Are energy lockdowns on the way? When the war in Iran kicked off and energy prices spiked, there was some chatter from media outlets and think tanks that it was a possibility. But then nothing really happened. Or at least nothing happened in the United States — at least not yet.
Personally, I was somewhat skeptical about the possibility. That’s not to say I don’t think we could ever have energy lockdowns here. The climate clause in the Constitution is right there next to the pandemic clause. However, given the current administration, I would think energy lockdowns would require presidential support, and, honestly, they just don’t seem on-brand for President Donald Trump.
Recommended Stories
Yet, concern over the possibility was and is far from unwarranted. Shortly after the war in Iran began and energy prices spiked, the International Energy Agency, one of those little globalist organizations such as the World Health Organization or World Economic Forum most normal people ignore until they’re trying to micromanage daily life, released the kind of wonky, in-the-weeds white paper that is easy to overlook.
THE PLANET IS STILL DOING GREAT. IT’S THE CLIMATE CULT THAT’S BROKEN
Titled “Sheltering From Oil Shocks, Measures to reduce impacts on households and businesses,” the document detailed “10 demand-side options open to households, businesses and governments to shelter themselves from today’s oil shock and relieve the strains on affordability.”
For those who have yet to read this veritable page-turner, most of these “options” pertain to transportation — and how we all can do less of it. Avoid unnecessary air travel. Work from home if you can. Take public transportation, bike, or walk if you absolutely must leave your home. Carpool if you insist on using a car — preferably with a driver familiar with the latest eco-friendly driving techniques.
Superficially framed as a set of helpful “options” people can consider or governments can encourage to cut back on energy usage and save some money, it becomes pretty clear pretty quickly the “options” being encouraged are by no means strictly voluntary for the individual. It’s not far into the document before it becomes apparent the IEA is completely fine with governments taking a firm hand with their populations if they must.
“In responding to the current crisis, governments can take the lead, both through measures they implement for the public sector and through regulations and mandates, complemented by public information and awareness campaigns,” the document states.
One of the more inconvenient “options” available for government implementation is reducing speed limits by 10 km/hour (6.2 mph for Americans). One of the more dystopian entails restricting movement in private vehicles by alternating when a particular vehicle can enter certain areas based on whether its license plate ends in an odd or even number — an effort that would require even more surveillance and policing on our already overly monitored roads.
Stronger government nudges to prompt people to adopt electric vehicles and the development of stricter fuel economy standards are also discussed.
A PAUSE IN CLIMATE LAWSUITS, AND A MUCH-NEEDED REALITY CHECK
Moreover, throughout the document, there is a general sense that many of these measures, if implemented, probably aren’t meant to be temporary responses to a short-term crisis but permanent features that sat on the policy wish lists of climate alarmists for years. It would seem the IEA is simply using current events as a pretext to roll them out.
Hence, even if we do not get full-scale COVID-style climate lockdowns in the immediate future because of Iran, it would be wise not to completely dismiss the IEA’s list of energy saving “options” as it seems more than likely the organization will continue to push them, if not as one big suite of emergency measures, then as a piecemeal series of efforts that slowly lead to the same undesirable destination.
Daniel Nuccio is an independent journalist and a spring 2026 College Fix fellow. He is a regular contributor to the College Fix and the Brownstone Institute. He earned his doctorate in biology in 2025.
