It is with great sadness that we announce the passing of Francisco Maldonado, Sr, beloved husband, father, grandfather, and friend on March 4, 2026. Francisco was born on October 10, 1952 in Matamoros, Mexico to Jose and Aurora Gracias Maldonado. He married Maria Garcia and she preceded Francisco in death on July 31, 2025. Francisco worked for many years as a tractor supervisor. He and Maria were parishioners at St. Margaret Catholic Church in Clewiston. He lived a full life of dedication to his family. He was a devoted father, to his children and a loving grandfather to his grandchildren. Francisco was a lover of old pickup trucks.
Francisco leaves fond memories with his children; Aurora Jaimes and her husband Hilario, Maria Delafuente and her husband Javier, Francisco Maldonado, Jr and Jose Maldonado. He was a loving grandfather to his grandchildren; Annabella Delafuente, Alejandro Delafuente, Adaliz Jaimes, and Angel Jaimes. . Francisco touched the hearts of many throughout his life. Francisco will be remembered by everyone who knew him with a smile.
Celebration of Francisco life will be held with a funeral mass on Monday, March 9, 2026, at St. Margaret Catholic Church in Clewiston at 11:00 a.m. followed by taking Francisco to Ridgelawn Cemetery to be laid next to his loving wife, Maria. A visitation will be held at the church starting at 9:00 a.m. also on Monday, March 9, 2026. All who knew Francisco are welcome to the join the family to celebrate his life. Francisco's spirit will remain in the hearts of all who loved and cared deeply for him.
Francisco has been entrusted with the caring staff of Akin-Davis Funeral Home - Clewiston.
Thursday, March 05, 2026
Algae Warning For Lake Okeechobee
Moore Haven, Fla. — The Florida Department of Health in Glades County (DOH-Glades) cautions the public of the presence of blue-green algae in Lake Okeechobee on March 3, 2026.
Water sample testing is underway. Blue-green algae have the potential to produce toxins. Since environmental conditions can change at any time, it is important to exercise caution, even if
presence of toxins has not yet been confirmed.
Residents and visitors are advised to take the following precautions:
• Do not drink, swim, wade, use personal watercrafts, or come into contact with waters
where there is a visible bloom.
• Wash your skin and clothing with soap and water if you have any contact with algae, or
discolored or water that smells unpleasant.
• Keep pets and livestock away from the area to avoid any contact with water. Waters
where algae blooms are present are not safe for animals. Pets and livestock should use
an alternative source of water when algae blooms are present.
• Do not cook or clean dishes with water contaminated by algae blooms. Boiling the water
will not eliminate toxins.
• Eating fillets from healthy fish caught in freshwater lakes experiencing blooms is safe.
Rinse fish fillets with tap or bottled water, throw out the
Water sample testing is underway. Blue-green algae have the potential to produce toxins. Since environmental conditions can change at any time, it is important to exercise caution, even if
presence of toxins has not yet been confirmed.
Residents and visitors are advised to take the following precautions:
• Do not drink, swim, wade, use personal watercrafts, or come into contact with waters
where there is a visible bloom.
• Wash your skin and clothing with soap and water if you have any contact with algae, or
discolored or water that smells unpleasant.
• Keep pets and livestock away from the area to avoid any contact with water. Waters
where algae blooms are present are not safe for animals. Pets and livestock should use
an alternative source of water when algae blooms are present.
• Do not cook or clean dishes with water contaminated by algae blooms. Boiling the water
will not eliminate toxins.
• Eating fillets from healthy fish caught in freshwater lakes experiencing blooms is safe.
Rinse fish fillets with tap or bottled water, throw out the
Tuesday, March 03, 2026
41-Year Old Arrested In Hendry Courthouse Bomb Threat
LABELLE, FL. -- On Thursday, February 26, 2026, at approximately 9:40am, a bomb threat was made to the Hendry County Courthouse, which was followed by a complete evacuation of all staff and citizens.
Hendry County Court Bailiffs and Security along with all available road patrol units responded and secured the perimeter of the courthouse; inside Courtroom bailiffs did a careful and methodical search of all courtrooms. Lee County Sheriff’s Office Bomb Squad Bomb-Sniffing dogs were also dispatched from the Lee County Sheriff’s Office where they did a secondary search of the courthouse. Neither the deputies or bomb-sniffing dogs discovered any suspicious packages or devices.
Hendry County Criminal Investigation immediately began looking into the bomb threat. By Friday night, February 27, 2026, they had an Arrest Warrant in hand and responded to a home in Cape Coral where the suspect lived with his girlfriend.
After interviewing witnesses at the residence, 41-year-old Don Michael Anthony Foligno was under arrest. It was related to detectives that Foligno had a court date to appear before the Judge at 9:00am on February 26 and was concerned about the bond amount. The call was made to the courthouse citing “there were two bombs planted there and were to go off in one hour, this is no joke”. According to reports, this was done in an effort to postpone his court appearance.
Foligno was taken into custody and transported to the Lee County Jail. On Tuesday, March 3, 2026, Foligno was transported to the Hendry County Jail where he is charged with False Report of Bomb/Explosive/ Weapon of Mass Destruction and Use of Two-Way Communication Device to Facilitate a Felony. He was right…making a Bomb Threat is “No Joke”.
Foligno, according to county records has an extensive arrest record in Hendry County going back 20 years.
Impaired Driving - 30% Of Traffic Fatalities
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — Driving impaired remains one of the most dangerous and entirely preventable threats on Florida’s roadways. Each year, lives are lost and families are permanently impacted due to drivers operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol, drugs, or a combination of both. One in three fatal traffic crashes in the state involves an impaired driver and accounts for more than 30% of all traffic fatalities. These incidents are preventable and result from decisions that can be avoided. That is why this March, the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (FLHSMV), and its division, the Florida Highway Patrol (FHP), urge all motorists to make responsible choices before getting into the driver’s seat.
Throughout March, FLHSMV and FHP will emphasize the dangers and consequences of impaired driving. While law enforcement continues to monitor Florida’s roadways, preventing impaired driving requires the commitment of every driver.
“Every day, our troopers encounter situations that could have been prevented with one responsible decision to not get behind the wheel while impaired. Whether the impairment is caused by alcohol, drugs, or fatigue, the result can be life‑changing in an instant,” said FHP Colonel Gary Howze. “We urge every driver to recognize the responsibility they carry each time they start their vehicle. Every safe choice behind the wheel protects a family, a community, and a future that cannot be replaced.”
Alcohol‑Impaired Driving
Alcohol remains the leading factor in impaired‑driving crashes, injuries, and fatalities in Florida. Over the last five years, alcohol alone accounted for:84.4% of impaired‑driving crashes
35.7% of impaired‑driving fatalities
80.7% of impaired‑driving injuries
DUI and open‑container violations also historically increase during the month of March.
Penalties for DUI can include substantial fines, license revocation, and potential incarceration. A DUI conviction remains on a driving record for 75 years. Florida law prohibits possession of alcohol by individuals under 21, providing alcohol to anyone under 21, and possession of open alcoholic beverage containers in vehicles.
Impairment begins with the first drink, and judgment is the first ability affected.
Drug‑Impaired Driving
Drug impairment presents significant risks and varies widely depending on the substance. Unlike alcohol, there is no established impairment limit for drugs. Marijuana is the most prevalent drug found in impaired‑driving crashes, particularly among drivers ages 10–24. Individuals ages 25–29 represent the highest number of drug‑related crashes and positive drug test results.
Between 2018 and 2023, Florida recorded:4,000+ drug‑confirmed crashes
Nearly 2,300 drug‑confirmed fatalities
Marijuana also acts as an impairment multiplier when combined with alcohol, prescription medications, or other drugs. Driving under the influence of drugs carries the same penalties as alcohol impairment.
Drowsy Driving
Drowsy driving poses significant safety risks and can result in serious or fatal crashes. Fatigue slows reaction time, impairs judgment, and may cause microsleep episodes that leave drivers unable to respond to changing roadway conditions. Drowsiness can occur on its own, but it is also frequently a secondary form of impairment caused by alcohol, drugs, or certain medications—further compounding the danger. High‑risk groups include young drivers, shift workers, commercial drivers, and individuals with untreated sleep disorders. Motorists are encouraged to rest before driving, take breaks every 100 miles or two hours, and utilize Florida’s rest areas and service plazas.
FHP Enforcement and Drug Recognition Expertise
FHP Troopers and law enforcement officers statewide are trained to identify impaired drivers. Florida has 303 certified Drug Recognition Experts (DREs), including 61 within FHP and nine instructors. DREs complete extensive academic and field training in physiology, vital signs, standardized field sobriety testing, and drug categories, followed by a rigorous certification process. Their expertise is critical to keeping impaired drivers off the road and ensuring that dangerous behavior is identified quickly and accurately. By recognizing impairment in all its forms, these highly trained officers help prevent crashes, protect lives, and keep Florida’s roadways safe for everyone.
Recognizing Impairment
Impairment affects a driver’s ability to operate a vehicle safely long before obvious signs appear. The five primary indicators of impairment include:
Throughout March, FLHSMV and FHP will emphasize the dangers and consequences of impaired driving. While law enforcement continues to monitor Florida’s roadways, preventing impaired driving requires the commitment of every driver.
“Every day, our troopers encounter situations that could have been prevented with one responsible decision to not get behind the wheel while impaired. Whether the impairment is caused by alcohol, drugs, or fatigue, the result can be life‑changing in an instant,” said FHP Colonel Gary Howze. “We urge every driver to recognize the responsibility they carry each time they start their vehicle. Every safe choice behind the wheel protects a family, a community, and a future that cannot be replaced.”
Alcohol‑Impaired Driving
Alcohol remains the leading factor in impaired‑driving crashes, injuries, and fatalities in Florida. Over the last five years, alcohol alone accounted for:84.4% of impaired‑driving crashes
35.7% of impaired‑driving fatalities
80.7% of impaired‑driving injuries
DUI and open‑container violations also historically increase during the month of March.
Penalties for DUI can include substantial fines, license revocation, and potential incarceration. A DUI conviction remains on a driving record for 75 years. Florida law prohibits possession of alcohol by individuals under 21, providing alcohol to anyone under 21, and possession of open alcoholic beverage containers in vehicles.
Impairment begins with the first drink, and judgment is the first ability affected.
Drug‑Impaired Driving
Drug impairment presents significant risks and varies widely depending on the substance. Unlike alcohol, there is no established impairment limit for drugs. Marijuana is the most prevalent drug found in impaired‑driving crashes, particularly among drivers ages 10–24. Individuals ages 25–29 represent the highest number of drug‑related crashes and positive drug test results.
Between 2018 and 2023, Florida recorded:4,000+ drug‑confirmed crashes
Nearly 2,300 drug‑confirmed fatalities
Marijuana also acts as an impairment multiplier when combined with alcohol, prescription medications, or other drugs. Driving under the influence of drugs carries the same penalties as alcohol impairment.
Drowsy Driving
Drowsy driving poses significant safety risks and can result in serious or fatal crashes. Fatigue slows reaction time, impairs judgment, and may cause microsleep episodes that leave drivers unable to respond to changing roadway conditions. Drowsiness can occur on its own, but it is also frequently a secondary form of impairment caused by alcohol, drugs, or certain medications—further compounding the danger. High‑risk groups include young drivers, shift workers, commercial drivers, and individuals with untreated sleep disorders. Motorists are encouraged to rest before driving, take breaks every 100 miles or two hours, and utilize Florida’s rest areas and service plazas.
FHP Enforcement and Drug Recognition Expertise
FHP Troopers and law enforcement officers statewide are trained to identify impaired drivers. Florida has 303 certified Drug Recognition Experts (DREs), including 61 within FHP and nine instructors. DREs complete extensive academic and field training in physiology, vital signs, standardized field sobriety testing, and drug categories, followed by a rigorous certification process. Their expertise is critical to keeping impaired drivers off the road and ensuring that dangerous behavior is identified quickly and accurately. By recognizing impairment in all its forms, these highly trained officers help prevent crashes, protect lives, and keep Florida’s roadways safe for everyone.
Recognizing Impairment
Impairment affects a driver’s ability to operate a vehicle safely long before obvious signs appear. The five primary indicators of impairment include:
Slowed reaction time
Limited short‑term memory functions
Decreased hand‑eye coordination
Weakened concentration
Difficulty perceiving time and distance
These effects can result from alcohol, illegal drugs, prescription medications, over‑the‑counter substances, or fatigue. Impaired driving is a choice with consequences that extend far beyond a single moment, and every driver has the power to prevent a tragedy before it occurs. FLHSMV and FHP remind all motorists that You Only Have One Life, and protecting it begins with making safe, responsible decisions every time you drive. To learn more about the Never Drive Impaired campaign, access safety materials, and review additional resources, visit FLHSMV.gov/impaired.
Limited short‑term memory functions
Decreased hand‑eye coordination
Weakened concentration
Difficulty perceiving time and distance
These effects can result from alcohol, illegal drugs, prescription medications, over‑the‑counter substances, or fatigue. Impaired driving is a choice with consequences that extend far beyond a single moment, and every driver has the power to prevent a tragedy before it occurs. FLHSMV and FHP remind all motorists that You Only Have One Life, and protecting it begins with making safe, responsible decisions every time you drive. To learn more about the Never Drive Impaired campaign, access safety materials, and review additional resources, visit FLHSMV.gov/impaired.
The Iran War Financial Costs? - Not Easy To Know But Climbing Quickly
Costs of recent Iran–Israel/U.S. clashes
Even focusing only on the most recent, open military phase gives a sense of how quickly costs escalate:
A concentrated Iranian missile salvo in October 2024 against Israel, involving about 180 medium‑range missiles, was estimated to cost Tehran around 2.3 billion dollars in hardware and related expenses, about 22 percent of its annual defense budget at the time.
On the U.S. side, estimates for “Operation Epic Fury” against Iran suggest about 630 million dollars just for pre‑strike mobilization (moving carriers, aircraft, and assets) and around 779 million dollars for the first 24 hours of strikes, putting the opening phase above 1.4 billion dollars. Longer‑run cost projections for a sustained war go up toward 200 billion dollars for the U.S. economy.
United States Spending:
The best current estimates put the total cost to the U.S. of the ongoing Iran war of 10 to 100 billions of dollars, depending on how long it lasts and how wide it spreads.
Infrastructure damage so far is very large on both sides, but it’s being tracked qualitatively (what was hit and how important it is) rather than with precise dollar figures yet.
Any dollar figures yet?
As of early March 2026, public sources do not offer reliable, detailed cost estimates specifically for physical infrastructure damage (ports, refineries, bases, terminals) inside Iran or in the Gulf states.
Economic analysts and the IMF instead talk in terms of macro‑level impacts: the total economic hit will depend heavily on the duration of the war and the extent of destruction to energy and industrial infrastructure, and on how long oil and shipping prices remain elevated.
In short, the infrastructure damage list is already long—naval bases, missile and drone facilities, nuclear‑related industrial sites, and major oil and port nodes in Iran, plus key energy and port assets in the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Bahrain—yet the financial valuation of those losses is still in early, rough‑order assessment rather than hard numbers.
Even focusing only on the most recent, open military phase gives a sense of how quickly costs escalate:
A concentrated Iranian missile salvo in October 2024 against Israel, involving about 180 medium‑range missiles, was estimated to cost Tehran around 2.3 billion dollars in hardware and related expenses, about 22 percent of its annual defense budget at the time.
On the U.S. side, estimates for “Operation Epic Fury” against Iran suggest about 630 million dollars just for pre‑strike mobilization (moving carriers, aircraft, and assets) and around 779 million dollars for the first 24 hours of strikes, putting the opening phase above 1.4 billion dollars. Longer‑run cost projections for a sustained war go up toward 200 billion dollars for the U.S. economy.
Why totals are uncertain
Much of Iran’s proxy spending is off‑budget or routed through covert channels and front companies, so outside estimates inevitably use intelligence leaks, partial budgets, and battlefield proxies (e.g., missile counts).
Indirect costs—lost oil revenue, higher shipping insurance, sanctions‑related GDP loss, currency collapse—often dwarf the visible military line items but are harder to attribute cleanly to specific operations or years.
Much of Iran’s proxy spending is off‑budget or routed through covert channels and front companies, so outside estimates inevitably use intelligence leaks, partial budgets, and battlefield proxies (e.g., missile counts).
Indirect costs—lost oil revenue, higher shipping insurance, sanctions‑related GDP loss, currency collapse—often dwarf the visible military line items but are harder to attribute cleanly to specific operations or years.
The best current estimates put the total cost to the U.S. of the ongoing Iran war of 10 to 100 billions of dollars, depending on how long it lasts and how wide it spreads.
Direct military cost estimates
The Penn Wharton Budget Model’s Kent Smetters estimates direct U.S. budgetary costs for Operation “Epic Fury” at about 65 billion dollars, with a range of 40–95 billion dollars, covering operations plus replacing munitions and equipment.
Independent tallies suggest the first 24 hours of strikes alone cost about 779 million dollars, including bomber sorties, fighter operations, Tomahawk cruise missiles, and carrier group operations.
Pre‑strike deployments and buildup (moving carriers and aircraft into position) are estimated at around 630 million dollars on top of that.
The Penn Wharton Budget Model’s Kent Smetters estimates direct U.S. budgetary costs for Operation “Epic Fury” at about 65 billion dollars, with a range of 40–95 billion dollars, covering operations plus replacing munitions and equipment.
Independent tallies suggest the first 24 hours of strikes alone cost about 779 million dollars, including bomber sorties, fighter operations, Tomahawk cruise missiles, and carrier group operations.
Pre‑strike deployments and buildup (moving carriers and aircraft into position) are estimated at around 630 million dollars on top of that.
Total economic impact on the U.S. economy
Smetters also projects broader economic losses to the U.S. of roughly 115 billion dollars, with a wide uncertainty band from 50 to 210 billion dollars, reflecting disrupted trade, higher energy prices, and tighter financial conditions.
Combining direct military costs and macroeconomic effects, his upper‑end scenario for the war’s total cost to the U.S. economy is around 210 billion dollars, assuming a conflict that lasts on the order of a couple of months and significantly disturbs markets.
Smetters also projects broader economic losses to the U.S. of roughly 115 billion dollars, with a wide uncertainty band from 50 to 210 billion dollars, reflecting disrupted trade, higher energy prices, and tighter financial conditions.
Combining direct military costs and macroeconomic effects, his upper‑end scenario for the war’s total cost to the U.S. economy is around 210 billion dollars, assuming a conflict that lasts on the order of a couple of months and significantly disturbs markets.
Current ballpark
Putting these together, early independent and academic estimates suggest:
Direct Pentagon cost: roughly 40–95 billion dollars, with about 65 billion treated as a central estimate if the war is not prolonged.
Total U.S. economic hit (budget + economy): plausible range from about 90 billion up to 200+ billion dollars, with roughly 180–210 billion as an upper‑bound scenario if energy and financial shocks are severe.
All of these figures are projections based on current intensity and assumed duration; if the war drags on beyond a couple of months or expands (for example, wider attacks in the Gulf or larger ground deployments), the costs rise sharply.
Putting these together, early independent and academic estimates suggest:
Direct Pentagon cost: roughly 40–95 billion dollars, with about 65 billion treated as a central estimate if the war is not prolonged.
Total U.S. economic hit (budget + economy): plausible range from about 90 billion up to 200+ billion dollars, with roughly 180–210 billion as an upper‑bound scenario if energy and financial shocks are severe.
All of these figures are projections based on current intensity and assumed duration; if the war drags on beyond a couple of months or expands (for example, wider attacks in the Gulf or larger ground deployments), the costs rise sharply.
Infrastructure damage so far is very large on both sides, but it’s being tracked qualitatively (what was hit and how important it is) rather than with precise dollar figures yet.
Infrastructure hit inside Iran
U.S.–Israeli strikes in Operation Epic Fury have hit more than 1,250 targets in the first two days, including naval bases, air defenses, drone facilities, missile sites, and command centers across the country.
Satellite imagery shows major damage at Konarak naval base and Iran’s main naval headquarters in Bandar Abbas, with ships burning and port infrastructure destroyed or heavily damaged.
A key drone facility at Choqa Balk in western Iran and air‑defense radar at Zahedan air base in the east were struck, indicating broad degradation of Iran’s air and drone network.
Battle‑damage assessments highlight hits on missile infrastructure across multiple provinces, including a missile base near Najafabad in Esfahan and bases around Bandar Abbas and Yazd, with bunker‑buster bombs collapsing hardened storage sites.
Earlier and current campaigns have also focused on Iran’s nuclear‑related industrial base; strikes in 2025 and follow‑on attacks in 2026 severely damaged enrichment facilities at Fordow and Natanz and metallurgy facilities at Isfahan, leaving only remnants of the pre‑2025 nuclear infrastructure.
Energy and export infrastructure
Kharg Island, Iran’s main crude export terminal that handled roughly 90% of crude exports (capacity up to about 1.8 million barrels per day), has been targeted by U.S. Navy Tomahawk missiles; the exact level of destruction is still being assessed, but sources describe “near‑total and indefinite loss” of the terminal in the near term.
Naval and fuel infrastructure at Bandar Abbas, including hardened underground bunkers for marine diesel, aviation fuel, and other strategic reserves, has been struck, disrupting both military logistics and civilian transport and industry in southern Iran.
Analysts note that damage to Kharg and Bandar Abbas collapses Iran’s main oil‑export income stream “almost entirely” in the short run, forcing deep budget cuts and limiting funds for proxies and domestic subsidies; repairing or work‑around exports via smaller ports could take months to years and still yield only a fraction of previous volumes.
Environmental and civilian systems
Rapid environment‑damage reviews note sunk or damaged naval vessels and bombed port facilities around Bandar Abbas and Konarak, generating pollution risks from fuel and oil leaks, and raising hazards for nearby coastal communities.
Strikes have also hit Basij and internal security facilities in Tehran and other provinces, damaging buildings in urban areas and causing fires and smoke plumes over the capital, although detailed data on power, water, and civilian transport infrastructure loss is still emerging.
Infrastructure targeted by Iran in other states
Iran has retaliated by striking energy and port infrastructure in Gulf states, aiming to raise global economic costs and pressure the U.S. and its allies.
Reports point to attacks on:
Jebel Ali / Jabal Ali area (UAE): military and civilian port and power facilities in the Dubai–Abu Dhabi corridor, including Jebel Ali Port and a major power complex, which is a critical regional maritime and energy hub.
Abu Dhabi and Dubai port infrastructure and Manama (Bahrain): drone and missile strikes causing damage to port facilities and shipping, heightening pollution and navigational risk.
Oil and gas installations in Qatar and Saudi Arabia, including reported attacks on energy sites in Qatar and an attempted drone strike on Ras Tanura (often reported as Ras Tan) refinery in Saudi Arabia, a crucial export facility; Saudi defenses reportedly intercepted some of these drones.
Environmental monitors warn that damaged port and offshore oil infrastructure in the Gulf, including at least one UAE‑owned platform reportedly targeted, could generate serious marine pollution and disrupt shipping lanes.
U.S.–Israeli strikes in Operation Epic Fury have hit more than 1,250 targets in the first two days, including naval bases, air defenses, drone facilities, missile sites, and command centers across the country.
Satellite imagery shows major damage at Konarak naval base and Iran’s main naval headquarters in Bandar Abbas, with ships burning and port infrastructure destroyed or heavily damaged.
A key drone facility at Choqa Balk in western Iran and air‑defense radar at Zahedan air base in the east were struck, indicating broad degradation of Iran’s air and drone network.
Battle‑damage assessments highlight hits on missile infrastructure across multiple provinces, including a missile base near Najafabad in Esfahan and bases around Bandar Abbas and Yazd, with bunker‑buster bombs collapsing hardened storage sites.
Earlier and current campaigns have also focused on Iran’s nuclear‑related industrial base; strikes in 2025 and follow‑on attacks in 2026 severely damaged enrichment facilities at Fordow and Natanz and metallurgy facilities at Isfahan, leaving only remnants of the pre‑2025 nuclear infrastructure.
Energy and export infrastructure
Kharg Island, Iran’s main crude export terminal that handled roughly 90% of crude exports (capacity up to about 1.8 million barrels per day), has been targeted by U.S. Navy Tomahawk missiles; the exact level of destruction is still being assessed, but sources describe “near‑total and indefinite loss” of the terminal in the near term.
Naval and fuel infrastructure at Bandar Abbas, including hardened underground bunkers for marine diesel, aviation fuel, and other strategic reserves, has been struck, disrupting both military logistics and civilian transport and industry in southern Iran.
Analysts note that damage to Kharg and Bandar Abbas collapses Iran’s main oil‑export income stream “almost entirely” in the short run, forcing deep budget cuts and limiting funds for proxies and domestic subsidies; repairing or work‑around exports via smaller ports could take months to years and still yield only a fraction of previous volumes.
Environmental and civilian systems
Rapid environment‑damage reviews note sunk or damaged naval vessels and bombed port facilities around Bandar Abbas and Konarak, generating pollution risks from fuel and oil leaks, and raising hazards for nearby coastal communities.
Strikes have also hit Basij and internal security facilities in Tehran and other provinces, damaging buildings in urban areas and causing fires and smoke plumes over the capital, although detailed data on power, water, and civilian transport infrastructure loss is still emerging.
Infrastructure targeted by Iran in other states
Iran has retaliated by striking energy and port infrastructure in Gulf states, aiming to raise global economic costs and pressure the U.S. and its allies.
Reports point to attacks on:
Jebel Ali / Jabal Ali area (UAE): military and civilian port and power facilities in the Dubai–Abu Dhabi corridor, including Jebel Ali Port and a major power complex, which is a critical regional maritime and energy hub.
Abu Dhabi and Dubai port infrastructure and Manama (Bahrain): drone and missile strikes causing damage to port facilities and shipping, heightening pollution and navigational risk.
Oil and gas installations in Qatar and Saudi Arabia, including reported attacks on energy sites in Qatar and an attempted drone strike on Ras Tanura (often reported as Ras Tan) refinery in Saudi Arabia, a crucial export facility; Saudi defenses reportedly intercepted some of these drones.
Environmental monitors warn that damaged port and offshore oil infrastructure in the Gulf, including at least one UAE‑owned platform reportedly targeted, could generate serious marine pollution and disrupt shipping lanes.
Any dollar figures yet?
As of early March 2026, public sources do not offer reliable, detailed cost estimates specifically for physical infrastructure damage (ports, refineries, bases, terminals) inside Iran or in the Gulf states.
Economic analysts and the IMF instead talk in terms of macro‑level impacts: the total economic hit will depend heavily on the duration of the war and the extent of destruction to energy and industrial infrastructure, and on how long oil and shipping prices remain elevated.
In short, the infrastructure damage list is already long—naval bases, missile and drone facilities, nuclear‑related industrial sites, and major oil and port nodes in Iran, plus key energy and port assets in the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Bahrain—yet the financial valuation of those losses is still in early, rough‑order assessment rather than hard numbers.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)