Skip to the story
All StoriesPoliticsConflict & SecurityBusiness & EconomyScience & TechHealthClimateMedia
All stories
Climate159 outlets ran this4 min read

Global Carbon Pollution to Fall 0.4% in 2026

Decrease in fossil fuel emissions attributed to Iran war and renewables, but total CO2 rises.

AI-assisted coverage comparison, editor-supervised · How this was made

Published
The coal-fired Mountaineer Power Plant, near New Haven, W.Va., operates across the Ohio River from the Lock 24 RV Park and Campground in Racine, Ohio, March 14, 2026. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster, File)

What this story says

  • Global carbon pollution from fossil fuels is projected to decrease by 0.4% in 2026, reaching 42.2 billion tons.
  • The decrease is primarily attributed to oil supply shocks from the Iran war and the expansion of renewable energy sources.
  • Oil emissions are expected to fall by nearly 2%, while coal emissions are projected to rise by 0.6%.
  • Total global CO2 emissions, including land use changes, are forecast to increase by 1%.

Who covered it

Left 41%(41)Centre 38%(39)Right 21%(21)

Percentages are shares of the 101 outlets carrying a published leaning rating. 58 of the 159 outlets we know ran this story carry no rating and are not counted in them. Coverage measured .

Trust

58/100

Craft

66/100

Hype

48/100

159 sources · methodology

Global carbon pollution from burning fossil fuels is projected to decrease by 0.4% in 2026, according to a study by the Global Carbon Project. This marks the third time in the 21st century that such emissions have fallen, following the 2009 recession and the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. The projected decrease amounts to 42.2 billion tons of carbon dioxide.

Scientists attribute this reduction primarily to supply shocks stemming from the Iran war, which has impacted oil prices and availability, and the increasing adoption of renewable energy sources. Oil emissions are expected to fall by nearly 2%, while natural gas emissions are forecast to decrease by 0.3%. Conversely, coal emissions are projected to rise by 0.6%.

However, total global CO2 emissions, which include those from land use changes such as deforestation and peat fires, are expected to increase by 1%. This rise is due to land use emissions increasing at a faster rate than fossil fuel emissions have decreased.

Disagreement on the cause of the decline

While the Global Carbon Project study links the fossil fuel emission drop to the Iran war and renewables, some reports suggest a more nuanced view. CTV News quoted study co-author Glen Peters stating the decrease is "largely driven by the war in Iran, what’s happened in the Strait of Hormuz," and that it is "a little bit of good news, but for the wrong reasons." Conversely, some outlets highlight the role of renewable energy growth. The Indian Express digest attributes the decline to "supply shocks created by the ongoing US-Iran conflict and the growing footprint of renewable energy sources."

What the coverage left out

None of the left-rated digests mention the specific figure for total global CO2 emissions, which is projected to increase by 1%. None of the centre-rated digests mention the specific figure for total global CO2 emissions, which is projected to increase by 1%. None of the right-rated digests mention the specific figure for total global CO2 emissions, which is projected to increase by 1%.

Tags:#ClimateChange#CarbonEmissions#FossilFuels#RenewableEnergy#IranWar#GlobalWarming

Still developing. We have re-checked which outlets are covering this 1 time, most recently on 10 Nov 2026, 14:30, and will add the sides that appear.

How each side covered it

Our own reading of the reporting listed below, written from the outlets’ articles rather than quoted from them. The reasoning is set out on our methodology page.

Left

41 rated outlets

  • Left-rated reports highlighted the role of the Iran war in the decline of fossil fuel emissions, often framing it as a temporary or problematic cause. The Indian Express stated the decline was due to "supply shocks created by the ongoing US-Iran conflict and the growing footprint of renewable energy sources." Semafor noted that "A reduction driven partly by geopolitical shocks is not a sustainable climate solution," quoting Professor Pierre Friedlingstein. HuffPost Italy's headline read, "Emissions From Fossil Sources Are Falling (Even for the War in Iran). But It Is a False Signal," and its digest mentioned the fall is "insufficient and not structural braking." In.gr's headline declared, "In the Iran War, Only the Climate Is the Winner - Carbon Emissions Dropped in 2026." SANA's digest stated the reduction was "Due to the Impact of the War on Oil Prices." Franceinfo.fr's headline noted "encouraging signs" but also pointed to "the effects of deforestation, which is still massive." Sydney Morning Herald reported "Greenhouse pollution down but global warming surges as climate talks begin," linking the fall to "the war in Iran and new renewables."

Centre

39 rated outlets

  • Centre-rated reports focused on the combination of factors leading to the emissions decrease, often noting the war's impact. CTV News' headline stated, "Heat-trapping carbon pollution drops, but scientists cite the Iran war rather than energy progress," and its full report detailed how the war "effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz, a vital shipping artery for petroleum products, pushing up global prices of gasoline and oil." ElNacional.cat's headline was "The 'Positive' and Unexpected Factor of the War with Iran," with its digest noting "The rise in the price of fossil fuels and supply disruptions cause a drop in emissions." Eesti Rahvusringhääling reported, "The US-Iran War Pushed Global Carbon Emissions Into a Long-Term Decline," but also stated "emissions are falling too slowly to meet climate goals." Observador's headline was "Renewable Energies and War in Iran Drive Down Carbon Emissions," and its digest mentioned "two thirds of carbon emissions are being supplied thanks to the expansion of alternative energies, but 'pulled down' by 'geopolitical crises is not' solution." TRT World's headline linked the Iran war to lower fossil fuel emissions, and its digest specified "oil-related emissions expected to drop 1.9 percent, although coal use is forecast to rise."

Right

21 rated outlets

  • Right-rated reports often highlighted the decline in fossil fuel emissions while cautioning about its sustainability or focusing on specific components of the change. Clarin's headline was "Iran's War Unexpectedly Caused a Decline in Carbon Emissions This Year," and its digest warned "this decline could be ephemeral." Observador's headline read, "Renewable Energies and War in Iran Drive Down Carbon Emissions," with its digest noting that "pulled down" by "geopolitical crises is not" a solution. Anadolu Ajansı's headline stated, "Iran War Disruption Expected to Curb Global Fossil Fuel Emissions, Scientists Say," and its digest noted "Oil-related emissions forecast to fall 1.9%, while coal emissions are expected to rise." Dagens Nyheter reported, "Renewable Energy and the Iran War Are Causing Emissions to Decrease," but quoted "This is not enough to put global emissions on a downward trend." N-tv's headline was "Despite Decline in Oil: Global CO2 Emissions Continue to Rise," and its digest stated "there is no reason for researchers to cheer." The National Herald's headline mirrored CTV News', "Heat-Trapping Carbon Pollution Drops, but Scientists Cite the Iran War Rather than Energy Progress."

Questions about this coverage

How did the left and right cover Global Carbon Pollution to Fall 0.4% in 2026?
Of the 101 outlets on this story carrying a published leaning rating, 41% are rated left, 38% are rated centre, 21% are rated right. Those percentages are shares of the rated outlets, not of every outlet that ran it, which was 159. The sections above set out what each side emphasised, in its own terms.
Is Global Carbon Pollution to Fall 0.4% in 2026 left or right?
Neither side dominates it. Of the 101 rated outlets on this story, 41% are rated left, 38% are rated centre, 21% are rated right, and no side holds the 70% this site would want before calling a field one-sided. A story is not left or right in any case; the outlets that carried it are what carry ratings.
Is the coverage of Global Carbon Pollution to Fall 0.4% in 2026 biased?
Global Carbon Pollution to Fall 0.4% in 2026 is one event reported by 159 outlets, and this page does not rate the story as biased or unbiased. What it publishes is the spread: which outlets ran it, where named rating organisations place each of them on the spectrum, and what each side chose to lead with. A leaning rating describes an outlet's record over time, not this article, and the two should not be run together.
Which outlets covered Global Carbon Pollution to Fall 0.4% in 2026?
159 that we know of, every one of them listed further up this page with a link to its own report and to what we hold on the publisher. Nothing here is a summary of somebody else's summary: the outlets are named so the original reporting can be read.
What is the projected change in global carbon pollution from fossil fuels in 2026?
Global carbon pollution from fossil fuels is projected to decrease by 0.4% in 2026. This amounts to an estimated 42.2 billion tons of carbon dioxide, marking the third reduction in the 21st century.
What are the main reasons for the projected decrease in fossil fuel emissions?
The decrease is primarily attributed to supply shocks caused by the Iran war, which has affected oil prices and availability, and the growing use of renewable energy sources. Oil emissions are expected to fall by nearly 2%.
Will total global CO2 emissions decrease in 2026?
No, total global CO2 emissions, which include those from land use changes like deforestation, are expected to increase by 1% in 2026. This is because emissions from land use are rising faster than fossil fuel emissions are falling.

Read it at the source

159 outlets, grouped by the leaning a published rating gives them. Every headline links to the original; an underlined outlet name opens our profile of that publisher.

Left

41
Show 33 more

Centre

39
Show 31 more

Right

21
Show 13 more

Not rated

58
Show 50 more

How did this read?

About the coverage, not about the story. We do not ask whether you agree with what happened — we have no honest use for that answer.

More in Climate

All Climate →
2026 on track to be hottest year as climate summit opens3 min read2026 on track to be hottest year as climate summit opensRead storyBrazil to unveil fossil‑fuel transition road map at COP31, says Ana Toni2 min readBrazil to unveil fossil‑fuel transition road map at COP31, says Ana ToniRead storyEconomist tells Canada climate trial nation's power is limited1 min readEconomist tells Canada climate trial nation's power is limitedRead story

Elsewhere on the site

President Donald Trump speaks in the James Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House Monday, Nov. 9, 2026, in Washington. (Alex Brandon/The Associated Press)Conflict & Security•3 min readTrump Pauses New Iran Strikes After Regional AppealsHegseth faces impeachment resolution over Iran warPolitics•2 min readHegseth faces impeachment resolution over Iran warFridges and freezers in hundreds of supermarkets across France were affected last monthConflict & Security•3 min readFrance Blames Iran's Revolutionary Guard for Supermarket CyberattacksNetanyahu Urges Trump to Resume Iran Strikes, Report SaysPolitics•3 min readNetanyahu Urges Trump to Resume Iran Strikes, Report Says
Global Carbon Emissions 2026 | MediaBias News