Military structures account for 5.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Why are they not required to report them? When global emissions are assessed, armed forces are typically not taken into account. However... Despite the global 'nervousness' surrounding climate neutrality, international climate change agreements do not impose any obligation on defence forces to report or reduce their carbon emissions. Scientists argue that the data some military structures do publish is, at best, unreliable or incomplete.
Why are armed forces not required to report emissions?
Military emissions abroad, ranging from aircraft to ships and military exercises, were not included in the 1997 Kyoto Protocol on reducing greenhouse gas emissions. They were also excluded from the 2015 Paris Agreements. The justification was that data on military energy consumption could compromise the security of the respective countries.
According to estimates by the environmental activist group The Conflict and Environment Observatory, the carbon footprint of European Union (EU) military spending in 2019 was approximately 23 million metric tonnes of CO₂ equivalent, which is equivalent to the annual CO₂ emissions of ~14 million mid-range cars. Activists argue that this estimate is quite conservative. It has been found that France, which has the highest military spending in the EU, accounts for approximately 1/3 of the total carbon dioxide emissions of EU military forces.
In a report on the carbon footprint of United Kingdom military spending in 2018, it was estimated at 10 million metric tonnes of CO₂ equivalent.
As temperatures reach new records, scientists and environmental protection groups are increasing pressure on the UN to force national armies to report all emissions. A long-standing state of exception has allowed a portion of the climate pollution generated by the military sphere to be left out of the total tally.
According to 2022 international expert estimates, military forces are among the largest consumers of fuel in the world and account for 5.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Environmental activists are demanding that military emissions be reported. The organisation The Conflict and Environment Observatory is one of those pushing for more comprehensive and transparent reporting on emissions from the military sphere.
Together with the environmental group Tipping Point North South and academics from the universities of Lancaster, Oxford and Queen Mary in Great Britain, research papers, letter campaigns and conferences are being used to lobby for a solution to the problem.
As one of the organisation's members points out, at least 17 peer-reviewed articles have been published in the first five months of 2023, which is three times more than in 2022 and more than in the previous nine years combined. In February, environmental activist groups appealed to representatives of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, UNFCCC), calling on this UN climate body to include all military department emissions in its reports, given their importance in global carbon dioxide accounting.
'In the current climate emergency, we cannot afford to exclude military and conflict-related emissions from the UNFCCC process,' states the letter from the environmental groups.
Attention will also be paid to emission accounting in the first global stocktake – an assessment of how far countries have or have not progressed in achieving the Paris climate goals. The COP28 climate summit will take place in the United Arab Emirates, beginning on 30 November.
'The exclusion of conflict-related emissions from UNFCCC reporting is a clear shortcoming,' believes Axel Michaelowa, founder and partner of Perspectives Climate Group, adding that hundreds of millions of tonnes of carbon emissions could remain unaccounted for in this way.
What, if anything, are military forces doing to address the emissions problem?
So far, there are few signs that there will be a 'tangible' response to efforts to resolve the problem this year. UNFCCC representatives stated in an email response to questions that there are no concrete plans to amend the guidelines on military emission reporting, but the issue could be discussed during future high-level meetings, including COP28 in Dubai.
When asked if military sector emissions would be discussed during COP28, representatives of the presidency, the UAE, replied that one of the thematic days of the two-week meeting would be 'Relief, Recovery and Peace', without providing further details. Some signs suggest that certain military forces are preparing for changes in reporting requirements in the coming years, while others are doing everything possible to reduce their climate impact.
For example, NATO – the Western security alliance, which also includes 21 EU countries – claims that a methodology has been developed for alliance members to report their military emissions.
For instance, New Zealand is exploring whether to add previously excluded areas to its reports, such as emissions from operations abroad, while Great Britain and Germany are working to address 'grey areas' in their reports, informed officials from the respective defence sectors.
Washington sent representatives of the US Army and Navy to last year's COP27 climate change summit in Egypt. It was the first time a Pentagon delegation had attended a global climate summit.
'I think that showed we are part of the conversation; we are certainly emitters when it comes to fossil fuels and energy,' emphasises Meredith Berger, Assistant Secretary of the US Navy for Energy, Installations, and Environment. Drones could help limit military sector emissions.
Emissions and oil consumption fall in the US military
The US Defense Logistics Agency, which oversees oil procurement, announced that it purchased 84 million barrels in 2022, which is almost 15 million barrels less than in 2018. Meanwhile, emissions fell to 44 million tonnes in 2022 (the previous year they were 46 million tonnes).
The US Department of Defense noted that these figures include all emissions. The indicators reported to the UNFCCC do not include international transport and reserve fuel.
Neta Crawford (Neta Crawford), Professor of International Relations at the University of Oxford, pointed out that the reduction in fuel consumption has been driven by the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan and Iraq, the introduction of renewable energy technologies, more efficient vehicles, as well as fewer and smaller-scale military exercises. Perhaps the wider use of drones is also improving the situation.
'One of the biggest emissions-reduction technologies is the use of unmanned aerial vehicles – drones,' a senior US defense official, who wished to remain anonymous, told the Reuters news agency. 'When you don't need a human presence on the aircraft, you get significantly better energy efficiency.'
How is the war in Ukraine affecting military sector emissions?
Lobbying groups working at the UN to abolish the principle of 'no reporting on military emissions' point to the war in Ukraine and the associated emissions as a major catalyst for change. 'The war in Ukraine has definitely drawn a great deal of attention to this issue, which had not been seen during other military conflicts,' emphasises Deborah Burton (Deborah Burton), a representative of the environmental group Tipping Point North South.
A report by Dutch carbon accounting expert Lennard de Klerk (Lennard de Klerk) estimates that the first 12 months of the war in Ukraine caused a net increase in greenhouse gases of 109 million tonnes, which is equivalent to the combined annual GHG output of Singapore, Switzerland and Syria.
Academics from the University of Oxford and Queen Mary University of London will host a conference on military emissions in Oxford on 26 September to develop new research that could help change requirements for reporting military sector emissions.
A representative of the Ukrainian Ministry of Environmental Protection informed that Ukraine supports these efforts and will seek government support for more transparent reporting of military emissions at the COP28 conference.
Due to security concerns – a looser regime for reporting emissions in the military sector
Although the war in Ukraine has sharpened the focus of climate activists on military sector emissions, some experts argue that this distracts governments from regional security issues. This could slow down relevant discussions in the near future.
'It is important to understand that the crisis in Ukraine has made this issue a bit more complicated,' says James Appathurai, Deputy Assistant Secretary General for Emerging Security Challenges at NATO.
Some military sources argue that publishing more detailed information about oil use would open a window into ongoing foreign operations.
'We would not want everyone to know how much fuel we consume – how far we fly, how far we drive, or what our training patterns are,' explains Markus Ruelke (Markus Ruelke) from the Environmental Protection Department of the German Ministry of Defence.
Some military sector emissions are registered in UN information tables as 'fuel combustion in undefined circumstances', notes the UNFCCC. For now, military sector emissions will remain difficult to determine on an international scale, points out Stuart Parkinson (Stuart Parkinson), Executive Director of the group Scientists for Global Responsibility. 'It is one thing to call on people to stop flying on planes or switch to electric cars, regardless of whether it causes costs or inconvenience, but it is difficult to do that if military forces go on 'free rides' while carrying out their missions,' notes Stuart Parkinson.
https://www.euronews.com/green/2023/07/10/glaring-gap-why-dont-militaries-have-to-report-their-greenhouse-gas-emissions