Cart
0
Politicians feud over US Military fuel consumption
According to U.S. Army Petroleum and Water Department, Fort Lee, “Fuel is the ‘blood of the military’ … and is critical to the life of the theater of operation.”
As fuel prices continue to rise, there are plans underway to turn the military from dependency on fossil fuels. Beyond no longer using jet fuel for burn pits, this initiatives includes adapting more hybrids and electric vehicles, and researching alternate power sources for tactical vehicles.
Secretary of Defense Austin has stated, “Failure to properly integrate a climate change understanding of related risks may significantly increase the Department’s adaptation and operating costs over time, lead to a suboptimal allocation of resources, imperil the supply chain, and/or result in degraded and outdated Department capabilities and operating concepts.”
Gear Spotlight- What Our Readers Are Picking Up
Currently, the biggest obstacle in any change is the disagreement between lawmakers on just how quickly to begin the process, and what vehicles to target first.
Fuel and the carbon bootprint
In a recent interview, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi acknowledged that the US Military consumes more fuel than 140 countries combined. This comment came from the U.N.’s COP26 climate conference in Glasgow, Scotland. When asked if the military seemingly being exempt from climate efforts, Pelosi responded stating, “we recognize that as well.”
She continued by saying the US Military has implemented many programs to attempt to create green energy over time in recent times.
Rep. Brian Mast, (R-FL.) responded by saying, “Trying to make vehicles more fuel-efficient is a good goal, but it can’t come at the expense of military readiness.”
Rep. Mast, who deployed to Afghanistan, continued by saying. “China is producing double the amount of greenhouse gas emissions of the U.S. and developing hypersonic missiles to boot. The Biden administration needs to focus on winning actual wars instead of ‘woke’ culture wars.”
When asked if China or climate change was the bigger threat to the U.S., Defense press secretary John Kirby stated, “both are equally important.”
This remark left Sen Tom Cotton (R-AR) “astonished,” who also stated, “Sacrificing our prosperity and security to appease the ideological demands of climate activists is foolhardy.”
Both parties seem intent on holding to their rhetoric, and some tax payers feel the squabbling will just lead to more wasted spending.
