CO₂ and War – How Conflict Can Undo Years of Climate Progress


 

CO₂ and War – How Conflict Can Undo Years of Climate Progress

It’s easy to think of climate change as something driven by cars, factories, and power stations. But there’s another, often overlooked contributor quietly undoing years of progress:

War.

And right now, with multiple conflicts happening across the world, the environmental cost is far greater than we tend to realise.

War Is Carbon-Intensive – Very Carbon-Intensive

Modern warfare is powered by fossil fuels.

  • Fighter jets burn thousands of litres of fuel per hour
  • Tanks and armoured vehicles consume fuel at staggering rates
  • Naval fleets run on heavy fuel oil
  • Supply chains stretch across continents

A single military operation can emit more CO₂ than some small countries produce in a year.

And unlike civilian emissions, military emissions are often:

  • Underreported
  • Excluded from climate agreements
  • Hidden for security reasons

So the true impact? Likely much higher than we think.

Destruction Releases Carbon Too

It’s not just the fighting itself.

War destroys infrastructure—and that has a climate cost:

  • Burning buildings release stored carbon
  • Oil depots and pipelines go up in flames
  • Forests are damaged or cleared
  • Industrial sites leak pollutants

Each destroyed city or facility is not just a humanitarian tragedy—it’s also a carbon event.

Rebuilding = More Emissions

After the conflict comes reconstruction.

Rebuilding cities requires:

  • Cement (a major CO₂ emitter)
  • Steel production
  • Transport of materials
  • Heavy machinery

Ironically, even recovery adds to emissions—sometimes for decades.

Environmental Protection Takes a Back Seat

During war, climate policy simply isn’t the priority.

Governments shift focus to:

  • Defence spending
  • Energy security (often meaning more fossil fuels)
  • Short-term survival over long-term sustainability

We’ve seen countries:

  • Reopen coal plants
  • Delay green targets
  • Increase domestic fossil fuel production

All understandable in context—but damaging globally.

One War Can Cancel Years of Progress

Here’s the uncomfortable truth:

A single major conflict can wipe out the emissions savings of multiple nations working hard to go green.

While individuals install solar panels and governments push net zero strategies, conflict can:

  • Spike emissions rapidly
  • Halt environmental cooperation
  • Reverse years of policy progress

And There Isn’t Just One Conflict…

The current global situation includes multiple ongoing conflicts. Each adds:

  • Direct emissions from military activity
  • Indirect emissions from economic disruption
  • Long-term environmental damage

It’s a compounding problem.

So What Can Be Done?

This is a difficult one—because peace isn’t something solved with a recycling bin or a heat pump.

But there are steps worth considering:

  • Include military emissions in climate reporting
  • Invest in lower-carbon defence technologies
  • Protect environmental infrastructure during conflict
  • Strengthen international agreements linking peace and sustainability

Because ultimately…

There is no path to net zero without global stability.

Final Thought

You can install solar panels (I’ve got 26 of them), charge your boat from batteries, and carefully separate your recycling…

…but halfway across the world, a single conflict can undo a huge chunk of that progress overnight.

It doesn’t mean we stop trying—far from it.

But it does remind us of something important:

Climate change isn’t just an environmental issue. It’s political, economic… and yes, deeply tied to peace.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Using Ecosia: The Search Engine That Plants Trees

Image
  Using Ecosia: The Search Engine That Plants Trees ( Click. Search. Plant. Repeat. ) Imagine if every time you googled something, you planted a tree. No, it’s not some kind of green-tech fantasy — it’s Ecosia , a real search engine that uses its ad revenue to fund global reforestation projects. And all it takes is changing your browser’s homepage. What Is Ecosia? Ecosia is a free, privacy-respecting search engine based in Germany. It works just like Google or Bing, but with a twist: They use 100% of their profits to plant trees. So far, they've funded over 180 million trees in places like: Brazil Burkina Faso Madagascar Indonesia Kenya All you have to do is search the web. That’s it. You search — they plant. How It Works Every time you search on Ecosia, the platform earns revenue from clicks on sponsored search results (just like Google). Roughly 45 searches = 1 tree . The money goes to vetted reforestation projects with a focus on: Native bi...
Read more

New Filtration Technology Could Be a Game-Changer in Removing PFAS “Forever Chemicals”

Image
New Filtration Technology Could Be a Game-Changer in Removing PFAS “Forever Chemicals”  PFAS – often called “forever chemicals” – have a nasty habit of doing exactly what their nickname suggests: they don’t break down , they build up in the environment, and they accumulate in our bodies. Used for decades in non-stick cookware, waterproof clothing, firefighting foams, food packaging and industrial processes, PFAS are now found in rivers, groundwater, drinking water – and even rain . The scale of the problem has felt overwhelming. Until now. A breakthrough from the lab Researchers at Rice University have developed a new filtration material that could dramatically change how we deal with PFAS pollution. Their peer-reviewed research describes a layered double hydroxide (LDH) material made from copper and aluminium that can: Absorb long-chain PFAS up to 100× faster than current filtration systems Target the most persistent and dangerous PFAS compounds Potentially destr...
Read more

Does economic growth have to mean rising emissions?

Image
  Does economic growth have to mean rising emissions? For decades, we’ve been told there’s an awkward trade-off: grow the economy or cut emissions – pick one . It’s a neat story. It’s also increasingly out of date. The uncomfortable truth for that old argument is this: several countries are already growing their economies while cutting emissions . Not hypothetically. Not on a whiteboard. In the real world. The old assumption (and why it stuck) Historically, growth did mean more emissions. Industrialisation burned coal, oil powered transport, and cheap energy meant dirty energy. GDP and carbon rose together, so the idea became baked in: prosperity equals pollution. But that logic assumes three things: Energy must come from fossil fuels Efficiency improvements are marginal Consumption can’t change None of those assumptions still hold. What “decoupling” actually looks like Economists talk about decoupling – separating economic growth from emissions. There are two...
Read more