This all went to maximalist “brinksmanship” pretty quickly, but the OP specifies changing things as much “as possible.” That probably means that we’re talking a matter of degrees rather than tripping up what was, by the turn of the 20th century, a necessary industry.
Just spitballing, but international business today is only loosely controlled by governments. If that culture emerges in, say, the robber baron era in a much more organized fashion, you might be able to work up a scenario where a cabal of businessmen tries some OPEC-like cutthroat economic sabotage early on. Maybe they see inevitable tragedy in a modern global conflict, think they know better than world governments, and try to shut things down. Maybe they just get too greedy, or maybe there’s a string of bad luck with lots of early environmental catastrophes.
There are probably lots of ways to make the general public hate a specific group of people- we’ve got a pretty solid track record of this kind of behavior. Though doing it across the majority of the developed world is tougher. OTOH, it happened to communists, so the worst kind of predatory capitalism seems only s few degrees harder.
Engineer a backlash that keeps things highly regulated and controlled as the normal cost of doing business. Basically pump the breaks on the auto revolution. Cars remain just a bit less economical for a longer time. This affects living patterns, which itself positively feeds back into less need for cars, which lowers demand for petroleum, and so on.
Maybe trucks and buses get more focus ITTL with the idea of the family car not developing until the 30s or 40s. Things could pick up for cars and gas then, but from a lower starting point with ultimately a lower peak.