Military Pollution: A Global Environmental Concern

The US military is one of the largest polluters in history, with a carbon footprint that surpasses that of entire countries. Military emissions are often overlooked in climate change studies due to the difficulty in obtaining consistent data, but the impact of military activities on the environment is undeniable. From nuclear testing to the consumption of liquid fuels, the US military's contribution to climate change is significant. With its vast infrastructure and global operations, the military relies on an extensive network of transportation to supply its bases, resulting in high levels of greenhouse gas emissions. The negligence and disregard for human life exhibited by the military have had devastating consequences, including dramatic increases in cancer rates among indigenous people residing near military reservations. As the world grapples with the escalating climate crisis, the role of the military as a major polluter cannot be ignored.

The US military is one of the largest polluters in history

The US military is the world's largest institutional consumer of oil and, correspondingly, the largest producer of greenhouse gases in the world. In 2017, the Pentagon's total greenhouse gas emissions were greater than those of Sweden, Denmark, and Portugal combined. The US military's emissions are so high that if it were a country, it would be the world's 47th largest emitter of greenhouse gases, sitting between Peru and Portugal.

The US military's vast infrastructure and extensive global network of trucks, cargo planes, and container ships contribute significantly to its carbon footprint. The movement and utilisation of troops and equipment around the world involve burning vast quantities of jet fuel and diesel. Military equipment is notoriously fuel-inefficient, with the remaining fleet of 60,000 Humvees getting only four to eight miles per gallon of diesel. The US military also owns a significant amount of property, with 585,000 facilities spread over 27 million acres in 160 different countries, requiring a substantial amount of energy for heating, cooling, and electricity.

The US military's operations have had devastating environmental consequences. Between 1944 and 1977, the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Washington state released radioactive toxic gases and fluids, contaminating the fish that provided food and economic subsistence to the indigenous residents. Uranium mining and aboveground nuclear weapons tests also occurred for approximately 50 years in and around these areas, causing dramatic increases in cancer rates among the indigenous people residing in this region.

The US military has recognised climate change as an "existential" threat to national security, spurring conflict and mass migration. However, critics argue that it has not done enough to mitigate its contribution to climate change. The US military's exemption from reporting emissions under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol and its subsequent withdrawal from the Paris Accord have made it challenging to obtain consistent and transparent data on its emissions.

While there have been attempts to "green" aspects of the US military's operations, such as increasing renewable electricity generation on bases, these efforts fall short of addressing the military's violent and oppressive nature and its lock-in with hydrocarbon-based weapons systems. As such, the US military remains one of the largest polluters in history, and its environmental impact demands significant reductions in its capacity and a shift away from fossil fuels.

Nuclear testing and toxic chemicals

Nuclear weapons testing has resulted in the radioactive contamination of numerous sites worldwide, with severe ecological and human health consequences. The United States, for instance, conducted nuclear tests in the Marshall Islands and the Navajo Nation reservation, resulting in radiation poisoning, birth defects, and increased cancer rates among residents. Similar impacts were observed in the North Pacific following the Castle Bravo nuclear test in 1954, with drastic increases in thyroid cancer incidence. The former Soviet region of Semipalatinsk (Semey) is another heavily contaminated site, with significant levels of radioactivity detected. China has also contributed to radioactive pollution in this region.

The United Kingdom is responsible for radioactive pollution in Australia due to atmospheric nuclear tests, and India and Pakistan have minimal environmental contamination due to their low number of nuclear tests. Uranium mining and above-ground nuclear weapons tests at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Washington state contaminated fish with radioactive toxins, leading to dramatic increases in cancer rates among indigenous people.

Toxic chemical emissions from military test sites have also caused significant environmental damage and health issues. Military exercises in Okinawa, Japan, have resulted in forest fires, soil erosion, water pollution, and harmful effects on marine life, including the emission of toxic chemicals such as PCBs, cadmium, mercury, and lead. Similar toxic emissions were found at the Italian Inter-force Test Range (PISQ) in Sardinia, Italy, where rocket launching, blasting, and armament destruction activities led to the release of toxic elements that exceeded legal limits in air, water, soil, milk, and animal tissues.

The US military has also been responsible for spills and dumping of hazardous substances, such as jet fuel and industrial solvents, which have contaminated waterways and groundwater, resulting in cancer and other illnesses among nearby residents. These instances of negligence and disregard for human life have contributed to the US military's significant contribution to climate change. If the US military were considered a nation, it would rank as the 47th largest emitter of greenhouse gases, consuming vast amounts of liquid fuels and emitting CO2e.

Military spending and emissions

The US military's vast infrastructure and global operations contribute significantly to its emissions. It relies on an extensive network of trucks, cargo planes, and container ships to transport troops, equipment, and supplies, including bombs, humanitarian aid, and hydrocarbon fuels. This results in the burning of vast quantities of jet fuel and diesel, with military equipment often being fuel-inefficient. The US military is also the single largest institutional consumer of petroleum and hydrocarbons in the world.

The US military's emissions have been estimated to be on par with those of medium-sized countries. A 2019 report from Durham and Lancaster University found that if the US military were a nation-state, it would be the 47th largest emitter of greenhouse gases in the world, based solely on fuel usage emissions. Similarly, research from Brown University placed the Pentagon as the world's 55th largest CO2 emitter if it were a country.

The impact of the US military's emissions is further exacerbated by its exemption from reporting military emissions. During the negotiations for the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, the US successfully lobbied for an exemption from reporting military emissions, a loophole that was closed by the Paris Accord. However, with the US withdrawing from the Paris Accord in 2020, this exemption will once again come into effect.

The environmental impact of military spending and emissions extends beyond the US. Researchers have estimated that militaries worldwide are responsible for about 5.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions. This impact is expected to grow as tensions escalate globally, leading to increased military spending and emissions. For instance, the recent increase in military spending in Europe in response to the crisis in Ukraine is projected to result in an additional 200 million tonnes of emissions per year for NATO alone.

Health hazards for military personnel

Military personnel are exposed to a wide range of environmental and occupational health hazards. Military operations and activities have been linked to environmental pollution caused by metals, and military personnel are at high risk of exposure to these metals. For instance, during military operations, gunshot residue released after firing contains a lot of metal particles that reach the environment and, by extension, the military personnel involved.

Furthermore, military personnel may be exposed to high-risk substances at high doses, including toxic industrial chemicals, water pollution, and traffic- and industrial-related air pollution, especially in dense urban operational environments and their outskirts.

Another significant concern is the impact of military pollution on the health of military personnel. Military bases have been found to rank among the most polluted areas globally due to the presence of toxic chemicals such as perchlorate and other jet fuel components that contaminate drinking water, aquifers, and surrounding soil. As a result, military personnel stationed at these bases are at an increased risk of various health issues.

Additionally, the US military's contribution to climate change through its vast carbon footprint cannot be overlooked. The US military is one of the largest consumers of liquid fuels and a significant emitter of greenhouse gases, which have been linked to respiratory issues and other health problems.

Overall, the health hazards faced by military personnel due to pollution are diverse and far-reaching. Better experimental designs, biomarker selections, and epidemiological studies are needed to comprehensively understand and address these health risks.

The US military's carbon footprint

The US military has an enormous carbon footprint, and its activities are a significant contributor to climate change. If the US military were a country, it would be the world's 47th largest emitter of greenhouse gases, emitting more than medium-sized countries like Sweden, Switzerland, Morocco, Peru, Hungary, Finland, New Zealand, and Norway. The US military's vast infrastructure and global operations contribute significantly to its carbon footprint. It relies on a network of trucks, cargo planes, and container ships to transport supplies, including bombs, humanitarian aid, and hydrocarbon fuels. The movement and utilisation of troops and equipment around the world account for 70% of its energy consumption, involving the burning of vast quantities of jet fuel and diesel.

The US military's real estate also contributes significantly to its carbon footprint. The Department of Defense (DoD) is responsible for powering, heating, and cooling over 500,000 buildings across 160 countries. In 2017, the DoD spent $3.5 billion on energy costs for these buildings, emitting more than 25,000 kilotonnes of carbon dioxide. The US military's weapons systems are also major fuel guzzlers, with fighter jets, tanks, ships, and planes consuming a significant amount of fuel.

The US military's emissions have often been overlooked due to reporting exemptions for military activities under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. While the 2015 Paris Accords removed this exemption, reporting military emissions remains optional, leading to a lack of consistent data on the US military's carbon footprint. The US military has acknowledged the threat of climate change and has taken some steps towards reducing its carbon footprint, such as investing in renewable electricity generation on bases and exploring alternative energy sources like biofuels. However, these efforts have been minimal, and the US military remains the world's largest institutional consumer of hydrocarbons.

The environmental impact of the US military extends beyond carbon emissions. Military expansion has affected air quality, ecosystems, biodiversity, and the health of local populations living around bases. Nuclear testing, uranium mining, and the disposal of toxic substances have contaminated water, soil, and ecosystems, leading to increased cancer rates among indigenous people in affected regions. The US military's vast carbon footprint and environmental impact have sparked calls for significant reductions in the Pentagon's budget and a reevaluation of its energy consumption.

Frequently asked questions