Japan Today
Russian missile and drone strike in Kyiv
Fire rages after a Russian missile strike in Kyiv, Ukraine, on Jan 2. Image: Reuters/STRINGER
environment

Study details huge emissions resulting from Russia's invasion of Ukraine

12 Comments
By Max Hunder

Russia's invasion of Ukraine has directly caused or paved the way to the emission of 175 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) into the atmosphere, a joint report says.

The report, published by Ukraine's environment ministry and climate NGOs, said their estimate included both emissions that had been released and those that would be produced during repair work following the destruction caused by the February 2022 invasion.

It laid out some of the main carbon-emitting activities caused by fighting.

"Billions of liters of fuel used by military vehicles, nearly a million hectares of fields and forests set ablaze, hundreds of oil and gas structures blown up and vast amounts of steel and cement used to fortify hundreds of miles of front lines," it said.

The 175 million tons estimate was the equivalent to the annual emissions produced by 90 million cars, or the whole of the Netherlands in a year, it said.

The war launched by Moscow has killed tens of thousands and displaced millions, but it has also caused vast environmental damage as two armies engage in the biggest European land war in 80 years.

The report, which seeks to quantify the war's carbon footprint, was put together in cooperation by Ukraine's environment ministry and climate researchers from Ukraine and other countries.

The report used a measure called the Social Cost of Carbon to calculate the approximate financial cost of the additional emissions.

"The total climate damage that the Russian Federation has caused after 24 months of the war amounts to more than $32 billion," it said.

The report said that the war emissions could be divided approximately into three thirds: military activity, the steel and concrete needed to rebuild damaged infrastructure, and the final third being made up of several disparate factors including fires and movement of people.

"In the early months of the war, the majority of the emissions were caused by the large scale destruction of civilian infrastructure requiring a large post-war reconstruction effort," the report said.

"Now, after two years of war, the largest share of emissions originate from a combination of warfare, landscape fires and the damage to energy infrastructure."

Military activity was responsible for 51.6 million tons of CO2 equivalent emissions, the report said.

The majority of that number, 35.2 million tons of CO2 equivalent, was caused by the Russian military's fuel consumption, with a further 9.4 million tons from the Ukrainian military's use of fuel.

Among the world's biggest consumers of fuel, militaries worldwide account for 5.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions, according to a 2022 estimate, opens new tab by international experts.

According to the report, the war has significantly increased the frequency of landscape fires in the affected areas.

It said a million hectares of land had been scorched by 27,000 war-related fires, causing the equivalent atmospheric damage of 23 million tons of CO2.

The report also calculated that the closure of airspace over Ukraine and some parts of Russia, as well as the restrictions on certain carriers' use of Russia's airspace, have created just over 24 million tons of CO2 of additional emissions.

"Restrictions or caution has largely cleared the skies above some 18 million square km of Ukraine and Russia, adding hours to journeys between Europe and Asia that consume additional fuel," it said.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2024.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

12 Comments
Login to comment

Is the methane released from the attack on the Nord Stream pipeline included in this study?

At the time, environmentalists said it was the single worst man-made intentional environmental disaster in human history.

10 ( +11 / -1 )

The total carbon emissions from the US military alone rivals that of the average country. And the US military has been around for much longer than 2 years.

0 ( +7 / -7 )

All the more reason to have stopped it rapidly by taking down Putin's regime with insurgents. And proof that governments are not serious about emissions reduction. Governments are all set for a war phase - 40 years of Cold War (replicating Chinese factories all over the planet) and another 5 years of World War. Tot up the emissions on that lot.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Barbarous invasions are bad for the environment. Surprise surprise. They are even more deadly to the invaded.

0 ( +7 / -7 )

Pukey2Today 08:17 am JST

The total carbon emissions from the US military alone rivals that of the average country. And the US military has been around for much longer than 2 years.

But preventing invasions like this one has likely saved a lot of lives and kept a lot of territory under responsible governments.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

TaiwanIsNotChina, the Israeli attack on Gaza probably has a far worse effect on the environment and lives. The US has poured billions of dollars into this, provided bombs, planes and other weapons and encouraged an irresponsible government to grab more territory.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

Yes, let's stop wars, because they pollute... not because they kill? How blatantly disturbed must the author of this article be, in order to mention all those tons of CO2 but not mention the actual human victims ONCE!!?? :( .

6 ( +9 / -3 )

Banthu

Is the methane released from the attack on the Nord Stream pipeline included in this study?

Of course it is blanked out, since they can not blame Russia for it.

At the time, environmentalists said it was the single worst manmade intentional environmental disaster in human history.

I didn't hear that, but it clearly was a massive disaster. But certainly "lets bury it" quickly became the motto for our mainstream media.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

gaijintraveller

TaiwanIsNotChina, the Israeli attack on Gaza probably has a far worse effect on the environment and lives.

Where do you get that idea from? The Israel war against Hamas is not even in the same ballpark as the Ukraine war, not to mention the many wars the US has been involved in. Even if you take the figure supplied by the Gaza "ministry of health" aka Hamas at face value, it is a drop in the bucket compared to the figures in East Europe.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

"The total climate damage that the Russian Federation has caused after 24 months of the war amounts to more than $32 billion," it said.

So the Zelenski government, which has been at war with the Dombas region since 2015 has not cased any "climate change"?

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Study details huge emissions resulting from Russia's invasion of Ukraine

One if the dumbest pieces JT has ever posted.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

ebisenJune 18  12:22 pm JST

Yes, let's stop wars, because they pollute... not because they kill? How blatantly disturbed must the author of this article be, in order to mention all those tons of CO2 but not mention the actual human victims ONCE!!?? :( .

When Desert Storm erupted in 1991 it was broadcast all over TV and radio 24/7. And the entire American public just ate it up, acted like zombies and the armchair generals sat there and 'Rah-rah! Rah-rah! Rah-rah! Rah-rah! Kick some azz!....' without even questioning why/what for/who/what/nothing.

When the Iraqis retreated from Kuwait they blew up every single oil well there, gushing black crude into the sky, land and sea. US and allied soldiers returned and were sick from all this exposure and more. But it was shoved under the rug.

Wars are not fun. Wars are not entertainment. There are many reasons why wars should be prevented if possible.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites