Climate change and energy are two key issues that will play a significant role in shaping the future security environment. Pentagon
For the first time, the Pentagon’s primary planning document addresses the threat of global warming, noting that it will accelerate instability and conflict around the globe. Former Senators John Warner (R-VA) and Hillary Clinton (D-NY) added language requiring the department to consider the effects of climate change on its facilities, capabilities, and missions to the 2008 National Defense Authorization Act. The Department of Defense’s Quadrennial Defense Review (PDF), officially released today, discusses the department’s “strategic approach to climate and energy”:
Climate change and energy are two key issues that will play a significant role in shaping the future security environment.
Although they produce distinct types of challenges, climate change, energy security, and economic stability are inextricably linked.The actions that the Department takes now can prepare us to respond effectively to these challenges in the near term and in the future.
The QDR notes that climate change affects the Department of Defense “in two broad ways”: first, global warming impacts and disasters will “act as an accelerant of instability or conflict,” and second, military installations and forces around the globe will have to adapt to rising seas, increased extreme weather, and other effects of global warming:
Assessments conducted by the intelligence community indicate that climate change could have significant geopolitical impacts around the world, contributing to poverty, environmental degradation, and the further weakening of fragile governments. Climate change will contribute to food and water scarcity, will increase the spread of disease, and may spur or exacerbate mass migration. While climate change alone does not cause conflict, it may act as an accelerant of instability or conflict, placing a burden to respond on civilian institutions and militaries around the world.
Source: Climate Progress
permaculturetv
niccolox
Kirstie Stramler
Eric Toensmeier
calea68
I took a look at the video and by chance was referred to a much more interesting one from the British military leaders http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB3Y0b7IFwg&feature=player_embedded “Foreign Office Minister Bill Rammell MP addresses a conference on climate security” (Youtube.com).
remember it is a double edged sword, the military leaders of the world are looking at increased instability due to starvation and havoc caused by changes in the Global Climate, this they view with interest as reason to push for more money, but they also see their reliance on oil (look at the US airforce for example) their plans for global mobilization using C-17′s are based on the abundant supply of jet fuel, if you think it is inefficient to travel in planes to cheap holiday destinations how much more inefficient it is to hand deliver a tank to battle in a C-17.
the words efficient and Pentagon rarely go together, certainly when in comes to spending taxpayer money.. but, its true they are making noises and heading in the clean-tech direction. http://articles.latimes.com/2009/apr/26/local/me-army-green26 indeed, the US clean-tech sector see that as their saviour, a guaranteed buyer for USA products. happened many times before. military keynesianism. interestingly, computers where going to make the mil more efficient too. but…
you might also be interested in USA based http://www.OperationFree.Net
We’re a coalition of leading Veterans and national security organizations who recognize that climate change is a major threat, and support fast, bold action. It is time for Americans to rise to the challenge, and we’re taking on the fight.
Remember: behind every ‘$300 hammer’ and ‘$800 toilet seat’ (sic) lies the reality of military/secret police black budgets. Much of so-called ‘military inefficiency’ is actually misdirection: of the Congress, of everybody. But sure — they burn through money like a compulsive gambler in Vegas, too.