in , , ,

Military emissions - the unknown quantity


by Martin Auer

The world's militaries emit significant amounts of greenhouse gases. But no one knows exactly how much. This is problematic because reliable facts and figures are needed to combat climate change. One Investigation of Conflict and Environment Observatory in cooperation with the Universities of Lancaster and Durham in Great Britain finds that the reporting requirements stipulated in the climate agreements of Kyoto and Paris are absolutely insufficient. Military emissions were explicitly excluded from the 1997 Kyoto Protocol at the urging of the USA. It is only since the Paris Agreement of 2015 that military emissions have had to be included in the countries' reports to the UN, but it is up to the states whether they - voluntarily - report them separately. The situation is further complicated by the fact that the UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) imposes different reporting obligations on different states depending on their level of economic development. The 43 in Appendix I (Annex I) countries classified as “developed” (including the EU countries and the EU itself) are obliged to report their national emissions on an annual basis. Less “developed” (Non-Annex I) countries only have to report every four years. This also includes a number of countries with high military expenditures such as China, India, Saudi Arabia and Israel.

The study examined the reporting of military greenhouse gas emissions under the UNFCCC for 2021. According to the guidelines of the IPCC, the military use of fuels should be reported under category 1.A.5. This category includes all emissions from fuels that are not specified elsewhere. Emissions from stationary sources are to be reported under 1.A.5.a and emissions from mobile sources under 1.A.5.b, subdivided into air traffic (1.A.5.bi), shipping traffic (1.A.5. b.ii) and "Other" (1.A.5.b.iii). Greenhouse gas emissions should be reported as differentiated as possible, but aggregation is permitted to protect military information.

Overall, according to the study, the UNFCCC reports are mostly incomplete, generally remain unclear and cannot be compared with each other because there are no uniform standards.

Of the 41 Annex I countries examined (Liechtenstein and Iceland have hardly any military expenditures and were therefore not included), the reports of 31 are classified as significantly too low, the remaining 10 cannot be assessed. The accessibility of the data is described as “fair” in five countries: Germany, Norway, Hungary, Luxembourg and Cyprus. In the other countries, it is classified as poor (“poor”) or very poor (“very poor”) (Table).

Austria reported no stationary emissions and 52.000 tons CO2e of mobile emissions. This is classified as "very significant under-reporting". The accessibility of the underlying data was rated as "poor" because no differentiated data was reported.

Germany has reported 411.000 tons of CO2e in stationary emissions and 512.000 tons of CO2e in mobile emissions. This is also classified as "very significant underreporting".

Energy use in military objects and fuel consumption in the operation of aircraft, ships and land vehicles are often seen as the main causes of military emissions. But a study by EU and UK armed forces shows that military equipment procurement and other supply chains are responsible for most of the emissions. For EU countries, indirect emissions are more than double direct emissions geschätzt, for Great Britain 2,6 times7. Emissions arise from the extraction of raw materials, the production of weapons, their use by the military and finally their disposal. And the military use not only weapons, but a wide range of other products. In addition, far too little research has been done into the effects of military conflicts. Military conflicts can massively transform social and economic conditions, cause direct environmental damage, delay or prevent environmental protection measures, and lead countries to prolong the use of polluting technologies. Rebuilding devastated cities can generate millions of tons of emissions, from removing the rubble to making the concrete for new buildings. Conflicts also often lead to a rapid increase in deforestation because the population lacks other energy sources, i.e. a loss of CO2 sinks.

The authors of the study emphasize that it will not be possible to achieve the Paris climate goals if the military continues as before. Even NATO has recognized that it must reduce its emissions. Therefore, military emissions should be discussed at COP27 in November. As a first step, Annex I countries should be required to report their military emissions. The data should be transparent, accessible, fully differentiated and independently verifiable. Non-Annex I countries with high military spending should voluntarily report their military emissions annually.

Greenhouse gas emissions are calculated by the most widely used international calculation tool, the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Protocol, divided into three categories or "scopes". Military reporting should also conform: Scope 1 would then be emissions from sources directly controlled by the military, Scope 2 would be the indirect emissions from military-purchased electricity, heating and cooling, Scope 3 would include all other indirect emissions as by supply chains or caused by military operations in the wake of conflicts. To level the playing field, the IPCC should update the criteria for reporting military emissions.

The study recommends that governments should expressly commit themselves to reducing military emissions. To be credible, such commitments must set clear targets for the military that are consistent with the 1,5°C target; they must establish reporting mechanisms that are robust, comparable, transparent and independently verified; the military should be given clear targets for saving energy, reducing dependence on fossil fuels and switching to renewable energies; the armaments industry should also be prescribed reduction targets. These should be real reduction targets and not net targets based on compensation. The planned measures should be made public and the results should be reported annually. Finally, the question should be addressed of how a reduction in military spending and military deployments and a generally different security policy can contribute to reducing emissions. In order to fully implement the required climate and environmental protection measures, the necessary resources must also be made available.

Countries with the highest military spending

This post was created by the Option Community. Join in and post your message!

ON THE CONTRIBUTION TO OPTION AUSTRIA


Leave a Comment