Report warns of devastating consequences of NATO's future plans: 'Pushing the world in the opposite direction'

A recent report warns that military spending increases from NATO could lead to a major rise in planet-warming pollution.

What's happening?

According to a review of academic studies by Scientists for Global Responsibility, the plan from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to raise member countries' military spending to 3.5 percent of their gross domestic product — part of an overall increase from 2 percent to 5 percent GDP — could drastically increase the production of heat-trapping pollution.

The Guardian's mid-September summary of SGR's findings suggests that the spending increase could generate an additional 1,455 million tons of emissions over the next decade — more than Brazil, the fifth-largest polluting nation, emits in a single year.

The upward spending adjustments reportedly come in response to recent wars and "the possibility that the U.S. under President Donald Trump will decide to withdraw some of its troops and capabilities from Europe," according to Reuters in June.

Tracking the military's true environmental footprint is notoriously difficult. A substantial amount of fossil fuel is used for tanks, jets, and warships, and the transport of heavy equipment only adds to the total. Yet, emissions data is inconsistent, and most countries are not required to report it clearly due to security reasons. 

The SGR review of 11 academic studies found that every $100 billion in additional military spending equates to about 35 million tons of extra carbon dioxide equivalent.

Why is this concerning?

The SGR report appears to be the most comprehensive assessment so far of the impact that increased military spending may have on the production of the pollution that is already driving rising global temperatures, extreme weather events, and related threats to human health and safety.

The report warns that planned military buildups could add as much pollution as the entire nation of Oman. Even without counting the destruction caused by conflicts themselves, military activities accounted for an estimated 5.5 percent of global emissions in 2019 — more than civilian aviation and shipping combined (for a total of 5 percent), according to The Guardian.

"It is extremely difficult to see how the current and planned military spending increases can be reconciled with the transformative action necessary to prevent dangerous climate change," according to the report.

"There is an urgent need for rapid decarbonization to prevent the most dangerous effects of climate change," said Stuart Parkinson, the author of the report, per The Guardian. "But recent and planned rearmament programs and wars are pushing the world in the opposite direction."

Do you worry about the longevity of EV batteries? For sure 💯 Not really 🤷 Not at all 🙅 I've never thought about it 🤔 Click your choice to see results and speak your mind.

What can be done about it?

The report recommends that nations with military spending exceeding 0.5 percent of their GDP should be required to report data to the United Nations and assist with estimating conflict-related pollution. 

SGR also recommends that these countries establish plans to transition away from dirty energy through the adoption of new technology and sustainable energy sources, as well as through peace-building agreements, arms control, and disarmament initiatives.

Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.