Militaries have to Switch to Clean Energy to Stop Climate Breakdown – Watts Up With That?

Essay by Eric Worrall

Tactical efficiency apparently comes second place when addressing the climate crisis.

Three reasons why the climate crisis must reshape how we think about war

Published: September 3, 2025 10.40pm AEST

Duncan Depledge
Senior Lecturer in Geopolitics and Security, Loughborough University

Earth’s average temperature rose more than 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels in 2024 for the first time – a critical threshold in the climate crisis. At the same time, major armed conflicts continue to rage in Ukraine, Gaza, Sudan and elsewhere. 

What should be increasingly clear is that war now needs to be understood as unfolding in the shadow of climate breakdown.

…

3. Armed forces will need to adapt

With geopolitical tensions rising and the number of conflicts increasing, it seems unlikely that calls for demilitarisation will be met any time soon. This leaves researchers with the uncomfortable prospect of having to rethink how military force can – and ought to be – wielded in a world simultaneously trying to adapt to accelerating climate change and escape its deep dependence on fossil fuels.

…

Militaries are being confronted with a stark choice. They can either remain as one of the last heavy users of fossil fuels in an increasingly low-carbon world or be part of an energy transition that will probably have significant implications for how military force is generated, deployed and sustained. 

…

Read more: https://theconversation.com/three-reasons-why-the-climate-crisis-must-reshape-how-we-think-about-war-262469

Imagine sending soldiers out to clear vast tracts of land, thinly scattering your forces to try to defend installations which could be wrecked by kids throwing rocks.

The reality of course is the greening of the military is one of those issues which exposes the absurdity of the climate movement. Nobody in their right mind would try to run a war which required massive transport of solar, wind and battery infrastructure, instead of transporting personnel, ammunition, food, fuel and military equipment.

There may be a case for nuclear power on military bases, to generate fossil fuel and electricity – transport costs in war zones can add hundreds of dollars per gallon to fuel costs. But this transportable nuclear powered fuel generator is no more than a lab toy for now, their current best full size transportable design produces a mere 0.8 gallons of hydrogen per minute, or 1100 gallons per day, which still has to be processed into liquid fuel in a lossy chemical reaction.

Related