“Without fuel they were nothing. They’d built a house of straw. The thundering machines sputtered and stopped.” — “The Road Warrior”
US gasoline prices have jumped, and for many commuters a 50% weekly increase at the pump is a real hardship. But people who drive electric cars mostly avoid that pain: they charge at home, often overnight, and pay far less per mile than gasoline drivers. An analysis last December found EVs costing about 5 cents per mile versus 12 cents for gasoline cars — and that comparison was made before the Iran conflict pushed oil prices higher.
For years EV sceptics raised predictable complaints — range anxiety, charging time, mineral constraints — even as EV range tripled and charging routines shifted to overnight habits. Political choices made a big difference too. The Trump administration curtailed government support for US battery factories and EV subsidies, a move that mattered because US tariffs keep Chinese batteries and EVs artificially expensive. High tariffs and political controversies around major EV manufacturers discouraged buyers, while Detroit’s own missteps slowed American automakers’ EV rollouts. The result: global EV sales surged, but US adoption plateaued and even fell.
That retreat has clear consequences. Other regions — China, Europe, many emerging markets — are accelerating their EV transitions. Slower EV production and adoption in the US can keep prices higher, delay battery and software improvements, and risk that the next generation of auto value creation happens elsewhere. In some countries the “flippening” to EVs has already occurred; Norway and Singapore are notable examples.
The Iran war highlights a separate, vital point: oil is uniquely vulnerable to supply shocks. A relatively small disruption — closure of the Strait of Hormuz, attacks on regional infrastructure — can rapidly spike crude and gasoline prices because demand for oil is highly inelastic in the short run. People still need to commute, and trucks, ships and planes keep moving. Oil is also a crucial feedstock for plastics and many modern industries, so supply disruptions prompt desperate willingness to pay more. That’s why even though only about 20% of global oil passes through the Strait of Hormuz, disruptions there nearly doubled oil prices.
Electricity markets are different. In the US, abundant domestic shale gas and fragmented natural gas markets mean American electricity prices are much less exposed to Gulf disruptions than oil prices are. Even global LNG disruptions affect Asia more than the US. The historical volatility contrast is striking: oil and gasoline prices swing far more than electricity. That makes driving an EV a clear hedge against recurring oil shocks. If you drive an EV in America today, the Iran war hurts you far less than someone who fills up weekly.
Worsening geopolitical vulnerability could make oil shocks more frequent or severe. Modern drone warfare and inexpensive precision strike capabilities allow smaller actors to threaten maritime chokepoints that were once relatively secure. Because oil is traded on global markets, any regional conflict that impairs shipping routes can instantly push prices up worldwide — including in the US. And recent US policy and military posture have not re-established the old certainty that American power will reliably keep oil markets calm.
This shifts the energy transition from primarily a climate argument to a national-security imperative. High and unstable fossil-fuel prices are an economic and social vulnerability. The Iran conflict is already prompting emergency measures worldwide — from rationing and working-from-home orders to strategic reserves releases and national energy-saving campaigns. Unlike previous crises, countries today have an alternative: accelerate deployment of solar, wind and batteries, and electrify transport. Switching to electric vehicles is a direct, practical way to reduce exposure to oil shocks.
There are signs of that shift. Dealers worldwide report increased EV inquiries; Chinese EV makers are seeing strong demand across Asia; European buyers are responding to high fuel costs. Historically, oil shocks have encouraged durable changes — the 1970s crises spurred demand for more fuel-efficient cars from Japan. This episode could do the same for EVs. Unlike the past, however, batteries and EV technology have matured dramatically and costs have fallen; EVs are now genuinely competitive with combustion vehicles.
If the US persists in resisting EV adoption through tariffs, cancelled support, and politicized messaging, it risks more than higher pump prices for American drivers. Industrially, the same digital, battery and motor technologies that power EVs underpin drones, robots, and many electronics. Weak domestic EV demand limits the scale for component manufacturers, undermining competitiveness in broader advanced-manufacturing sectors. In short, lagging on EVs cedes the industrial future to regions that embrace the transition.
For individual Americans, the practical consequence is continued exposure to intermittent spikes in gasoline prices, higher per-mile costs, and the ongoing inconvenience of weekly refueling. For more pragmatic nations, growing EV adoption insulates middle classes from developments in the Middle East: they wake up to fully charged cars and aren’t anxiously watching Strait-of-Hormuz headlines.
The Iran war is a vivid reminder that dependence on global oil markets is a strategic liability. Accelerating electrification of transport and expanding renewables and storage are not just climate policies but measures to increase resilience and national security. Political choices that slowed America’s EV transition have real costs now — higher fuel bills, weakened industrial positioning, and heightened vulnerability to the next supply shock. Choosing to disbelieve in technological and energy transitions has consequences; countries and consumers that embrace electrification will be better protected from the next geopolitical disruption.
