U.S.
military consumes more hydrocarbons than most countries -- massive hidden
impact on climate
Lancaster University
The US military's
carbon footprint is enormous and must be confronted in order to have a
substantial effect on battling global warming, experts argue.
Research by social
scientists from Durham University and Lancaster University shows the US
military is one of the largest climate polluters in history, consuming more
liquid fuels and emitting more CO2e (carbon-dioxide equivalent) than
most countries.
The majority of
greenhouse gas (GHG) accounting routinely focuses on civilian energy use and
fuel consumption, not on the US military. This new study, published in Transactions
of the Institute of British Geographers, calculates part of the US
military's impact on climate change through critical analysis of its global
logistical supply chains.
The research provides
an independent public assessment of the US military's greenhouse gas emissions.
It reports that if the US military were a nation state, it would be the 47th
largest emitter of GHG in the world, if only taking into account the emission
from fuel usage.
Report co-author Dr Patrick Bigger, of Lancaster University Environment Centre, said: "The US Military has long understood it is not immune from the potential consequences of climate change -- recognising it as a threat multiplier that can exacerbate other threats -- nor has it ignored its own contribution to the problem.
"Yet its climate
policy is fundamentally contradictory -- confronting the effects of climate
change while remaining the largest single institutional consumer of hydrocarbons
in the world, a situation it is locked into for years to come because of its
dependence on existing aircraft and warships for open-ended operations around
the globe."
Despite the recent
increase in attention, the US military's dependence on fossil fuels is unlikely
to change. The US is continuing to pursue open-ended operations around the
globe, with the life-cycles of existing military aircraft and warships locking
them into hydrocarbons for years to come.
The research comes at
a time when the US military is preparing for climate change through both its
global supply networks and its security infrastructure. This study brings
transparency to one of the world's largest institutional consumers of
hydrocarbons at a time when the issue is a hot-button topic on the US
Presidential campaign trail.
Leading Democratic candidates, such as Senator Elizabeth Warren, are asking critical questions of the role of the US military in climate change and examining its plans for the future.
Leading Democratic candidates, such as Senator Elizabeth Warren, are asking critical questions of the role of the US military in climate change and examining its plans for the future.
Co-author Dr Benjamin
Neimark, Associate Director of the Pentland Centre for Sustainability in
Business at Lancaster, said: "This research provides ample evidence to
support recent calls by activist networks to include the US military in
Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's Green New Deal and other international
climate treaties."
Co-author Dr Oliver
Belcher, of Durham University's Department of Geography, said: "Our
research demonstrates that to account for the US military as a major climate
actor, you must understand the logistical supply chain that makes its
acquisition and consumption of hydrocarbon-based fuels possible.
"How do we
account for the most far-reaching, sophisticated supply chains, and the largest
climate polluter in history? While incremental changes can amount to radical
effects in the long-run, there is no shortage of evidence that the climate is
at a tipping point and more is needed."
The researchers'
examination of the US military 'carbon boot-print' started with the US Defense
Logistics Agency -- Energy (DLA-E), a powerful yet virtually unresearched
sub-agency within the larger Defense Logistics Agency.
It is the primary
purchase-point for hydrocarbon-based fuels for the US Military, and a powerful
actor in the global oil market, with the fuels it delivers powering everything
from routine base operations in the USA to forward operating bases in
Afghanistan.
"An important way
to cool off the furnace of the climate emergency is to turn off vast sections
of the military machine," added Dr Neimark. "This will have not only
the immediate effect of reducing emissions in the here-and-now, but create a
disincentive in developing new hydrocarbon infrastructure integral to US
military operations."
Other key findings of
the report include:
In 2017 alone, the US
military purchased about 269,230 barrels of oil a day and emitted more than
25,000 kt- CO2e by burning those fuels. In 2017 alone, the Air Force
purchased $4.9 billion worth of fuel and the Navy $2.8 billion, followed by the
Army at $947 million and Marines at $36 million.
If the US military
were a country, it would nestle between Peru and Portugal in the global league
table of fuel purchasing, when comparing 2014 World Bank country liquid fuel
consumption with 2015 US military liquid fuel consumption.
For 2014, the scale of
emissions is roughly equivalent to total -- not just fuel -- emissions from
Romania. According to the DLA-E data obtained by the researchers, which
includes GHG emissions from direct or stationary sources, indirect or mobile
sources and electricity use, and other indirect, including upstream and
downstream emissions.
The Air Force is by
far the largest emitter of GHG at more than 13,000 kt CO2e, almost
double that of the US Navy's 7,800 kt CO2e. In addition to using the
most polluting types of fuel, the Air Force and Navy are also the largest
purchasers of fuel.