Iran war – Emergency Energy Measures straight from the Great Reset playbook
Thu 2:19 pm +00:00, 26 Mar 2026
The International Energy Agency (IEA) has just published a new report that claims to identify ten “demand-side measures” which will “alleviate the economic impacts [of the] war in the Middle East.”
Titled “Sheltering From Oil Shocks”, it is notionally aimed at “easing oil price pressures on consumers”, but it reads like a page straight out of the Great Reset playbook.
Its ten recommendations include old favourites like working from home, limiting air travel and even phasing out gas cookers…
…targeted actions can ease pressure on fuels that are particularly constrained. A reduction in air travel where alternatives exist can significantly lower demand for jet fuel. Measures to shift LPG use away from transport and towards essential applications, such as cooking, can help protect vulnerable households. At the same time, encouraging the uptake of alternative clean cooking solutions where feasible can reduce reliance on LPG and avoid a return to more polluting fuels that harm people’s health.
In full, their recommendations are…
- Work from home where possible.
- Reduce highway speed limits by at least 10 km/h
- Encourage public transport
- Alternate private car access to roads in large cities on different days
- Increase car sharing and adopt efficient driving practices
- Efficient driving for road commercial vehicles and delivery of goods
- Divert LPG use from transport
- Avoid air travel where alternative options exist
- Where possible, switch to other modern cooking solutions
- Leverage flexibility with petrochemical feedstocks and implement short-term efficiency and maintenance measures
If a lot of those sound familiar, well, that’s because they were suggested inclusions in “Climate Lockdowns”, those totally imaginary things that conspiracy theorists just made up.
Let’s take a deeper look at a couple.
Number 4 is especially fascinating. What exactly does “alternate private car access in large cities on different days” mean? Because at first glance it doesn’t look like correct English.
The report explains:
Private vehicles are allowed into designated zones in large cities on specific days only based on their number plate. Vehicles with odd-numbered plates have access on different weekdays than those with even-numbered plates. This measure reduces traffic congestion, engine idling and fuel-intensive stop-and-go driving. It also reduces local air pollution and improves attractiveness of the city centre for the use of bicycles or walking.
…but notably doesn’t actually elucidate how this would be enforced.
It would require CCTV with Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) tech to scan all traffic, and presumably automatically issue fines to anyone with an even-numbered car who dares to drive on a Thursday.
It’s an idea pulled from the plans for “15-minute cities”.
Number 5 recommends “increasing car sharing”, which rather echoes calls to end private car ownership, doesn’t it? That’s a policy which the WEF has been nudging along for the last ten years.
There’s number 8, “Avoid air travel where alternative options exist”, number 1 “Work from home where possible” or number 9, “switching to modern cooking solutions”.
Not one of which is a new policy or original idea; they all already existed as mooted solutions for totally different problems.
The supplementary section – “Targeted consumer support” – suggests extra benefits be paid to low-income households to cover their energy bills (a sort of proto-UBI), as well as boosting electric vehicle uptake and replacing old heating systems with heat pumps.
In short, what we have here is a “climate lockdown” by any other name. Perhaps a trial run.
This really should end the argument for anyone as yet unconvinced that the war in Iran is being used to push through the ever-familiar “Great Reset” agenda.
And in case you’re not seeing where we go from here, recall the (totally spurious) reports of “nature recovering” during the Covid lockdowns?
That’s what comes next.
We’re subjected to these measures as an “emergency management” system, and then – shockingly – we’re told that it’s really helped the environment and reduced pollution and CO2 and slowed warming and…whatever else they want to say.
They won’t be constrained by reality; that’s the benefit of just making stuff up.
Once again, we’re being asked to believe that, by total chance, what we need to do is what all governments on Earth already wanted to do.
It’s really shocking how often that happens.
