DoD “Precariously Underprepared” for Security Challenges of Climate Change

The report recommends that the Army engage proactively in climate change-oriented campaign planning to anticipate future climate conflicts and mass migration in countries like Bangladesh. Incorporating future challenges into today’s budgets will distribute the cost of adaptation. 

Furtek summarizes the report’s message thus: “Climate change is radically altering the theater of operations and the home front, increasing the challenges the U.S. military faces at each stage of its national security mission. This report echoes the need to more fully incorporate climate threats into our security awareness and military readiness.”

Here are the report’s Executive Summary and Summary Recommendation:

Executive Summary
Current conversations about climate change and its impacts are often rancorous and politically charged. As an organization that is, by law, non-partisan, the Department of Defense (DoD) is precariously unprepared for the national security implications of climate change-induced global security challenges. This study examines the implications of climate change for the United States Army. This includes national security challenges associated with or worsened by climate change, and organizational challenges arising from climate change-related issues in the domestic environment. Given that, the study’s starting point is the implications of climate change for the U.S. Army, and the Army is therefore the focus of the analysis and recommendations. That said, much of the analysis involves DoD and other elements of the government, and most of the Army-specific recommendations have parallels that apply to other military services.

The study itself did not involve original research on the nature or magnitude of climate change. The analysis assumes, based on the preponderance of evidence available, that significant changes in climate have already occurred, likely to worsen in the years ahead. The study did not look to ascribe causation to climate change (man-made or natural), as causation is distinct from effects and not pertinent to the approximately 50-year horizon considered for the study. The study does, however, assume that human behavior can mitigate both the size and consequences of negative impacts that result from climate change.

Summary Analysis
Initial findings of the study focus on changes to the physical environment and the human response to those changes.

Sea level rise, changes in water and food security, and more frequent extreme weather events are likely to result in the migration of large segments of the population. Rising seas will displace tens (if not hundreds) of millions of people, creating massive, enduring instability. This migration will be most pronounced in those regions where climate vulnerability is exacerbated by weak institutions and governance and underdeveloped civil society. Recent history has shown that mass human migrations can result in increased propensity for conflict and turmoil as new populations intermingle with and compete against established populations. More frequent extreme weather events will also increase demand for military humanitarian assistance.

Salt water intrusion into coastal areas and changing weather patterns will also compromise or eliminate fresh water supplies in many parts of the world. Additionally, warmer weather increases hydration requirements. This means that in expeditionary warfare, the Army will need to supply itself with more water. This significant logistical burden will be exacerbated on a future battlefield that requires constant movement due to the ubiquity of adversarial sensors and their deep strike capabilities.

A warming trend will also increase the range of insects that are vectors of infectious tropical diseases. This, coupled with large scale human migration from tropical nations, will increase the spread of infectious disease. The Army has tremendous logistical capabilities, unique in the world, in working in austere or unsafe environments. In the event of a significant infectious disease outbreak (domestic or international), the Army is likely to be called upon to assist in the response and containment.

Arctic ice will continue to melt in a warming climate. These Arctic changes present both challenges and opportunities. The decrease in Arctic sea ice and associated sea level rise will bring conflicting claims to newly accessible natural resources. It will also introduce a new theater of direct military contact between an increasingly belligerent Russia and other Arctic nations, including the U.S. Yet the opening of the Arctic will also increase commercial opportunities. Whether due to increased commercial shipping traffic or expanded opportunities for hydrocarbon extraction, increased economic activity will drive a requirement for increased military expenditures specific to that region. In short, competition will increase.

The increased likelihood of more intense and longer duration drought in some areas, accompanied by greater atmospheric heating, will put an increased strain on the aging U.S. power grid and further spur large scale human migration elsewhere. Power generation in U.S. hydroelectric and nuclear facilities will be affected. This dual attack on both supply and demand could create more frequent, widespread and enduring power grid failures, handicapping the U.S. economy.

In addition to the changing environmental conditions that will contribute to a changing security environment, climate change will likely also result in social, political, and market pressures that may profoundly affect the Army’s (and DoD’s) activities. Studies indicate that global society, including in the U.S., increasingly views climate change as a grave threat to security. As the electorate becomes more concerned about climate change, it follows that elected officials will, as well. This may result in significant restrictions on military activities (in peace-time) that produce carbon emissions. In concert with these changes, consumer demands will drive market adaptation. Businesses will focus on more environmentally sound products and practices to meet demand.

The DoD does not currently possess an environmentally conscious mindset. Political and social pressure will eventually force the military to mitigate its environmental impact in both training and wartime. Implementation of these changes will be costly in effort, time and money. This is likely to occur just as the DoD is adjusting to changes in the security environment previously highlighted.

Summary Recommendations
In light of these findings, the military must consider changes in doctrine, organization, equipping, and training to anticipate changing environmental requirements. Greater inter-governmental and inter-organizational co-operation, mandated through formal framework agreements, will allow the DoD to anticipate those areas where future conflict is more likely to occur and to implement a campaign-plan-like approach to proactively prepare for likely conflict and mitigate the impacts of mass migration. Focused research and early funding of anticipated future equipment and requirements will spread the cost of adaptation across multiple budget cycles, diminish the “sticker shock” and impacts to overall spending.

Finally, the DoD must begin now to promulgate a culture of environmental stewardship across the force. Lagging behind public and political demands for energy efficiency and minimal environmental footprint will significantly hamstring the Department’s efforts to face national security challenges. The Department will struggle to maintain its positive public image and that will impact the military’s ability to receive the required funding to face the growing number of security challenges.

The recommendations of this study follow.

1. THE ARMY OPERATING ENVIRONMENT

1.1 Problem: Hydration Challenges in a Contested Environment

Recommendation: The Army must develop advanced technologies to capture ambient humidity and transition technology from the United States Army Research, Development, and Engineering Command (RDECOM) that supports the water sustainment tenants of decentralizing and embedded, harvest water, and recycle and re-use.

Implementation Timing: 6-10 Years

Resource Requirement: Moderate

1.2 Problem: Lack of adequate preparation and coherence in doctrine, training, and capabilities development to support effective Arctic operations.

Recommendation: The Army and the Department of Defense must begin planning and implementing changes to training, equipment, doctrine and capabilities in anticipation of an expanded role in the Arctic associated with global climate adaptation.

Implementation Timing: Now to 10+ Years.

Resource Requirements: Moderate to High.

1. THE ARMY INSTITUTION

1.1 Problem: The Lack of a Culture of Environmental Stewardship

Recommendation: Army leadership must create a culture of environmental consciousness, stay ahead of societal demands for environmental stewardship and serve as a leader for the nation or it risks endangering the broad support it now enjoys. Cultural change is a senior leader responsibility.

Implementation Timing: Now

Resource Requirements: Low

1.2 Problem: Potential disruptions to readiness due to restrictions on fuel use.

Recommendation: The Army must significantly increase investment in more realistic simulation that incorporates the advances in virtual and augmented reality. It should also continue to invest in the development of lower CO2 emissions platforms and systems.

Implementation Timing: 6-10 years (Virtual Reality / Augmented Reality), 10+ years (alternate energy platforms).

Resource Requirements: Moderate to High.

2. THE JOINT FORCE AND DoD

2.1 Problem: Lack of coordination and consolidation in climate-change related intelligence.

Recommendation: Advocate for a comprehensive organization, functional manager, technology, and process review study to identify the current state of intelligence community agencies with regard to climate change, with the goal of formalizing Interagency coordination on Climate Change-related intelligence.

Implementation Timing: Now

Resourcing Requirements: Low

2.2 Problem: Lack of Organizational Accountability for and Coordination of Climate Change-Related Response and Mitigation Activities

Recommendation: Recommit to the Senior Energy and Sustainability Council (SESC). Add a resourcing element to the council by providing the USA and VCSA with funding across each POM cycle to support climate-related projects that improve readiness and resiliency of the force.

Implementation Timing: Now, 1-10 Years

Resource Requirements: Low, though potentially moderate through reprogramming.

2.3 Problem: Lack of Climate Change-Oriented Campaign Planning and Preparation

Recommendation: (A) Develop Bangladesh (worst case scenario) Relief Campaign Plan as notional plan for preparing for broader climate change-related requirements arising from large-scale, permanent population dislocations. (B) Work more closely with the CDC to ensure appropriate military support to infectious disease treatment and containment. (C) Ensure preparedness for global, regional or local disruptions in logistics that may affect the Army’s operations or allies.

Implementation Timing: Now

Resource Requirement: Low

3. NATIONAL CONTEXT3.1 Problem: Power Grid Vulnerabilities

Recommendation: A. An interagency approach, coupled with collaboration of the commercial sector, should catalogue the liabilities across the electrical grid and prioritize budget requests for infrastructure improvements. B. The DoD should pursue options to reverse infrastructure degradation around military installations, including funding internal power generation such as solar/battery farms and small-nuclear reactors.

Implementation Timing: Now (A); 6-10, 10+ Years (B)

Resource Requirement: Low (A); High (B)

3.2 Problem: Climate Change and Threats to Nuclear Weapons Infrastructure

Recommendation: The U.S. Department of Defense, in combination with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) should develop a long term 15 to 20 year tritium production plan that accounts for advances in nuclear technology and the possibility of rising climate induced water levels as well as increases to the overall average water temperature used to cool nuclear reactors. This plan should include projections of fiscal resources and military tritium requirements needed to maintain and modernize the U.S. nuclear stockpile. It should also include U.S. government requirements for use of helium-3, a decay product of tritium used primarily for neutron detection when searching for special nuclear material (SNM) and enforcing nuclear nonproliferation agreements.

Implementation Timing: Now to 10+ Years

Resource Requirement: High

Finally, the study examined the threat climate change poses to the U.S. military’s coastal infrastructure, i.e., coastal military facilities and key airports and shipping facilities. Additionally, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) manages the nation’s system of inland waterways, and condition of much of that system will be affected by rising seas and changing weather. That said, the study found no basis for additional action. The DoD and USACE have adequate systems and processes in place to track and manage these risks.

— Read more in Implications of Climate Change for the U.S. Army (U.S. Army War College, 2019)