Why we ignore the environmental cost of war | Ali Borhani | TEDxSurreyUniversity

The speaker begins by recounting a personal experience from their childhood in Iran, where a radio announcement of an Iraqi attack on September 22nd, 1980, marked the beginning of an eight-year war. This war, and subsequent conflicts, deeply impacted their life and the lives of those around them, including the loss of a classmate, and the severe injury of a cousin's son who was destined for an Ivy League business school. The speaker highlights the immense human cost of war, with a million young men dead or maimed in the Iran-Iraq war alone, and criticizes how the lucrative nature of warfare prevented its early cessation. The core argument presented is that while discussions about climate change often focus on common culprits like coal, oil, and consumer habits, the significant emissions generated by wars and military destruction are largely ignored. The speaker contrasts the public's concern over a "barrel of oil" with a "barrel bomb," and how personal carbon footprints are meticulously measured, yet the emissions from military operations are overlooked. This is framed as a form of "emissions exceptionalism." The speaker draws a parallel between the well-known Keeling Curve, which tracks atmospheric CO2, and a hypothetical "killing curve," suggesting that increases in conflict correlate with rising emissions. They list numerous instances of military interventions and regime changes, particularly those involving the United States, to illustrate the widespread and frequent nature of military operations that contribute to emissions. The speaker questions who is measuring the environmental impact of these actions, from naval battle groups to air operations. A vivid visualization exercise is then presented, asking the audience to imagine the immense logistical and destructive scale of military deployments: hundreds of thousands of soldiers, vast amounts of military hardware, millions of air sorties, and the subsequent destruction. This destruction, the speaker emphasizes, results in the obliteration of infrastructure like hospitals, schools, and cities, releasing significant "embodied carbon." This destruction represents a "second layer of scope two" emissions that are not accounted for. The speaker defines emissions not just as supply chain impacts, but as the "fire" (scope 1), the "ash" (scope 2), and the "breath after" (scope 3), considering these as collective, unacknowledged scars. The speaker criticizes current climate policies, such as carbon border adjustment mechanisms and nationally determined contributions, for focusing on emissions from trade and national targets while neglecting the vast carbon footprint of military actions. They question the diligence in tracking incoming emissions while remaining oblivious to outgoing emissions generated through military might. The speaker points to specific conflict zones from Koramsha to Kabul, and Mosul to Mariupol, asserting that this issue transcends political systems and highlights a pervasive "climate hypocrisy." The speaker then addresses the "elephant in the room": the peacetime global footprint of militaries, estimated at 5.5%, which excludes drills, maneuvers, and actual combat. They pose the question of what the actual figure would be if all destructive operations, fuel consumption, and reconstruction emissions were included, suggesting it could be as high as 20-25%. The speaker expresses excitement about the potential of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and advanced technologies, such as DeepMind's protein folding model, to help unravel the "mystery of emissions hiding" within military operations. They argue that companies with AI capabilities can create "large liability models" to track and quantify these emissions. Satellite technology and machine learning are presented as tools that can provide clear images of destroyed cities, enabling the simulation of rebuilding emissions. The speaker anticipates the "national security" argument against disclosure but counters that it is a matter of "collective global humanity's insecurity" if these emissions are not measured. They believe that a close approximation of emissions from conflicts like the Vietnam War to the present day is achievable with current technology. The speaker calls for moving beyond "climate theater" and establishing laboratories, particularly in the Global South, to measure and model these emissions, holding those who lecture others about their emissions accountable for their own. In conclusion, the speaker uses a story about a logger and an oak tree to illustrate the concept of the "handle of the axe" being made from the very thing it destroys. They urge the audience to recognize that the tools and consciousness exist to address "emissions exceptionalism" and to move towards transparency, simulation, and compensation for the environmental damage caused by wars. The message is one of collective responsibility and the need to confront the often-ignored climate impact of military actions.