Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford
➤ Gửi thông báo lỗi ⚠️ Báo cáo tài liệu vi phạmNội dung chi tiết: Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford
Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford
COSTS OF WARWATSON INSTITUTEINTERNATIONAL & PUBLIC AFFAIRSBROWN UNIVERSITYPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change, and the Costs of WarNeta c. Crawford1 2 B Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 CrawfordBoston UniversityUpdated and Revised, 13 November 2019?SummaryIf climate change is a "threat multiplier,” as some national security experts and members of the military argue, how does the US military reduce climate change caused threats? Or does war and the preparation for it increase those risks?In Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford its quest for security, the United States spends more on the military than any other country in the world, certainly much more than the combined miliPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford
tary spending of its major rivals, Russia and China. Authorized at over S700 billion in Fiscal Year 2019, and with over $700 billion requested for FY2COSTS OF WARWATSON INSTITUTEINTERNATIONAL & PUBLIC AFFAIRSBROWN UNIVERSITYPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change, and the Costs of WarNeta c. Crawford1 2 B Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford two million people, 11 nuclear aircraft carriers, and the world’s most advanced military aircraft, the US is more than capable of projecting power anywhere in the globe, and with "Space Command," into outer space. Further, the US has been continuously at war since late 2001, with the US military an Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawfordd State Department currently engaged in more than 80 countries in counterterror operations.3All this capacity for and use of military force requires aPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford
great deal of energy, most of it in the form of fossil fuel. As General David Petraeus said in 2011, "Energy is the lifeblood of our warfighting capaCOSTS OF WARWATSON INSTITUTEINTERNATIONAL & PUBLIC AFFAIRSBROWN UNIVERSITYPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change, and the Costs of WarNeta c. Crawford1 2 B Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford, and Co-Director of the Costs of War project at Brown and Boston Universities. Crawford thanks Matthew Evangelista, Anna Henchman, Catherine Lutz, Heidi Peltier, Nathan Phillips, Stephanie Saveli, Adam Sweeting, Alexander Thompson and David Vine for their critical comments and helpful suggestions. Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 CrawfordCrawford also benefited from feedback at Ohio State University in April 2019 and Brown University in September 2019.2The previous study, released in JPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford
une 2019, included calculations of emissions from Fiscal Years (FY) 1975 to 2017. This updated and revised version adds the DOD FY2018 fuel consumptioCOSTS OF WARWATSON INSTITUTEINTERNATIONAL & PUBLIC AFFAIRSBROWN UNIVERSITYPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change, and the Costs of WarNeta c. Crawford1 2 B Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawfordes that the budgetary costs of the post-9/11 wars, including Homeland Security and future obligations to care for the veterans of these wars, are more than $6 trillion dollars. Neta c. Crawford. “United States Budgetary Costs and Obligations of Post-9/11 Wars through FY2020: $6.4 Trillion,* November Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford 2019.< General David Petraeus, quoted in Department of Energy, “Energy for the Warfighter: The Department of Defense Operational Energy Strategy," 14Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford
June 2011. https://www.energy.goy/articles/energy-war-jighter-depa I t me n t • dele nse -opera t i onal-energy-s t ra tegy.1emphasized energy securiCOSTS OF WARWATSON INSTITUTEINTERNATIONAL & PUBLIC AFFAIRSBROWN UNIVERSITYPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change, and the Costs of WarNeta c. Crawford1 2 B Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawfordser of petroleum and correspondingly, the single largest institutional producer of greenhouse gases (GHG) in the world.5 From FY1975 to FY2018, total DOD greenhouse gas emissions were more than 3,685 Million Metric Tons of C02 equivalent. While only a portion of US total emissions, US military emiss Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawfordions are, in any one year, larger than the emissions of many countries. In 2017, for example, the Pentagon’s total greenhouse gas emissions (installatPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford
ions and operations) were greater than the greenhouse gas emissions of entire industrialized countries, such as Sweden, Denmark and Portugal and also COSTS OF WARWATSON INSTITUTEINTERNATIONAL & PUBLIC AFFAIRSBROWN UNIVERSITYPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change, and the Costs of WarNeta c. Crawford1 2 B Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford-9/11 wars. The best estimate of total US military greenhouse gas emissions (including installations and operations) from 2001 when the wars began with the US invasion of Afghanistan, through FY2018, is 1,267 million metric tons of greenhouse gases (measured in C02equivalent, or CO2e). The Overseas Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 CrawfordContingency Operations (war-related) greenhouse gas emissions portion of those emissions—including for the major war zones of Afghanistan, Pakistan, IPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford
raq and Syria— is estimated to be more than 440 Million Metric TonsofC02e for the period of FY2001-2018 (summarized in Table 2).6The US military is prCOSTS OF WARWATSON INSTITUTEINTERNATIONAL & PUBLIC AFFAIRSBROWN UNIVERSITYPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change, and the Costs of WarNeta c. Crawford1 2 B Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford are all real, but terrorists and these countries arc not certain to attack the US. Arms control and diplomacy can deescalate tensions and reduce threats. Economic sanctions can also diminish the capacity of states and non-state actors to threaten the security interests of the US and its allies.Glob Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawfordal warming is the most certain and immediate of any of the threats that the US faces in the next several decades. In fact, global warming has begun: dPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford
rought, fire, flooding, and temperature extremes will lead to displacement and death. The effects of climate change, including extremely powerful storCOSTS OF WARWATSON INSTITUTEINTERNATIONAL & PUBLIC AFFAIRSBROWN UNIVERSITYPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change, and the Costs of WarNeta c. Crawford1 2 B Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawfords and refugee crises. In response, the military has added the national security implications of climate change to its long list of national security concerns.Unlike some elements of the present US administration, which is in various modes of climate denial, the US military and intelligence community Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford act as if the negative security5These emissions are a result not only of war, but also of on-going non-war operations, exercises, wargames, and the mPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford
aintenance of military installations. For a discussion of the concept of greenhouse gas equivalencies, see /Appendix 1. US Environmental Protection AgCOSTS OF WARWATSON INSTITUTEINTERNATIONAL & PUBLIC AFFAIRSBROWN UNIVERSITYPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change, and the Costs of WarNeta c. Crawford1 2 B Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford Appendix 1. This is a conservative estimate. Not including biogenic sources or reductions from renewable energy use; the latter were less than 1 percent of emissions. In the most recent year for which statistics are available, total greenhouse gas emissions by the DOD for FY2018 were about 56 milli Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawfordon metric tons of C02 equivalent, a reduction from the previous year.2consequences of a wanning planet are inevitable. The DOD has studied the problemPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford
for decades and begun to adapt its plans, operations and installations to deal with climate change.The US military has an opportunity to reduce the rCOSTS OF WARWATSON INSTITUTEINTERNATIONAL & PUBLIC AFFAIRSBROWN UNIVERSITYPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change, and the Costs of WarNeta c. Crawford1 2 B Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawfords, while some sea level rise and mass extinction will certainly occur—these changes have already begun—the most dire consequences of climate change and the associated threats and consequences to national security are not already baked into the system.7 There is time to act to reduce greenhouse gas e Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawfordmissions and it is urgent to do so. If the US military were to significantly decrease its greenhouse gas emissions, it would make the dire climate chaPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford
nge caused national security threats the US military fears and predicts less likely to occur.Absent any change in US military fuel use policy, the fueCOSTS OF WARWATSON INSTITUTEINTERNATIONAL & PUBLIC AFFAIRSBROWN UNIVERSITYPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change, and the Costs of WarNeta c. Crawford1 2 B Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford emissions, will help guarantee the nightmare scenarios that the military predicts and that many climate scientists say are possible.Yet, the Pentagon does not acknowledge that its own fuel use is a major contributor to climate change. The military uses a great deal of fossil fuel protecting access Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawfordto Persian Gulf Oil. Because the current trend is that the US and indeed the world economy is becoming less dependent on oil. it may be that the missiPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford
on of protecting Persian Gulf oil is, in most instances, no longer vital and the US military can reduce its presence in the Persian Gulf. The PentagonCOSTS OF WARWATSON INSTITUTEINTERNATIONAL & PUBLIC AFFAIRSBROWN UNIVERSITYPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change, and the Costs of WarNeta c. Crawford1 2 B Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawfordures Congress might consider to reduce DOD fossil fuel consumption and simultaneously reduce risk of climate change caused conflict.Reductions in military fossil fuel use would be beneficial in four ways. First, the US would reduce its overall greenhouse gas emissions. This would thereby mitigate cl Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawfordimate change and its associated threats to national security. Second, reducing fossil fuel consumption would have important political and security benPentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change and the Costs of War Revised November 2019 Crawford
efits, including reducing the dependence of troops in the field on oil, which the military acknowledges makes them vulnerable to enemy attacks. If theGọi ngay
Chat zalo
Facebook