Driving the news: Guterres fielded questions on the Saudi oil attacks and President Trump’s continued rollback of environmental rules as he sought to preview next week’s UN Climate Action summit.

• "Our overarching focus for our meetings next week will be sustainable and inclusive development, leaving no one behind,” Guterres said in his opening remarks. "With a spotlight on climate change, which affects everyone."
• On the Saudi attacks, Guterres said: "I don’t think there is a more serious threat in the world than what’s happening in the Gulf."
• When asked whether he agrees with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who said Wednesday that the attacks were an "act of war," Guterres responded: "It doesn’t look like an act of peace."

One level deeper: Guterres also deflected questions about Trump’s continued dismissal of climate science and his administration's imminent rollback of fuel efficiency standards, as well as a related effort to block California’s ability to issue tougher versions of those standards.

What’s next: Guterres said he intends for at least some leaders to present specific plans on Monday toward reaching a 2050 goal of "carbon neutrality," a Herculean effort given the significant dependence on carbon-emitting activities most countries engage in for energy, agriculture and manufacturing. Guterres has regularly said that climate change is the "biggest threat" to the global economy.

• "I told leaders not to come with fancy speeches but concrete commitments," Guterres said.

One level deeper: The greatest increases are in the Midwest and Great Lakes region, which Casselano says is not atypical because this region often sees high volatility.

• Alaska was the one state to see (a very tiny) decrease: $0.008.

The big picture: Gas prices remain pretty low, as they have the last few years, compared to a decade ago when they were hitting the $4 mark.

What’s next: Saudi Arabian officials have said they will fully restore oil supply by month's end, and that half the 5.7 million barrels per day of production knocked offline in the weekend attacks is back, Axios’ Ben Geman writes.

• Whether this is a short- or long-term impact on gas prices will greatly depend on how soon Saudi facilities are back up and running as well as crude oil prices, which account for more than 50% of the price at the pump, Casselano writes.

Go deeper: Check out the data, with state-level gas prices, here.

Driving the news: "Flight shaming” is near the top of the list of hypocrisy charges. Jet-fueled airplanes account for just 2% of global carbon dioxide emissions, but on a per-ton basis, it’s one of the most carbon-intensive activities individuals can choose. Some recent and high-profile examples:

• Swedish teenage activist Greta Thunberg sailed across the Atlantic Ocean in a carbon-free sailing boat to attend the climate summit, hosted by the United Nations on Sept. 23. But she faced criticism after a Berlin newspaper, TAZ, reported her sailing trip would emit more greenhouse gases than if she would have flown herself because several people would fly to New York to return the boat to Europe.
• British Prince Harry and his wife Duchess Meghan have recently faced similar criticism for urging action on climate change while flying in private jets.
• Al Gore, the former vice president turned climate activist, has faced by far the most hypocrisy charges (including but not limited to air travel), waged by people opposing action, according to a peer-reviewed 2018 study on this topic. Yes, people study this topic!

The motivations driving hypocrisy charges vary widely. Those who dismiss climate change as a problem do it to mock climate activists like Gore, but that 2018 study found it’s actually progressives urging action who invoke the hypocrisy angle more in the media.

• Trying to make people feel guilty for their carbon-intensive activities doesn’t actually get them to change their behavior, according to another study from 2016. Focusing on system-wide changes is best, the authors conclude.

“The reality is, you’re just not going to be effective motivating individual people if you make them feel bad.”

Between the lines: Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines hypocrisy as “behavior that contradicts what one claims to believe or feel.”

• This implies a conscious choice to do Action A that contradicts Belief B. Yet, our society’s use of energy — largely fossil fuels — is mostly passive and in most cases unavoidable.
• Indeed, most people would not be able to afford — both in money and time — to sail across the Atlantic Ocean in a carbon-free boat like Thunberg did.
• Since we all somehow use fossil fuels and carbon-free replacements are still the exception (for now), charges of hypocrisy would have to apply to pretty much all of us, thus diluting the whole point.

But, but, but: This concept is increasingly part of our debate, so it’s got me thinking about tangents that are more actionable: to what degree people are willingly taking concrete steps to lower their lifestyle’s impact on climate change, or why people are not. I’m also looking at how much we passively depend on fossil fuels and products coming from them, namely plastic.

What’s next: I’ll be occasionally writing columns tackling these topics going forward.

• One way people are taking individual steps in response to concerns about climate change is donating more to environmental groups, as I reported in last week’s column.
• Other topics I’m exploring are companies that seek profits from directly encouraging consumers to move away from fossil fuels, and reality checking the effectiveness of offsets and credits, which are arcane, intangible ways companies and individuals can counterbalance emissions.

What I’m hearing: A big reason I’m pursuing these angles is because I regularly hear from readers asking what they can do to address climate change, or they ask me about my carbon footprint. So, what do you do to reduce the climate impact of your lifestyle? Or conversely, why don’t you take such steps?

There are no right or wrong answers, just your insights. Email me at amy@axios.com.