Let's step back in time for a moment.
Imagine you were back in 2019 and someone had outlined, in advance, the sequence of events that would unfold across 2020, 2021 and 2022, lockdowns, travel restrictions, and what began as “two weeks to flatten the curve” extending into years, many folk would have wanted to hear it out of a desire to be prepared, informed, and aware of what might be coming next. No? I know it is one of the reasons why I moved out of the city in 2018 ahead of what I observed when Pluto and Saturn opposed each other in 2001 and what I felt was going on in 2020, and the reason behind quite a number of public posts. Those posts were not about a 'lockdown' but about a massive redistribution of power, the likes of which we had not experienced since the Protestant revolt of the 16th century, when German aristocrats used Martin Luther's protest as an excuse to break from Rome and establish their own economic (and religious) system.
Today, the 22nd of March 2026, a similar question presents itself: are we being given early signals about what lies ahead?
On March 21st 2026, the International Energy Agency (IEA) released a report addressing how societies might respond to oil supply shocks. Framed as guidance, the document outlines a series of measures intended to reduce demand and stabilise energy systems during a period of strain. While not mandates, such recommendations are often indicative of the types of policies governments may consider if conditions worsen.
Within the broader context of global planning initiatives, such as the World Economic Forum’s 2030 agenda, these proposals can be viewed as part of a longer-term conversation about resilience, sustainability, and systemic adaptation in the face of resource constraints or they can be seen as another heist within the celestial energetic framework wherein the conditions are ripe to establish 'new conditions of living'
The IEA’s proposed “10-point plan” includes a range of potential measures. Among those discussed are reduced speed limits to conserve fuel, encouragement of remote working, expanded carpooling, and the introduction of car-free days. There are more speculative suggestions around limiting air travel and managing road usage more strictly.
Whilst these are not confirmed policies, being advisory in nature, such recommendations offer insight into how authorities might respond if energy shortages intensify.
The language used, “temporary measures”, is something we have heard before. It is not long ago that emergency responses introduced during crises persisted longer than initially anticipated. Energy disruptions linked to geopolitical tensions or supply constraints are rarely short-lived, and their effects can extend over years rather than months.
This does not necessarily imply inevitability, but it does underscore the importance of awareness. The current situation reflects a complex intersection of energy security, economic stability, and environmental transition. As fuel prices rise and supply chains tighten, behavioural changes, whether voluntary or encouraged, are likely to follow.
Many of the suggested adjustments were already put forward in 2020-22: working from home, reducing unnecessary travel, etc. and it seems that this is the next iteration of a deeper 'game'.
There are many things that those better educated than I can write about, but I just wanted to flag your attention to this document and see how you feel about what is unfolding, after all an Iranian client (lawyer 100 m from the White House) told me that some government agency granted a contract to a US engineering company to rebuild Tehran, weeks before the 'Iranian's' started bombing fellow Arab states... All is not what it seems...
https://www.iea.org/news/new-iea-report-highlights-options-to-ease-oil-price-pressures-on-consumers-in-response-to-middle-east-supply-disruptions