Feed on
Posts
Comments

military_convoy.jpg

A new report from a dozen retired US military leaders warns that climate change poses significant risks to its national security. Dependence on fossil fuels and the vulnerable energy grid threaten the country, according to Powering America’s Defense: Energy and the Risks to National Securityfrom the Military Advisory Board (MAB) of the Center for Naval Intelligence. The report argues that climate change concerns are intersecting with issues of national security, calling the country’s reliance on fossil fuels “perilous.”

Among the study’s recommendations:

  1. The US uses about 25% of the world’s oil but only controls 3%, leading to a fossil-fuel dependence that undermines its foreign policy objectives and economic stability.

  2. Climate change will create further instability in politically unstable regions, and dwindling fossil fuel reserves will create an upward pressure on fuel prices, and that could disable the American economy
  3. The military relies on on fossil fuels, but it uses them inefficiently, and that inefficiency wastes money and often places soldiers in harm’s way. The Department of Defense should better understand its own carbon footprint, correct inefficiencies, and move to renewable energy where possible
  4. The antiquated US electricity grid represents a national security “weak link.” The US and DOD should enable smart grid technologies.
  5. The DOD should integrate energy security and climate change targets into national security and military planning processes.

“We have less than ten years to change our fossil fuel dependency course in significant ways,” concludes Vice Admiral Dennis McGinn, the former Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Warfare Requirements and Programs. “Our nation’s security depends on the swift, serious and thoughtful response to the inter-linked challenges of energy security and climate change. Our elected leaders and, most importantly, the American people should realize this set of challenges isn’t going way. We cannot continue business as usual.”

___________________

The MAB includes:

General Gordon R. Sullivan, USA (Ret.)
Admiral Frank “Skip” Bowman, USN (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Lawrence P. Farrell Jr., USAF (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Paul G. Gaffney II, USN (Ret.)
General Paul J. Kern, USA (Ret.)
Admiral T. Joseph Lopez, USN (Ret.)
Admiral Donald L. “Don” Pilling, USN (Ret.)
Admiral Joseph W. Prueher, USN (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Richard H. Truly, USN (Ret.)
General Charles F. “Chuck” Wald, USAF (Ret.)
General Anthony C. “Tony” Zinni, USMC (Ret.)

4 Responses to “The Green Berets: Military Advisory Board & Climate Change”

  1. Mound of Sound says:

    These generals and admirals are adding their voices to the assessments already done by the Pentagon and British Ministry of Defence. The collective wisdom is summed up nicely by Gwynne Dyer in his book, “Climate Wars.” Dyer’s synopsis of the conclusions of these figures and the war fighters is that it won’t be climate change that gets us but rather the wars it will trigger long before we in the West experience the climate effects of AGW.

    Because Western states will, in the main, be the “least and last” affected, they’ll have the greatest reluctance to act quickly enough. Asia and Africa, the Middle East and South/Central America however, will be hit much earlier and far more severely causing the outbreak of military conflicts involving such nations as Russia, China, India and Pakistan, all of which could be goaded into resorting to their nuclear arsenals.

    Meanwhile our Western leaders still toy with the idea of 80% GHG reductions by 2050 which isn’t going to do anything but, perhaps, slow the onset of the worst.

  2. I’m glad the military is finally recognizing the need to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels. However, I am tired of seeing all of these reports published without much action. The action I have seen doesn’t seem to be progressing quickly enough. We can’t wait until 2050 to reduce our dependence on oil.

  3. Gerry W. says:

    Just received this – thought you might be interested. It looks like the Conservatives might vote against it.

    —————————————————————————–
    Subject: Stephane Dion’s Renewable Energy Bill
    —————————————————————————–

    Debate resumed in the HoC on Thursday, June 11th, on Stéphane Dion’s Renewable Energy Bill M-295.

    The video clip runs from 07:12:00 to 07:32:50, and 07:34:50 to 07:59:15.
    http://parlvu.parl.gc.ca/Parlvu/asx/playlist.aspx?files=/2009/2009-06/0001315b.wmv

    Perhaps people could write to their MP, and also their closest Conservative MP, to ask them to support this Bill.

    Information on IRENA is here: http://www.irena.org/ . Afghanistan is a member and so is Iran.
    —————————————————————————-

  4. John-Musca says:

    Hello,
    Need help resetting my password.
    Thank you,
    John Musca
    John Musca

Leave a Reply