The electrification of military vehicles will increase demand for batteries, yet forthcoming EU battery legislation contains a blanket military exemption. Piotr Barczak and Linsey Cottrell explain why the exemption challenges military greening claims.
States should support the establishment of an intergovernmental science-policy panel on chemicals, waste and pollution, argues Linsey Cottrell. Doing so could also help draw attention to conflict pollution.
When wars end without clear resolution, conflicts can become frozen. In this post, Clayton Payne examines how the frozen conflicts affecting Georgia’s breakaway republics of Abkhazia and South Ossetia have influenced their environment, and how it is managed.
This guest commentary from UNIDIR argues that we need to explore how climate change is influencing the trade, use and legacy of conventional weapons – and how arms flows will exacerbate climate insecurity.
Thousands of people have helped raise the profile of the environment causes and consequences of war over the last 20 years, this #EnvConflictDay post explores how they have done that, and encourages us to take a day to reflect on our collective achievements.
With interest growing in reducing military emissions, Linsey Cottrell and Eoghan Darbyshire explore why they emit so much and what it will take to reduce their contribution to climate change.
Doug Weir untangles what it actually was that NATO and its member states committed to at June’s summit. While there were some positive signs, the pledges fell short of what is needed to address military contributions to the climate crisis, in line with the Paris Agreement.
With so much focus on how climate change can influence security, have we neglected the question of how conflicts influence emissions? As Eoghan Darbyshire and Doug Weir explain, environmental and social changes in conflict-affected and post-conflict areas can mean significant changes in emissions.
