Download EnvironmentandEnergyIssuesforthemilitary

Report of the
Latin America and Caribbean
Militaries Environmental and
Energy Working Group
Information Paper for IADB
Environmental and Energy Issues for the
Military
January 2014
Table of Contents
I. Acknowledgments (0.5 - page)
II. Executive Summary (1-page)
III. Introduction and Background (2-pages)
IV. Environmental and Energy Issues for the Military (Total: 15 pages)
a. Central America (3-pages)
1. Central American Region
2. El Salvador
3. El Salvador military forces
b. Caribbean (3-pages)
1. Caribbean Region
2. Trinidad & Tobago
3. Trinidad & Tobago military forces
c. South America (3-pages)
1. Ecuatorial Region
2. Colombia
3. Colombian Navy
d. South America (3-pages)
1. Southern Cone
2. Chile
3. Chilean military forces
e. North America (3-pages)
1. North America Region
2. USA
3. US Military Forces
V Conclusion and Recommendations (2-pages)
VI. Appendices
VII. List of References
Executive Summary:
PURPOSE: The Latin America and Caribbean Militaries Environmental and
Energy Working Group is pleased to forward this information paper to the Inter-American
Defense Board on the implications of environmental variability on military organizations
throughout the Americas. This report offers important considerations and recommendations for
regional military organizations with regards to the impacts of environmental destabilization on
regional military installations; force health protection; operations and readiness.
In its key security documents, ‘Declaration of Security’, adopted October 28, 2003, the
Organization of American States (OAS) established that “environmental deterioration affects the
quality of life of our peoples and may constitute a threat, concern, or challenge to the security of
states in the Hemisphere.” Through its declaration the organization’s Secretariat for
Multidimensional Security call for action by all member states to “undertake to strengthen our
national capabilities” in the face of environmental degradation. The baseline of understanding
that form the foundation of this study is that global climate change could constitute a threat,
concern, or challenge for the security of the states of the hemisphere 1and that national and
collective security interests will be negatively affected by shifts in temperatures, rain patterns,
vector borne diseases, sea levels and other environmental related factors. It has as its main
operating assumption that climate degradation poses a threat to national territories and citizens
and that military organizations – key stewards of national security --have a responsibility to work
in concert with civil authorities to confront these impacts through whole-of-government
resiliency and adaptation plans.
Acknowledging that shifting environmental forces pose a threat to national order, regional
military organizations established a informal environmental and energy working group to
examine how regional militaries are currently being impacted by climate degradation.
This group was comprised of military officials from a representative set of OAS member states,
specifically, Colombia, United States, El Salvador, Chile, Trinidad and Tobago and Barbados.
During the course of a six months, the working group examined the actual impacts of climate
degradation on military forces, specifically, the impacts on installations, operations and force
readiness of participating countries.
The scope of the study was deliberately limited to how rapid and gradual onset environmental
shifts will impact the capacities of military organizations to execute their missions in the near,
mid and long terms. The group’s key recommendation centered the need for more detailed actual
and forecast impact assessments on military installations and operations across the region.
The group also recommended that environmental awareness training be made available to mid
and senior level military officers and civilian personnel. Such capacitating will provide key
personnel the knowledge and skill-sets required to help regional military organizations to not
only respond to the impacts of climate degradations, but also to become leaders in mitigating and
adapting strategies. Given military organizations reliance on fossil fuel sources – sources that
emit greenhouse gassed that contribute to global temperature rise, the working group
1
Key OAS Security Documents, Volume 1 National Security, Department of Public Security, Secretariat for Multidimensional
Security, Organization of American States, page 12
The security threats, concerns, and other challenges in the hemispheric context are of diverse
nature and multidimensional scope, and the traditional concept and approach must be expanded
to encompass new and nontraditional threats, which include political, economic, social, health,
and environmental aspects.
----- Organization of American States 2
Background:
Climate change is a major global challenge that will have significant and lasting impacts on
human well-being and development (IPCC, 2007a; UNEP, 2007). These impacts threaten
livelihoods, cultures, economies, security and governance of OAS member states making it
necessary to adapt rapidly across many parts of society (Leith, 2010; Pascual and Elkind, 2010).
Paradoxically, though the region has minimum responsibility for one of the main causes of
global warming (it accounts for only 11.78% of emissions of greenhouse gases) member states
will be impacted and national resources strained as governments struggle to manage the
increasing direct and indirect impacts of environment degradation.
There is conclusive evidence that environmental variability impacts include an increase in the
Earth’s average temperature by about 0.74°C over the past century. Further, it is forecast that
total temperature rise will be between 3 – 4 degrees Celsius by 2100. This warming trend will
result in adverse impacts on member states to include; increased intensity and frequency of
hurricanes in the Caribbean; changes in precipitation patterns and intensity; changes in
temperature levels; longer droughts; increased sea level rise in coastal areas of South Atlantic
countries; melting glaciers in Patagonia and the Andes; and ice sheet losses in West Antarctica
(UNEP, 2009; Magrin and others, 2007; UNEP and SEMARNAT, 2006). These impacts will not
only affect local populations in varied ways, but will also impact military installations;
operations; force health; and overall readiness to conduct varied missions.
“The security threats, concerns, and other challenges in the hemispheric context are of diverse nature
and multi-dimensional in scope, and the traditional concepts and approaches must be expanded to
encompass new and nontraditional threats, which include political, economic, social, health and
environmental aspects.”3
One of the most important consequences of environmental variability, especially for Caribbean
islands, is sea level rise and storm surge events dues to an increasing number of extreme storms
(Simpson et al., 2010, 2009; Wong, 2010; Allison, N.L. et al., 2009; Singh et al. 2009; Webster,
2005; Singh, 1997). Singh (1997a) has suggested that the rate of sea level rise in the Southern
2
Key OAS Security Documents, Volume 1 National Security, Department of Public Security, Secretariat for Multidimensional
Security, Organization of American States, page 12
3 Key OAS Security Documents, Department of Public Security, Volume I: National Security p.11
Caribbean significantly exceeds the average global mean. In 2007 it projected that sea levels
could rise by between 18cm and 59cm in this century, and many researchers now believe that the
sea level increase will be even greater –between 0.8 and 1.5 meters– as suggested by new
assessments of the physical fracture potential of the Greenland and Antarctica ice sheets (UNEP,
2009). Magrin and others (2007) note that, according to various IPCC climate models, the
average temperature increase projected for Latin America by the end of the century varies from 1
to 4°C for scenarios that anticipate certain levels of emissions mitigation, and from 2 to 6°C for
scenarios that do not make such predictions. Such changes will have a disproportionate impact
on not only coastal communities but will also adversely impact national Coast Guard; Naval
ports; and other public sea side facilities.
According to UNEP,GEO LAC 3, 2010, the region’s vulnerability is not only due to more
frequent climatic events but also to the population’s ever greater exposure to these threats
(Andean Community, 2008). Data from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
predicts even more disturbing future scenarios. The fall out of more frequent meteorological
events will lead to a requirement for more robust national and regional response mechanisms
and assets to provide search and rescue and other first response services to affected populations.
The IPCC report estimates, that increases in mean sea level, climate variability and extremes will
affect coastal areas, and cause adverse impacts on low-lying coastal areas, including destruction
of mangroves, coral reefs (especially in Mesoamerica and the Caribbean) (UNEP,GEO LAC 3,
2010). Such effects will adversely impact the livelihoods of coastal populations with possible
security implications for law enforcement and military organizations. The availability of
drinking water on the Pacific coast of Costa Rica, Ecuador and the Río de la Plata estuary,
among others, would also be affected possible leading to intra-communal conflict
_________________________________________.
The challenges of climate degradation are inextricably linked to fossil fuel consumption. Oil
continues to be the region’s most important energy supply source (41.7%), followed by natural
gas (26%) and energy from renewable sources (23%). The exploitation of hydrocarbons is
closely related to environmental deterioration, to the extent that even IEA members recognize
that current trends in energy management are not sustainable and that, because the sector now
makes a heavy contribution to climate change, a better balance must be found between energy
production and the environment (IEA, 2008; Omar Farouk, 2007). Military forces in the region
are large consumers of fossil fuels and so contribute to environmental degradation of the region.
It is ill-advised and poor stewardship for forces to continue wasteful and environmentally
harmful practices when other avenues could be made available.
Further, there is a growing appreciation that the ability of military organizations to conduct core
mission sets will continue to be eroded by environmental shifts. It is important that these changes
be acknowledged and analyzed so that military organizations can proactively formulate
resiliency and adaptation plans to minimize impacts to military readiness across all mission set.
The lack of homogeneous, up-to-date and comparable data that would allow for an objective
analysis of the environment, and for decision-making based on the best available scientific and
technical information, is a problem at all scales in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC).
The generation of information and knowledge faces many difficulties throughout the region,
including, not insignificantly, problems of funding. Evaluating the state of the environment at the
regional, sub-regional, national and local scale is limited by these problems and impacts
decision-making (UNEP, GEO LAC 3, 2010). Such assessments will inform planning processes
to include adaptation and resiliency plans– saving dollars and improving the sustainability
installations and forces.
The group did not endeavor to accomplish a comprehensive regional study of climate impacts,
but rather to examine actual impacts military organizations. Based on this analysis of
observable and likely future impacts, the group formulated recommendations designed to help
regional militaries to start to address the many challenges of climate degradation utilizing both
individual and collectively frameworks.
Gradual but significant environmental variability constitutes a slow moving emergency that all nations
will be compelled to respond to both proactively and reactively – now and into the future. The extent of
the impacts will vary depending upon the magnitude and intensity of exposure in addition to the
capacity of individual states to mitigate and respond to the impacts of environmental shifts. All nations
should expect a continuing and increasing interplay between climate, land, water, food, migration, and
urbanization, economic, social, and political factors.
It is ill-advised for national security discussions to be confined to traditional topics and notions of
security that have traditionally centered around the axis of state on state conflict. Environmental factors
such as; natural resources scarcity (e.g. clean water), environmental degradation (e.g. deforestation,
water contamination), chemical spills/hazardous wastes, extreme weather/catastrophic events (e.g.
tornadoes and hurricanes) and infectious diseases (i.e. pandemics) must be understood as serious
hazards to national and international stability. A new framework of understanding is needed – one that
incorporates environmental variability considerations into the regional and nation-state security
calculus.
All states of the Americas have experienced locally severe economic damage, plus substantial
ecosystem, social and cultural disruption from recent weather-related extremes, including hurricanes,
severe storms, floods, droughts, heat waves and wildfires. Over the past several decades, economic
damage from severe weather has increased dramatically, due largely to increased value of the
infrastructure at risk. Annual cost to North America for example has reached tens of billions of dollars in
damaged property and economic productivity, as well as lives disrupted and lost. 4 These emerging
realities will compel governments throughout the Americas to reassess national security priorities and to
develop strategies to improve national resiliencies in the face of intensifying environmental variability.
This information paper provides a synopsis on some prominent environmental related impacts on four
Western Hemisphere sub-regions – the Caribbean, North America, Central America, and South America.
It does not aspire to provide a comprehensive assessment of environmental impacts on the entire
region, but rather expose impacts of environmental challenges on a set of representational countries.
This will inform conversations on how regional militaries can be better prepared to support civilian
authorities to mitigate the effects of the “slow moving emergency”, as well as maintaining resiliency and
readiness.
4
North America. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,
http://know.climateofconcern.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=article&id=109
IV. Environmental and Energy Issues for the Military (Total: 15 pages)
a. Central America (3-pages)
b. Caribbean (3-pages)
c. South America (3-pages)
d. South America (3-pages)
e. North America (3-pages)
“The melting of the polar ice cap in the Arctic plus the frequency and intensity of weather events in this
hemisphere, with the corresponding need for military humanitarian assistance missions, calls for a greater
attention to the security implications of climate change” 5
Though North American states (i.e. Canada, the United States and Mexico) are generally more capable
of mitigating and responding to the potential and actual impacts of changes in the environment, factors
such as; topography, national capacities and human geography will make some countries more
susceptible to the effects of specific environmental factors than others. The following is a short list of
some of the impacts environmental variability is already having on North American states.
 Due to sea level rise, increase in inundations, and storm surge flooding, shoreline erosion. This will
affect the people living in the coastal ecosystems like salt marshes.
 Wildfire and insect outbreaks have been increasing and are likely to intensify.
 Increased risk of deaths due to heat waves, water-borne diseases, and degraded water quality,
respiratory illness, and vector-borne infectious diseases.
 Due to diminishing snowfields, the availability of water has become a major issue. This will add to
the pressure on the availability of groundwater.
Canada, the United States and Mexico, in the recent past, have all experienced economic damage, plus
substantial ecosystem, social and cultural disruption from weather-related extremes which include
hurricanes, floods, droughts, heat waves and wildfires. Further, economic damage from severe weather
has increased dramatically, due largely to increased value of the infrastructure at risk. For example,
annual costs to North American states have now reached tens of billions of dollars in damaged property
and economic productivity, as well as lives disrupted and lost. 6 Extreme events, from natural disasters
to severe droughts, will become increasingly more common requiring that sustainability and resilience
become essential elements of national security strategy of North American states. 7
Extreme weather phenomena like Hurricane Sandy that affect large populations capture international
attention due to the rapid onset of the impacts. However, slow moving environmental impacts like polar
ice melt can be just as significant. Over time seemingly small changes like global temperature rise can
lead to unforeseen geo-political tensions and new vulnerabilities. The polar ice melt for example has
resulted in the opening of previously frozen waterways compelling the Canadian government to more
actively engage other arctic states like, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, and Sweden in order
to resolve long standing maritime border disputes before they play out on the high seas.
Further south in Mexico, the second largest greenhouse gas emitter in Latin America, longer and hotter
periods are being experienced leading to more droughts, more intense rains with associated frequent
5
Gates, RM. Speech delivered at German Marshall Fund Security Conference, Halifax, Nova Scotia [online] (November 20, 2009).
www.defense.gov/speeches/speech.aspx?speechid=1398.
6
North America. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,
http://know.climateofconcern.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=article&id=109
7
The Concept of Environmental Security, By Kent Hughes Butts, Sherri Goodman, Nancy Nugent (2012)
floods and mudslides. According to the World Bank, if climate change is not addressed, the Mexican
economy is expected to decline by between 3.5 and 4 percent and suffer significant costs of up to 6.2
percent of GDP. 8
It is becoming increasingly understood by all national security stakeholders that environmental
variability related impacts will be destabilizing factors throughout the region and must be addressed in
the short term to prevent long term damage to the natural environment and to regional human security.
Our leadership in the Department of Defense (DoD) has been considering different aspects of
environmental and energy issues and potential effects on US Military facilities, operations, training and
missions we undertake.
Over the last five years, US national security and defense guidance have highlighted the potential effects
of environmental stressors in the future security environment. Physical pressures such as population,
resources, energy, climatic and environmental, could combine with rapid social, cultural, technological
and geopolitical change to create greater uncertainty.9 Subsequent guidance brought attention to the
uncertain effects of climate change to the physical environment and the relation to the military
missions. 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. 10
Environmental factors have the potential to directly affect our military forces as we are supported by
the physical environment in which we operate. Here are some examples of environmental factors that
DoD is looking into from a risks/vulnerabilities assessment perspective11.
Facilities:







precipitation patterns affect water availability
storm frequency and flooding affect maintenance costs for roads, utilities and runways
storm frequency and flooding affect flood control and erosion control measures
rising temperatures increase energy costs for building and industrial base operations
coastal flooding and storm surge affect coastal infrastructure and cost of infrastructure
reinforcement and other modifications
coastal flooding affect the demand for surface water resources and associated cost of saltwater
intrusion countermeasures
inland and coastal flooding may affect future land availability and siting of new construction
Operations


high temperatures may affect airlift capacity and change operational parameters for equipment
higher temperatures increase operational health risks
8
Mexico Seeks to Adapt to Climate Change and Mitigate its Effects (April 17, 2013) http://www.worldbank.org/en/results/2013/04/17/mexicoseeks-to-adapt-to-climate-change-and-mitigate-its-effects
9
2008 National Defense Strategy
10
2010 Quadrennial Defense Review
11
2012 Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan, Appendix 2





precipitation patterns affect land carrying capacity for vehicle maneuvers
increased storm frequency and intensity may cause temporary or prolonged disruption of
operations
flooding disrupts access to water crossings and river operations
flooding increases transportation infrastructure damage
coastal flooding and storm surge may have impacts on supply chain from potential shipping
interruptions
Training:




high-heat days cause training day limitations
rising temperatures reduce live-fire training
changes in precipitation patterns affect availability of training lands
coastal flooding and storm surge impacts littoral and shore training and ranges
Missions


environmental degradation may increase the potential for conflict or humanitarian crises
extreme weather events may lead to increased demands for defense support to civil authorities for
humanitarian assistance or disaster response12
To maintain military resiliency and readiness, DoD has started to look into mission sustainability. This is
in compliance with US Government policy for agencies to become more efficient in the use of energy,
greenhouse gas emissions, use of water resources and management of waste.13 The DoD’s vision of
sustainability is to maintain the ability to operate into the future without decline – either in the mission
or in the natural and manufactured systems that support it. Many key issues facing DoD can be
addressed through smart investments that improve sustainability as well as promote the mission, such
as using energy and water more efficiently, acquiring more energy from renewable sources, designing
buildings for high performance, reducing the use of toxic and hazardous chemicals, and optimally
managing solid waste14.
The DoD Services has initiated plans and actions to become more sustainable and resilient. The
following information is as reported in the 2012 DoD Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan:
Army: The Army conducted a comprehensive review of environmental programs in FY 2011, including
an evaluation of environmental staffing levels across the Army, to ensure that Army organizations are
successfully postured to support both the mission and sustainability goals. The Army also merged its
energy and sustainability governance structures in October 2011 into a single Senior Energy and
Sustainability Council that serves to institutionalize energy and sustainability in doctrine, policy, training,
operations and acquisitions across the entire Army enterprise. The Army incorporated sustainability as a
“foundation” concept embedded across the Army Campaign Plan strategy map, where one of the
12
2010 Quadrennial Defense Review
13
2009 Presidential Executive Order 13514
14
2011 Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan
objectives is to “achieve energy security and sustainability objectives.” Finally, the Army launched its
cross-cutting Net Zero Initiative in April 2011, a holistic approach to energy, water, and waste that
directly supports the Army's energy security and sustainability objectives.
Navy: In the Navy, the Chief of Naval Operations (OPNAV) Energy and Environmental Readiness Division
was created in May 2010, combining the existing OPNAV Environmental Readiness Division and the
Navy's Task Force Energy. Since then, the division has developed many cross-cutting sustainability
initiatives, such as the incorporation of sustainability considerations into ship and weapons system
design processes and promoting sustainability through Navy outreach efforts. The Department of the
Navy (DON) is in the process of revising its Environmental Readiness Program Manual (OPNAV
Instruction 5090.1C) to specifically include information on sustainability and the DoD SSPP. The revision
is expected to be published in FY 2013.
Air Force: The Air Force has moved to Sustainable Infrastructure Assessments, which combine energy
and water audits, facility condition assessments, space optimization assessments, and High Performance
and Sustainable Building assessments into a single activity. In October 2011, the Air Force issued its
Environmental Management System Standardization Methodology and Approach policy memo, and in
November 2011 updated its Environmental Management Instruction. These actions formally establish
environmental management systems (EMSs) across the enterprise as the core framework for continual
program and process improvement to achieve and attain sustainability and compliance goals. Later in FY
2012, the Air Force will issue a policy on achieving a “net zero” posture for Air Force installation water,
energy and solid waste. The net zero actions will build upon and complement the new EMS policies and
ES-2 other existing Air Force strategic sustainability policy and goals, providing a systemic, cross-cutting
blueprint that embeds sustainability into Air Force operations.
In a regional context, we recognize that with the promotion of sustainability practices we contribute to
international resiliency and the Department’s goal of conflict prevention as outlined in the 2010
Quadrennial Defense Review. 15
15
2011 Strategic sustainability Performance Plan
V Conclusion and Recommendations (2-pages)
VI. Appendices
VII. List of References