Climate Changed: The U.S. Military Has Spewed $21 Billion in Emissions since 9/11
ENVIRONMENT, 22 Jul 2019
- About a third of that occurred in conflict zones, study says
- Cutting emissions will lessen conflicts, author writes
The U.S. military is belching more global-warming pollutants than some industrialized nations, with about a third of its emissions occurring in major conflict zones such as Afghanistan and Iraq, according to a new study.
American armed forces — with a globe-spanning array of bases, warships, planes and land vehicles — are the world’s largest institutional emitter of greenhouse gases, topping countries including Sweden and Denmark, according to the study from Brown University’s Costs of War project. A spokesman for the Pentagon didn’t immediately return a request for comment.
The study estimated the carbon footprint of the many U.S. military operations since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The results: 766 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent released from 2001 through 2017. That includes 400 million tons emitted in major conflict zones. Add in facilities and other routine factors, and the total carbon footprint over those years rises to 1.2 billion tons.
For comparison, total global greenhouse emissions in 2017 — including everything from power generation to changes in land use — were 53.5 billion tons, according to the United Nations Environment Programme.
The U.S. doesn’t put a price on emissions. If it did, however, the Pentagon could face a steep bill. Greenhouse gas emission allowances sold in California’s cap-and-trade system, for example, cost $17.45 a ton. So the price for all of the military’s releases since 2001 through 2017 would come to $21.1 billion.
The latest report’s author — Neta Crawford, a political science professor at Boston University and co-director of the Costs of War project — previously gained notice for trying to estimate the price of post-Sept. 11 wars. Her estimate for that was $6 trillion, if Homeland Security and the costs of caring for veterans were included.
She acknowledges the Pentagon’s ongoing efforts to explore alternative energy technologies, from renewable fuels to solar power. But she also argues in her latest report that much more work needs to be done, saying cutting emissions could help stave off the worst effects of global warming and lessen conflicts that Pentagon planners have previously warned that climate change could provoke.
The effort could also have the benefit, she said, of cutting oil use and thereby decreasing the need for American forces in the Middle East, particularly the Persian Gulf. The report was issued one day before two oil tankers in the Gulf suffered damage from explosions, with one possibly struck by a torpedo.
With assistance by Jonathan Tirone
Tags: Activism, Capitalism, Climate Change, Conflict, Development, Economics, Environment, Geopolitics, History, Human Rights, Military, NATO, Nuclear Waste, Politics, Public Health, Solutions, USA, Violence, War, energy, global warming, pollution, power, world
DISCLAIMER: The statements, views and opinions expressed in pieces republished here are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of TMS. In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Join the discussion!
We welcome debate and dissent, but personal — ad hominem — attacks (on authors, other users or any individual), abuse and defamatory language will not be tolerated. Nor will we tolerate attempts to deliberately disrupt discussions. We aim to maintain an inviting space to focus on intelligent interactions and debates.
Click here to go to the current weekly digest or pick another article: