Font size:
Print
Environmental Costs of War
Context:
The world currently faces the devastation of two significant conflicts: the war in Ukraine and the ongoing violence in Gaza.
More on News
- Beyond the immense human suffering, these wars have unleashed catastrophic environmental damage, or what experts call “eco-terrorism.”
- From emissions generated by military supply chains to the environmental cost of reconstruction, the ecological impact of modern warfare is staggering.
The Carbon Footprint of Conflict
- Wars significantly contribute to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, not only from explosives but also from the energy-intensive military operations and the rebuilding efforts that follow.
- In 2023 alone, 170 armed conflicts displaced nearly 120 million people while leaving a profound ecological impact.
Historical Impact
- World War I’s trench warfare destroyed grasslands, animal habitats, and soil quality.
- World War II’s aerial bombardments contaminated landscapes and harmed ecosystems.
- The Vietnam War saw large-scale deforestation through chemical means, leaving a once-pristine environment in ruin.
- The Gulf War’s oil well fires released vast amounts of GHGs, while oil spills devastated marine life.
Modern Conflicts
- The Russia-Ukraine war has emitted over 175 million tonnes of CO₂ equivalent in its first two years.
- The Gaza conflict, though localised, has contributed an estimated 50 million tonnes of emissions, exacerbating soil degradation, water pollution, and hazardous debris accumulation.
Hidden Emissions and Military Secrecy
- According to the Conflict and Environment Observatory, military activities account for 5.5% of global GHG emissions.
- When factoring in weapon manufacturing, supply chains, and reconstruction, this figure could rise to 29%.
- However, emissions from military operations remain unreported under the Kyoto Protocol and Paris Agreement, shielded by “national security” considerations.
Climate Change and Economic Impact
- A study by Harvard and Northwestern University researchers highlights the economic cost of climate change, likening its impact to that of a “continuing permanent war.”
- Global GDP has already shrunk by 12% due to a 1°C rise in temperature since pre-industrial times.
- A 3°C rise could lead to a 50% decline in global output, capital, and consumption.
The Down to Earth report on the Russia-Ukraine war underscores the severe environmental and humanitarian consequences of the conflict, including the generation of approximately 75,000 cubic meters of destruction waste in areas such as Bucha, highlighting significant challenges in waste management.
Funding Wars vs. Climate Action
- Despite the pressing need for climate finance, major economies prioritise military spending:
- The US has spent $60.7 billion on Ukraine and $17.9 billion on Israel over the last two years.
- European nations like the UK, Germany, and Denmark have collectively spent billions on military aid to Ukraine.
- Russia has allocated a record $126 billion for defense in 2025, 32.5% of its government expenditure.
- In contrast, the COP-29 summit in Baku failed to secure a climate finance goal of $1.3 trillion annually, with developed nations committing only $300 billion per year by 2035.
A Call for Sustainable Progress
- Donella Meadows, a renowned environmental scientist, advocated for a “genuine progress indicator” (GPI) to measure human well-being based on air quality, food security, and sustainability.
- As Yuval Noah Harari warns, avoiding ecological collapse requires building a society that is socially and financially equitable while staying within ecological limits.
