The U.S. military not only accepts the notion of climate change, its leaders see climate change as a national-security priority. But Congressional climate-change-deniers continue to pretend that the military\u2019s full-speed-ahead program isn\u2019t happening.<\/p>\n

Looking at official policy statements reveals that the military is well on the way to spending vast sums of taxpayers\u2019 dollars to deal with the national-security implications of global climate change. Yes, Senate and Congressional skeptics and deniers, you heard that right.\u00a0 The military establishment has solidly planted its boots in the camp of the tree-hugging, Sierra-clubbing, inconvenient-truthing climate changers.<\/p>\n

Just take a glance at excerpts from the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review Report:<\/p>\n

Climate change will shape the operating environment, roles, and missions.\u00a0 \u2026The Department of Defense will need to adjust to the impacts of climate change on our facilities and military capabilities. \u2026Climate change is expected to act as a \u201cthreat multiplier.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Or try parsing the words of retired Navy Vice-Admiral Lee F. Gum, president of the American Security Project, to try to find a shred of evidence to refute the reality of climate change:<\/p>\n

Addressing the consequences of changes in the Earth\u2019s climate is not simply about saving polar bears or preserving the beauty of mountain glaciers.\u00a0 Climate change is a threat to our national security.\u00a0 Taking it head-on is about preserving our way of life.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

And what about the claims of those who accept that climate change is real, but reject the role of human behavior?\u00a0 Perhaps they failed to read the official statements of the Department of Defense:<\/p>\n

The Department is increasing its use of renewable energy demand to improve operational effectiveness, reduce greenhouse gas emissions in<\/em> support of U.S. climate change initiatives<\/em> [italics added], and protect the Department from energy price fluctuations. . . . The U.S. military is clearly working to address the twin threats of energy dependence and climate change.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Is it possible to explain away the words of Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who identifies \u201cenergy as one of the Department\u2019s top 25 \u2018transformational priorities’ “? And Gates knows why that goal is at the top of the department\u2019s list. At 80% of the U.S. government\u2019s total energy consumption, defense is the largest government user of energy.<\/p>\n

The evidence of the military treating climate change as settled fact is virtually everywhere: from official documents to policy statements. So, ignore the grandstanding of the skeptics and deniers, because the back story is that they\u2019re not about to publicly affirm the truth that a momentous shift in energy policy is happening virtually under the radar. And that this shift was initiated at the very top by President Obama.\u00a0The President, taking advantage of his seat at the head of the table,\u00a0has quietly exploited his prerogatives as commander-in-chief to outline and implement bold and far-reaching renewable-energy initiatives within the military.<\/p>\n

The number of program initiatives is staggering and the costs of implementation huge. And make no mistake about it: whatever the public positions of the deniers and skeptics, their sacred cows\u2014the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force\u2014are fully in the game.<\/p>\n

Army Initiatives<\/p>\n

\n
• A 500-megawatt solar power plant at Fort Irwin, California, intended to end the base\u2019s reliance on the public electric grid within a decade<\/li>\n
• 4,000 electric vehicles put into action during the next three years to prevent emission of more than 100,000 tons of carbon dioxide<\/li>\n
• A geothermal project in Nevada<\/li>\n
• A pilot project for biomass conversion for fuel use<\/li>\n
• Development of micro-grids for use in forward operating bases in combat<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

  Navy Initiatives<\/p>\n

  \n
  • The forming of Task Force Energy and Task Force Climate Change<\/li>\n
  • Investing $550 million in energy-efficiency effort<\/li>\n
  • Launching the Great Green Fleet using alternative fuels by 2016<\/li>\n
  • Conducting tests to certify algae and camelina-based biofuels for use as jet aircraft fuel and shipboard fuel<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

    Air Force Initiatives<\/p>\n

    \n
    • Department of Defense\u2019s largest energy user at $9 billion<\/li>\n
    • Largest solar array in North America at Nevada\u2019s Nellis Air Force Base<\/li>\n
    • Under construction: Soaring Heights Community at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Tucson, Arizona, that will rely on solar power for 75% of residential needs, the nation\u2019s largest community-wide solar-power system<\/li>\n
    • Began using fuel made from algae in 2010<\/li>\n
    • Entire fleet to be certified to fly on biofuels in 2011<\/li>\n
    • Fleet presently using a 50\/50 mix of plant-based biofuel and jet fuel<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

      Facts?\u00a0 Military policy? Skeptics still stonewalling<\/strong><\/p>\n

      The 2010 election seated at the legislative table the greatest number of climate skeptics and deniers the House and Senate has ever seen: 56 percent of the new Republican caucus in the House and 74 percent of Republican senators.\u00a0 These far-righters choose to ignore\u2014with impunity\u2014facts , figures, and conclusions based on sound science. Unfortunately, for Americans as well as for the global community, they may be winning their cynical and dangerous game.<\/p>\n

      Dismissing the conclusions of the more than three thousand earth scientists from around the globe who study climate change and who have affirmed that human activity is, in fact, a contributing factor in changing mean temperatures<\/a>, the skeptics and deniers exploit the complexity of the science to confuse and misrepresent.\u00a0 The result?\u00a0 The public is fed a steady diet of increasingly outrageous misinformation peddled by politicians who are beholden to the oil, gas, and nuclear-energy lobbies.<\/p>\n

      Incredibly, the skeptics and deniers seem to be getting away with it. But can they get away with dismissing the conclusions of their own military? To put this issue in perspective, when was the last time these same conservatives were skeptical about any policy, decision, or request from the military establishment? Just take a look at the Ryan budget. Is military spending on the list of Republican austerity cuts? Of course not.<\/p>\n

      Look closer and the hypocrisy is even more stunning.\u00a0 The skeptics and deniers pander on the one hand to the traditional energy industry\u2014some of their major campaign donors\u2014while pretending on the other that the fully funded program well under way in the military to develop and use alternative energy is motivated by something other than climate change.<\/p>\n

      If the pretenders have their way, their stonewalling and hypocrisy may ensure catastrophic long-term effects that will be particularly disruptive in the developing world\u2014that is, if the government of the country that contributes the greatest quantity of greenhouse gases into the global atmosphere\u2014yes, that would be us\u2014fails to muster the political courage to take even the first tentative steps toward reducing our polluting ways.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

      The U.S. military not only accepts the notion of climate change, its leaders see climate change as a national-security priority. But Congressional climate-change-deniers continue<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":16,"featured_media":9362,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"nf_dc_page":"","_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[19,451,128],"tags":[1055,1056],"yoast_head":"\n