflect more than supply and demand. They also incorporate the transportation bottlenecks and political coercion.
“The near-700 gigawatt surge in 2025 marks yet another record for renewables. Against the backdrop of a deepening energy crisis caused by the war in the Middle East, this sends a strong signal to governments and businesses to strengthen energy security and resilience through domestic renewable energy sources,” Francesco La Camera, director-general of IRENA, told me. “Expanding home-grown solar, wind, and hydropower in national energy systems can reduce exposure to international fuel markets. Renewables are the best and most cost-effective insurance policy against supply disruptions and volatile fuel prices.”
The Fossil Fuel System’s Achilles’ Heel
The volatility is precisely what makes renewables so appealing. Fossil fuels remain vulnerable to disruption: they must be drilled, shipped, and insured. Their price can rise because of a pipeline rupture, a naval threat, or a producer cartel.
Renewables also have their weaknesses, namely the politics surrounding the production, processing, and distribution of rare earths. But after installation, the fuel is free. While that distinction may not satisfy ideological opponents of the energy transition, the economics are increasingly persuasive to governments, utilities, and households that don’t want to be at the mercy of global fuel shocks.
This goes beyond any single conflict. Ms. Swim explains that the more globally optimized a supply chain becomes, the more fragile it becomes. If makers of goods also control the distribution links, they have too much economic power. Witness Russia, which throttled natural gas to the European Union to coerce foreign policy decisions. China has deployed the same tactic across Asia. Iran is simply the latest and most drastic application of this well-established playbook.
The world must move toward energy systems that are harder to weaponize.
Still, any serious version of this argument must confront the obvious realities: the green-energy economy has its own supply-chain exposure. Rare earths, critical minerals, and other raw materials are often mined in Africa or elsewhere, processed abroad, and shipped through the very same maritime lanes that carry oil and LNG. So it is not enough to say renewables are immune to geopolitical disruption. They are not. Their supply chains also run through a dangerous world.
Renewables Have Chokepoints Too—But They Still Win
An oil pump is pictured at an obsolete oilfield, with wind turbines in the background, in Sargentes de la Lora on March 13, 2026, near Burgos in northern Spain, where oil first flowed in Spain in 1964. (Photo by CESAR MANSO / AFP via Getty Images)
AFP via Getty Images
But this is where the comparison still favors renewables. Swim’s answer is that economies adapt, and one of the clearest ways around renewables’ “chokepoints” is through recycling. She points to the growing opportunity to recover materials from aging solar panels and reuse them rather than relying solely on virgin inputs shipped through contested corridors. I have written at length about how the United States could expand its list of rare-earth element suppliers and recycle the raw materials used in medical equipment, defense systems, and energy components.
Supply diversification matters, along with building more processing capacity in North America and Europe. So do material substitutions and technology improvements. Importantly, we need a more deliberate industrial policy that treats clean-energy components as strategic assets rather than just cheap imports. Recycling is part of the solution because it turns yesterday’s deployment into tomorrow’s supply. But the larger answer is to stop assuming the current mineral map is set in stone forever.
When nations finally grasp that energy dependence can be used against them, they start building systems that are harder to squeeze. That’s why this war should not slow the renewable transition; it should accelerate it.
“There is an opening for innovators,” Swim says. “The renewable energy industry is hungry and is ready to step in right now.” Meanwhile, localizing mineral processing and diversifying sourcing away from single-corridor supply chains—approaches already underway in both the U.S. and the EU—further reduce exposure over time.
The deeper story here is not that war makes oil more expensive. It’s that war reminds us how vulnerable the fossil-fuel system really is. Renewables will not eliminate geopolitical conflict. Nor will they immediately diminish the leverage that current supply chains have. But they can lessen the ability of any one region, regime, or shipping lane to hold the global economy hostage. That alone is reason enough to move faster.