Experts warn about the climate cost of modern war. Dr. Patrick Bigger, Research Director at Climate and Community Institute. Neta Crawford, Brown University, author of “The Pentagon, Climate Change, and War: Charting the Rise and Fall of U.S. Military Emissions.” Journalist Mark Hertsgaard with Giles Trendle, former Managing Director of Al Jazeera English. It’s a full load for this climate emergency, getting hotter all the time.
What will this frivolous burst of masculine violence in the Middle East cost the future?
Listen to or download this Radio Ecoshock show in CD Quality (57 MB) or Lo-Fi (14 MB)
ACCELERATING NEWS
Talk about your Earth-shaking news! Science proves it: “Significant acceleration of global warming since 2015”. This Open Access paper comes from the respected Potsdam Institute in Germany. Earth is warming faster over the last 10 years than during any previous decade. No it’s not El Niño, volcanoes going off or changes to the Sun. This is human war against the atmosphere ramping up along with Nature’s reactions, including destabilized weather.
Scientists Grant Foster and Stefan Rahmstorf say at the present rate, we will exceed the 1.5°C limit of the Paris Climate Accord by or before the year 2030. That use to be 2100, and then 2050, and now it’s less than four years away. We should note American scientist Dr. Michael Mann says he withdrew from this paper because he disagreed with the methods used (to remove other natural variables).
Lead Author Grant Foster is a retired statistician formerly at Tempo Analytics. Stefan Rahmstorf is is Co-Head of Research Department on Earth System Analysis of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) and Professor of Physics of the Oceans at the University of Potsdam. (pictured right)
PREDICTION BY JAMES HANSEN
All along, starting a decade ago, retired NASA scientist James Hansen warned the rate of climate change was accelerating. He was met with doubt, but that is gone now. In his latest post, Hansen predicts a terrible 2 degrees average global warming by the during the 2030’s. With his small team, Hansen writes:
“The world seems headed into another El Nino, just 3 years after the last one. Such quick return normally would imply, at most, an El Nino of moderate strength, but we suggest that even a moderately strong El Nino may yield record global temperature already in 2026 and still greater temperature in 2027.
The extreme warming will be a result mainly of high climate sensitivity and a recent increase of the net global climate forcing, not the result of an exceptional El Nino, per se.
We find that the principal drive for global warming acceleration began in about 2015, which implies that 2°C global warming is likely to be reached in the 2030s, not at midcentury.”
That was from climate scientist James Hansen, still working on his new book “Sophie’s Planet” at age 84.
As the Guardian March 6 reports the awful accelerating warming news, the new study found:
“…global heating accelerated from a steady rate of less than 0.2C per decade between 1970 and 2015 to about 0.35C per decade over the past 10 years. The rate is higher than scientists have seen since they started systematically taking the Earth’s temperature in 1880.”
We are already burning up the future. Can the shutdown of Gulf oil and gas help stem the tide of carbon into the atmosphere? What about all that jet fuel and rocket fuel torched in the war against Iran? Add in demolition of Tehran and damage in Gulf States and Lebanon – the climate costs just for reconstruction concrete are not possible for a survivable world for humans.
The whole crisis of blocking the Strait of Hormuz would be impossible with solar panels and wind distributed around the world. Unless electric utilities raise rates, electric vehicle users won’t feel pain at the pumps with rising gas and diesel prices. We could have ended dependence on Middle East energy a decade ago. But here we are.
This crisis is rapidly spinning out into a major recession, if not economic crash – all coming from a long age of fossil dominance, colonialism, and violence. That is the history coming out of every gallon and liter, every piece of plastic, all the concrete and steel. Fossil fuels are violent.
“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.”
– Republican President and Second World War hero Dwight Eisenhower in 1953.
Now we investigate the climate costs of modern warfare, greenhouse gas emissions from military operations, supply chains, infrastructure and reconstruction.
===================
REAL MILITARY EMISSIONS
PATRICK BIGGER
You see it on TV and social media. Another refinery explodes, a concrete city blows into rubble, flaming missiles and planes light up the atmosphere. In Russia, Ukraine, Gaza and now Iran, humans are at war against the atmosphere. A whole new branch of climate science adds up the steep carbon cost of war.
That includes Dr. Patrick Bigger. Patrick is Research Director at the Climate and Community Institute based in Philadelphia. He co-authored the report “Confronting Military Greenhouse Gas Emissions” (free .pdf here).
Listen to or download this 20 minute interview with Patrick Bigger in CD Quality or Lo-Fi
Studies on the climate costs of modern warfare, which include greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from military operations, supply chains, and infrastructure, have been produced by several researchers and organizations. Key figures often focus on the “military emissions gap” – the lack of mandatory, transparent reporting for armed forces in global climate agreements.
CONCRETE DETAILS
Let’s get to some concrete details. Even in peace time, cement and concrete are responsible for about 8 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. The industry is like the third-largest emitter, behind only China and the U.S. We have to carefully limit concrete use. But then humans blow up entire cities, from Gaza to Ukraine – and now likely Tehran.
Tehran has about the same population as New York City. It has the best transit system in the Middle East. The city is being torn up by thousands of missiles, bombs, and drones. Eventually, this mega-city will need repair and that means more concrete and fossil fuels. Can the atmosphere absorb the added hits of wanton destruction of cities?
THE EXAMPLE OF GAZA
We also discuss a report from a group of experts, including from Queen Mary University of London and Patrick’s own Climate and Community Project in their 2025 “Study of Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Israel-Gaza Conflict”. The carbon footprint of Israel’s war on Gaza exceeds that of many entire countries.
An analysis by researchers in the UK and US estimated that 281,000 metric tonnes of CO2 equivalent were generated in the first 60 days following the October 7, 2023, attack. Over 99% of these emissions were attributed to Israel’s aerial bombardment and ground invasion. The study from Queen Mary University of London indicated that during just the first five days of the conflict between Israel and Iran, the launch of jet and missile fuel (including ballistic missiles) caused an estimated 35,000 tons of CO2.
Significant emissions come from cargo flights delivering military supplies. For example, US cargo planes delivering 10,000 tons of supplies to Israel in the first 60 days emitted 133,000 tons of CO2 equivalent. The projected reconstruction of Gaza could result in tens of millions of metric tons of CO2.
BLASTING THE CLIMATE
News coverage and social media love to show big missiles blasting up into the atmosphere. They add to climate change for all of us. While a single missile launch might only emit a few dozen tons of CO2, the “radiative forcing” (the warming effect) is amplified because these gases and soot are released directly into the stratosphere, where they linger longer than at ground level.
JET FUEL WORST CLIMATE OFFENDER
I was surprised to learn, in this war, military aviation releases even more greenhouse gases than missiles and interceptors. In just one example, the U.S. Air Force has almost 500 refueling tankers. The largest U.S. Air Force refueling tankers – the KC-10 Extender – carries about 52,000 gallons of military fuel called JP-8 (Jet Propellant 8). Burning a full 52,000-gallon load from just one of America’s big flying tankers creates over a million pounds of C02 (500 tons), or 500 metric tonnes.
Just building all that military hardware releases more greenhouse gases. Now they’ll get another trillion dollars.
THE DARK BRIGHT SIDE?
The air space over Iran is almost empty. Commercial flights to and from the Middle East have more or less stopped. Is it possible this pause in commercial flights will lead to a short reductions in aviation emissions, even when we include military flights?
In a similar vein, the war has temporarily closed the Strait of Hormuz. About 20 percent of the world’s supply of oil and natural gas has been shut off. From a strict climate perspective, that is a good thing. But is it a win? What happens to fossil fuel investment when the price of gas and oil go up steeply – we get more investment.
THE VOLCANO STORY
The story of military emissions may be like that of volcanic explosions. At first volcanic dust cools the surface with shade. That only lasts a year or so. Then all the greenhouse gases blasted up with the volcano remain in the atmosphere for at least 100,000 years, adding to heat. Similarly, a war might reduce normal emissions of a fossil-based economy in the short-term – but then leave a larger warming in the long-run.
Some of the tools to analyze the real climate costs of war were established in 2024 by Lennard de Klerk and the Initiative on GHG Accounting of War. That network was established to assess greenhouse gas damages from the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Now it continues with new conflicts. We also have estimates of the previous 12-day war between Israel and Iran.
All of this war destruction and new greenhouse gases is unnecessary and insane.
SEE ALSO: Environment / June 20, 2025 “The Climate Costs of War – Scientific analyses show that the Ukraine and Middle East wars have unleashed staggering amounts of planet-warming emissions” by Mark Hertsgaard (paywall).
SEE ALSO WIKI Environmental impact of the Gaza war
In the interview bigger cites this paper on military concrete in Iraq.
Article Open Access “Concrete Impacts: Blast Walls, Wartime Emissions, and the US Occupation of Iraq”
– Benjamin Neimark, Oliver Belcher, Kirsti Ashworth, Reuben Larbi First published: 11 December 2023. The study finds that US forces installed about 412 km (256 miles) of concrete blast walls in Baghdad between 2003–2008, with an associated carbon footprint of roughly 203,000 tonnes CO2 equivalent.
========================
WHAT ARE THE REAL EMISSIONS OF THE AMERICAN MILITARY?
NETA CRAWFORD
In this program you hear a presentation by Neta Crawford, Professor of Political Science at Boston University. It was part of the MIT Security Studies Program, titled “Military Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate War” (October 14, 2020).
A transcript of this 2020 presentation can be found here.
Neta Crawford is a leading expert in U.S. Military emissions. She is one of the few to ever them all up. Neta is co-director of the Costs of War project at Brown University – and professor at the University of Oxford. In 2022, Neta published “The Pentagon, Climate Change, and War: Charting the Rise and Fall of U.S. Military Emissions” (MIT Press). Crawford estimates 1,323 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions from the American military from 2001 to 2019. That is a minimum, without counting a whole lot of related emissions such as down the weapons production chain, rebuilding ports and bases due to climate and more.
SLIDE DATA DURING THIS PRESENTATION BY NETA CRAWFORD
Slide at 9:54 DOD Vehicle Fuel Consumption
Neta shows a slide showing Department of Defense Fuel Consumption from 1975 to 2018. In that period, she calculates the U.S. burned more than 184 billion gallons, almost 700 billion liters of high-carbon jet fuel, along with 38 billion gallons of diesel fuel and 6 billion gallons of gas.
Slide at 11:26 Examples of US Military Aircraft jet Fuel consumption and CO2e Emissions
Crawford’s slide shows Examples of US Military Aircraft jet Fuel consumption and CO2e [or carbon dioxide equivalent] Emissions.
The B-2 bomber 4.28 gallons/mile (10 liters per kilometer). Burning one load of about 25,000 gallons, without refueling, results in 251 Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (CO2e)
The KC-46A Refueling tanker holds 16,000 gallons and a full load of it’s own fuel (not including tanker fuel) is about 156 metric Tons CO2e. The worst plane on the slid is the KC-135R which burns 4.9 gallons per mile.
Slide at 11:40 Estimated Department of Defense Greenhouse Gas Emissions, BY 1975-2019
Total Department of Defense CO2e emissions have declined in the period 1975 to 1991, down from about 100 Million Metric Tons CO2E to about 60 million tons since about 2011. Neta says the drop is because the U.S. closed a number of bases. Also the military switched to more natural gas and less coal power. She estimates 1,323 million metric tons from 2001 to 2019 total estimate for US military. Neta Crawford’s overall estimates do not include emissions of US military industrial production, blowing up oil or gas facilities in war, and does not include concrete for reconstruction.
========================
PANEL ON IRAN WAR EMISSIONS
HERTSGAARD AND TRENDLE
You would never know how dire this is just by mainstream media. Right-wing billionaires own most of it and climate reporting is no longer welcome. There is a journalist support group called Covering Climate Now. I attended their online seminar on March 5th. The host was journalist, author and Radio Ecoshock guest Mark Hertsgaard. We hear a short presentation by Giles Trendle, former Managing Director of Al Jazeera English. He knows both climate and the Middle East. The webinar was recorded by Alex Smith March 5, 2026.
Trendle says military emissions from Russia/Ukraine war lead to 312 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions in 4 years of war – and 652,000 tons of CO2 emissions in just the first four months of Gaza war. Emissions from the Ukraine war are 1600 times larger. That makes GHGs in Gaza 41 times more intense than in Ukraine, based on geographic size. He dreads the stats for Iran.
Giles says the Middle East shipping shutdown is also a concern for Europe which gets a lot of gas from Qatar. He expects huge surges in prices, with major economic impacts and rising prices for consumers. He worries about mass migration including into Europe – which pushes the right wing opposition. MI5 and MI6 reports focused on that.
SEE: “Press Briefing: The Iran War and the Climate Emergency” Covering Climate Now March 5, 2026.
=================
ALEX SAYS
Just like the DOD cannot account for where it’s huge budget goes, failing multiple audits every year – they cannot track their own greenhouse gas emissions. Of course, even trying to do that now would get a person fired. It is not just a military secret. The whole operation is so vast and complex nobody really knows how much climate damage the U.S. military-industrial complex does, in times of peace and of war.
U.S. Department of War/Defense emissions greatly depend on whether air power is being used. Whether in Afghanistan or now Iran, whenever there are a lot of aircraft on the move, CO2 emissions go up. We know from this history assembled by Crawford that the massive use of aircraft sorties bombing Iran creates an equally massive amount of new emissions going up into the atmosphere, changing the climate for all foreseeable generations. We know that from past data.
But now, this new burst of military emissions arrives as emissions, temperatures and the rate of climate change all hit record highs. The present is blowing up the future. It does not have to be this way.
We knew this way back. The Temptations sang it out in 1970 with their hit “War”.
I’m Alex. Thank you for listening, and caring about this world. And hey, if you can help keep me going on Radio (stations get the program for free) please make a donation here. There are no other sponsors, ads, or secret institutes behind Radio Ecoshock. Just you, me, and others who care.
This never gets stale. Listen to “War” The Temptations UMG Recordings 1970.