Military & Climate Crisis - 6%

➡️ THE CLIMATE COST OF WAR & MILITARIES – 6% of Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions

One of the biggest blind spots of climate change is the impact of emissions from war, the armed forces, weapons production, and the arms trade. The military is one of the largest consumers of fossil fuels, as tanks, aircraft, ships, submarines, and other vehicles ferociously consume fuel on their warpath.

With a lack of transparency, zero accountability and no legal requirement to monitor and report, estimates put the combined contribution to climate change at 6%. The actual percentage is likely much higher. The carbon footprint of the military-industrial complex and its endless wars is immense.

With military spending reaching unprecedented highs in 2024, the focus of militaries around the world is very much on expansion and upgrades, with emission reductions and environmental considerations a mere afterthought.

In the ultimate paradox, military actions are not only a cause of the climate crisis, but the climate crisis is now officially a cause of war.

Jump straight to our resources on the ➡️ Military & Climate Change

Explore our comprehensive guides on -

• Comprehensive Guide to Climate Change

• Causes of Climate Change

• Climate Change as a Cause of Conflict

• Military Guides by Country

• The U.S. Armed Forces – Unprecedented Spending

• Conflict Regions

• Climate Refugees

• Nuclear Weapons Madness & Ecocide

• Disarmament Projects Around the World

Military Climate Impunity & Irresponsibility

“Ignoring military emissions is not just concerning with regard to climate change. It ignores the growing recognition of climate change being a serious security risk for Europe and beyond” - Florian Krampe, director of climate research SIPRI.

Longstanding environmental exceptionalism has created an emissions gap which is seriously overlooked in climate negotiations such as the recent COP30. Shockingly, if the global military were a country, it would rank in fourth place in terms of emissions.

As there are still no concrete measures to promote military decarbonisation, the whole industry is highly dependent on fossil fuels. In fact, after the U.S. insisted, military operations were excluded from reduction obligations in the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. The 2015 Paris Agreement currently only covers voluntary reporting, of which only a handful of countries oblige, and even then, publications meet only the bare minimum of UN guidelines. Countries with the largest militaries publish nothing at all.

Rampant greenwashing by militaries results in less than 10% of their carbon footprint ever being reported. Not a single nation reports on the impact of its activities during war. We must begin to understand the true scale of emissions and environmental impact before we can start to reduce them.

The U.S. Department of Defence is the world's single largest consumer of petroleum. In a worrying trend, modern upgrading of jets, for example, the F-35 stealth fighters, use considerably more fuel than previous aircraft.

Whilst UN reporting systems allow militaries to downplay their emissions, hide them under other categories, and make exemptions for emissions in international waters and airspace, we will not see a reduction in emissions.

Trillions are spent every year propping up war machines, weapons proliferation programmes, and military technologies, money which has been diverted away from essential climate financing, action, and adaptation for those most vulnerable.

The Military & Climate – Key Statistics

• World military expenditure in 2024 reached $2718 billion, an increase of 9.4% on the previous year and the highest amount ever.

• The global arms trade value in 2024 reached $111.6 billion. Arms production and their supply chains are significant producers of carbon emissions. The exact amount is unknown due to shady industry practices and weak regulation.

• The world is currently experiencing the highest number of armed conflicts since 1945, with a 65% increase in conflict-affected areas since 2021.

• In 1991, as a result of deliberate sabotage by Iraqi forces, more than 700 oil wells were set ablaze, releasing 130-140 million tons of carbon dioxide, equating to 2% of global emissions for that year. The Persian Gulf was flooded with 11 million barrels of crude oil. More than 3 decades later, Kuwait is still suffering the disastrous consequences.

• Israel's war on Gaza, aside from the devastating humanitarian consequences, generated 32 million tonnes of CO₂ in the first year and a half alone. This is equivalent to the emissions of more than 8 coal-fired power plants in one year.

• In a deliberate campaign of ecocide, Gaza has witnessed the destruction of 97% of tree crops, 82% of annual crops, and 89% of farmland.

• To remove and process the rubble which Gaza has been reduced to, it is estimated that machinery will generate the equivalent of 66,000 tonnes of CO₂.

• Military activity in the three years since Russia's invasion of Ukraine has created the equivalent of 237 million tonnes of CO₂.

• Countries reporting both conflict and climate-related displacement have tripled since 2009. These countries receive only a quarter of the climate finance they need.

• Some of the worst-affected countries include Sudan, Yemen, Syria, Haiti, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Myanmar.

• A recent study discovered that for every 1°C increase in temperature, conflict between individuals increases by 2.4% and conflict between groups increases by 11.3%.

Ecocide as a Weapon of War

Ecocide refers to the mass destruction of the natural environment by deliberate or negligent human action. There is a massive movement to criminalise ecocide due to its devastating, widespread, and long-term impacts on flora, fauna, the air, water sources, and human populations. Ecocide is already recognised in 11 countries, but legal prohibitions remain limited.

There is a renewed push to include ecocide in the Rome Statute, which currently only includes some forms of environmental damage under war crimes. The movement is led by groups such as Stop Ecocide International, which aims to fill gaps in current frameworks and prevent this form of catastrophe from happening again.

In war, ecocide has been used for decades to cripple the enemy and civilian populations. A population simply cannot survive without a healthy and clean environment. Clean air, safe water, fertile soil, and arable land sustain life. Without these things, the survival and well-being of a population, its ecosystems, and biodiversity are at serious risk.

Scorched earth policy is a military strategy to destroy anything of value which might enable armed forces or civilians to fight a war. Relentless Israeli bombardment and military activities have left vast areas of Gaza reduced to rubble and completely unlivable.

This destruction extends far beyond infrastructure. The soil, contaminated with hazardous materials, is incapable of supporting even the smallest-scale farming. Water sources, already scarce, have been further polluted by damaged sewage infrastructure and targeted attacks on water systems. Israel has repeatedly prevented the reconstruction of desalination plants, landfills, and sewage disposal systems. Chronic electricity and fuel shortages prevent Palestinians from protecting their environment and pursuing any kind of sustainable development. A grey, dusty, barren, rubble-filled landscape replaces once-thriving ecosystems.

In 2023, during the early stages of the Russian Invasion of Ukraine, the Nova Kakhovka Dam was destroyed in one of the worst ecological disasters in Europe. The dam provided drinking water for more than one million people, irrigation for thousands of acres of farmland, and was home to countless endangered species. Landmines, industrial runoff, and chemicals contaminated the Dnipro River, leaving ecosystems destroyed.

Military training areas destroy vast areas of agricultural land, wetlands, and forests. They are now estimated to cover between 1-6% of the land's surface. Explosives, chemicals, fires, and abandoned ordnance cause serious long-term environmental damage to ecosystems.

Long after wars are over, heavy metals and pollutants from munitions and rubble render soil and water sources unusable for decades.

*****

Instead of persistent global conflicts, endless wars, and an escalating arms race, humanity must commit to international dialogue, disarmament, and a culture of peace.

Governments are starting to acknowledge the oversized role militaries play in global emissions and to recognise the broader environmental impacts of conflict.

The environment has long been a forgotten victim of war, mere collateral damage. But after the July 2025 historic advisory opinion by the ICJ on countries' legal obligations to tackle climate change, this may become a thing of the past. The Vanuatu Initiative, spearheaded by the Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change, did not specifically mention military activities but declared that the human right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment is protected by law. It also reaffirmed that governments are legally obligated to curb the use of fossil fuels and to regulate the climate impacts of companies and businesses.

Prior to this, in 2022, the UN's International Law Commission published a draft on the protection of the environment, specifically during armed conflict. They went on to be approved by the UN General Assembly the same year. It lays out a framework for environmental protection before, during, and after armed conflicts and in the case of occupation. Lack of enforcement, state pushback, and the absence of clear obligations have stalled implementation.

The need for greater transparency is a matter of urgency. Research by SGR estimated that military carbon footprints grow by 32 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent for each additional $100bn in military spending. With military budgets rapidly increasing around the world, the underreporting of military emissions will continue to have even greater implications for the climate crisis and our ability to adapt.

Author: Rachael Mellor, 04.12.25 licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0

For further reading on the Climate Cost of War & Militaries see below ⬇️