Global Climate Consequences of the War in Ukraine

Russia's war in Ukraine has a major climate impact

Eugen Coroianu, 28.06.2024, 13:49

Russia’s war in Ukraine has resulted in the consumption of billions of liters of fuel used by military vehicles, nearly a million hectares of fields and forests burned, hundreds of oil and gas infrastructure elements blown up, and huge amounts of steel and cement used to fortify hundreds of kilometers of front lines. Emissions generated during the two years of the invasion amount to about 175 million tons of carbon dioxide, according to the most comprehensive study of its kind to date. The emissions are equivalent to the annual use of 90 million cars.

Overall, this conflict is a net detriment to the climate, as reductions in emissions from a weakened Ukrainian economy have been more than offset by emissions from the conflict, displaced people, and production to other countries, and increased global military spending. This is according to the authors of the IGGAW (Wartime Greenhouse Gas Accounting Initiative) report. The study is summarized, on the Romanian website Infoclima, by researcher Vlad Zamfira, who explains:

“Fires, the attack on the energy infrastructure, thousands of air miles, all come with a climate cost. Billions of liters of fuel burned, the need now and in the future of mountains of steel and fresh concrete for fortifications on both sides of the front, but also the eventual reconstruction of Ukraine, the hundreds of strikes on energy systems – all paint a grim climate picture, in which Russia could be held responsible for billions of euros in damages.

Beyond the devastating impact on social and economic infrastructure and the resulting loss of life, wars and excessive militarization, are a major source of pollution. From the intentional or unintentional destruction of natural resources – forests, water bodies – the global military machine is among the world’s biggest polluters What are the main sources of emissions from the Ukraine war? Satellite images show that about 27 thousand fires have scorched almost a million hectares of land. Almost three-quarters of these are near the front lines, where fire management infrastructure has been almost abandoned, and intervention conditions are almost impossible. But more intense fires were seen across the country as foresters, fire crews and equipment were mobilized or relocated to cities, slowing response times. Energy infrastructure has become a target with serious climate consequences. In the first weeks of the war, Russia carried out dramatic strikes on fossil fuel deposits in Ukraine, but the climate cost of those strikes is overshadowed by the destruction of the Nord Stream pipelines, which led to a week-long undersea methane eruption with a devastating climate impact. A months-long uncontrolled fire on a Black Sea oil rig is believed to have burned more than 150 million cubic meters of natural gas.

An unusual impact came from the most powerful greenhouse gas, sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), which escaped in unusually large quantities during the conflict. Used to insulate electrical switches, it has a heating potential nearly 23 thousand times greater than carbon dioxide. About 40 tons of SF6, equivalent to about one million tons of CO2, are believed to have escaped into the atmosphere after more than a thousand Russian strikes damaged about half of Ukraine’s high-voltage grid installations. On the other hand, restrictions or caution have largely cleared the skies over 18 million square kilometers of Ukraine and Russia, adding hours to journeys between Europe and Asia, which use up extra fuel.

Beyond Ukraine, the invasion triggered a surge in military spending, particularly in Europe, which raised demand for explosives, steel, and other high-carbon materials. Total global military spending reached $2.4 trillion in 2023, up 6.8 percent in real terms from 2022, the steepest annual increase since 2009. In addition to production, long-distance deliveries of heavy weapons contribute to the emissions generated, Infoclima also writes. The report estimates that if we had peace talks now, the Russian Federation would be forced to foot a $32 billion bill for climate reparations for the first 24 months of the war, according to a methodology to establish a cost per ton of carbon emitted.

Lennard de Klerk, lead author of the Wartime Greenhouse Gas Accounting Initiative, said: “Russia hurts Ukraine, but also our climate. This conflict is considerable and will be felt globally due to carbon emissions. The Russian Federation should be made to pay for this, a debt it owes to Ukraine and to countries in the Global South, which will suffer the most from climate damage,”. Total emissions could be drastically reduced if the war were to end quickly.