LONDON — Reflecting on energy markets just over one month into Russia’s onslaught in Ukraine, Saudi Arabia’s top energy official saidThis is a link to “Look at the current situation, who’s talking about climate change right now?”

The comments Prince Abdulaziz Bin Salman made in March were a rerun from his speech to attendees of the COP26 climate conference in Glasgow, Scotland in November 2013. In that address, he said the world could reduce greenhouse gas emissions by using hydrocarbons.

Abdulaziz shared his thoughts on climate change and energy security with CNBC. He said that Saudi Arabia is the largest oil exporter in the world, and would continue to support fossil fuel production. “We are pro producing oil and gas, and — hallelujah — pro using coal.”

The Russian President Vladimir Putin’s War in Ukraine is about to enter its fourth month. This raises concerns over the implications of the conflict. food, energyand the global climate goals.

G-7 warnedRussia’s invasion caused “one of most severe food- and energy crises” in recent history, threatening the world’s most vulnerable.

U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has saidThe Kremlin’s aggression on Ukraine could have serious implications for global heat targets. turn to coalOder imports of liquefied natural gasAlternative sources of energy to Russian oil.

Guterres described the shortsighted rush for fossil fuels in “madness”, before warning that mankind’s addiction to fossil fuels will lead to mutually assured destruction.

Six months later, negotiators were leaving the U.K. in a state of dismay six months after COP26 ended. incremental progressThe global energy landscape has dramatically changed.

The invasion of Russia has effectively put an energy transition in limbo. It is clear that policymakers must shift away fossil fuels to avoid an apocalyptic climate.

U.N. chief said countries shouldn’t “hit the brakes on decarbonization” in response to Russia’s invasion. “Now is the time for us to pedal to the drum towards a sustainable energy future.”

Krakovska stated, “From my perspective, because I’m still here in Ukraine, and I see all of it from the beginning, I would suggest that our first security, the security for life, is what we have.” Her previous experience includes: told CNBCThe primary cause of Russia’s conflict and climate crisis is due to humanity’s dependence on fossil fuels.

We will continue to be dependent on fossil fuels. The longer we delay, the greater our dependence. [climate]Krakovska stated, “The more secure we become when we act,”

Researchers have consistently stressed the fact that global warming is primarily caused by the burning of fossil fuels like coal, oil, and gas. Without immediate, deep emission reductions in all sectors, it will be impossible to limit global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius.

The temperature limit at which the world is aiming for is a critical global target. Beyond this point tipping points are much more probable. Tiping points refer to thresholds where small changes could cause dramatic changes in Earth’s life support system.

All world government agreed to the 2015 Paris climate accordGlobal warming should be kept below 2° Celsius. Also, efforts must be made to reduce the temperature rise by 1.5° Celsius. The International Energy Agency is responsible for the former. warnedIt is not possible to develop new oil or gas projects.

Krakovska heads the Hydrometeorological Institute of Ukraine’s applied climatology lab. While it is difficult at the moment to estimate the effects of Russia’s invasion on climate, there are clear signs of ecological destruction.

Krakovska stated that she was concerned about the behavior of Krakovska. large swathes of wildfires burning unchecked in SiberiaNoting that Russian military units which would normally fight these fires were relocated to Ukraine’s frontline,

Greenpeace said that wildfires in Siberia were twice as big last month than they were in 2021. They cited satellite data. The burning of Sibirians’ trees results in extreme carbon pollution and melting of methane-rich Permafrost, which is starting to become a regular occurrence of climate collapse.

Krakovska stated that “this war causes such many terrible consequences, and it only exacerbates climate crisis.” Her repeated the Ukrainian government’s request to the EU that Russia stop financing its invasion and impose an immediate ban on Russian oil imports.

The IEA was established in late March. publishedA 10-point plan for reducing oil demand. It recommends policies like lowering highway speeds by at least 10 km/h, working remotely as often as possible, and no car on Sundays in cities.

According to the energy agency, such measures would reduce global price pressure, decrease economic harm, and shrink Russia’s hydrocarbon revenues. This will help shift oil demand towards a sustainable path.

Lazarus stated that even though there are some behavioral or cultural challenges, such as changing speeds or the temperature in our homes, it can be done.

People want to be involved in something. Lazarus explained that the desire to help reduces the cost and vulnerability of households investing in energy efficiency, conservation, and helps the rest the world free up the resources needed to deal with this crisis. This is the right time to make dramatic effort on the demand side.

The world’s top climate scientists warn that global warming has reached a critical point.now or never” territory.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UN) reiterated the fact that to reduce global warming below the key threshold of 0°C, the emissions from warm gases must be cut by half before the end the next decade.

Jose Manuel Barroso was chairman of Goldman Sachs International. He also served as the former President of the European Commission.

Everyone agrees in the long and medium-term that fossil fuels are better off. The point is how costly it will be — and so I think there is a risk of backlash. Barroso added that there was a chance of the climate agenda being collateral damage due to this war in Ukraine.

The IPCC has no doubt about the “cost” associated with the fight for a sustainable future. It is not as costly as people may believe.

“Without taking into account the economic benefits of reduced adaptation costs or avoided climate impacts, global Gross Domestic Product (GDP) would be just a few percentage points lower in 2050 if we take the actions necessary to limit warming to 2°C (3.6°F) or below, compared to maintaining current policies,” IPCC Working Group III Co-Chair Priyadarshi Shukla said on April 4.

— CNBC’s Lucy Handley contributed to this report.