Norway’s new US-produced Lockheed Martin F-35 fighter jets will contribute to considerably higher carbon emissions in 2030, jeopardising Norway’s obligation to curb CO2 emissions to 60 percent of their 2005 level, the newspaper Dagsavisen reported.

Compared with the old F-16s, the F-35s are much heavier (31 tonnes fully loaded versus 13 tonnes), and have much more powerful engines, Dagsavisen stressed. Consequently, they burn 5,600 litres of jet fuel per hour, compared to only 3,500 litres for the old F-16s, which have been in use since 1980.

When the F-35 fleet is fully phased in 10 years from now, carbon emissions generated by the Norwegian air force will increase by a whopping 207 percent, the newspaper reported. By 2030, the air force alone will account for 56 percent of the armed forces’ total emissions. This will make it even harder for Norway to meet its climate goals, even though the military is generally granted a free pass for its heavy climate footprint.

“It’s a big problem that the military all over the world secures exemptions from reporting the effects on the climate and their climate measures”, Gaute Eiterjord, the leader of the environmental organisaton Nature and Youth, told Dagsavisen. “We can’t have that, when all parts of society are supposed to get down to zero emissions by 2050”.

Lars Gjemble, communications adviser for the Norwegian armed forces, claimed there was “broad agreement” that addressing “climate and environmental challenges is among the biggest jobs we face”. An an example thereof, he stressed that the defence sector, which is poised for a major build-up, is phasing out the use of heating oil.

ALSO READ  Russia, France discuss situation in eastern Mediterranean reigon

However, Per-Willy Amundsen, defence policy spokesman at the right-wing Progress Party, doesn’t buy into these objections. According to him, Norway’s defence capabilities should be prioritised first.

“Unless the climate fanatics want to shut down the Armed Forces, then they can come up with constructive suggestions on how to reduce emissions as much as possible, without compromising defence capabilities,” Amundsen told Dagsavisen, dismissing the counter-arguments as “symbol politics that has zero impact on climate change”.

According to him, switching to nuclear-powered weapons that are virtually emission-free could drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions. “But these climate fanatics put neither Norway’s security nor the safety of our citizens first”, he added.

“If we put the figures into perspective, Norway accounts for about 0.14 percent of the world’s global greenhouse gas emissions. Defence accounts for 0.45 percent of Norway’s total emissions. The expected increase in emissions from Norway’s defence will then amount to about 0.00022 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, based on today’s emission figures,” Amundsen said.

Norway’s air force is set to become one of Europe’s foremost users of the F-35 with a total of 52 aircraft. So far, Norway has received less than a dozen of them, with an average price tag of NOK 1.375 billion (roughly $160 million) apiece.


Source: Sputnik

Share this article:
  • 1

Notice: All comments represent the view of the commenter and not necessarily the views of AMN.

All comments that are not spam or wholly inappropriate are approved, we do not sort out opinions or points of view that are different from ours.

This is a Civilized Place for Public Discussion

Please treat this discussion with the same respect you would a public park. We, too, are a shared community resource — a place to share skills, knowledge and interests through ongoing conversation.

These are not hard and fast rules, merely guidelines to aid the human judgment of our community and keep this a clean and well-lighted place for civilized public discourse.

Improve the Discussion

Help us make this a great place for discussion by always working to improve the discussion in some way, however small. If you are not sure your post adds to the conversation, think over what you want to say and try again later.

The topics discussed here matter to us, and we want you to act as if they matter to you, too. Be respectful of the topics and the people discussing them, even if you disagree with some of what is being said.

Be Agreeable, Even When You Disagree

You may wish to respond to something by disagreeing with it. That’s fine. But remember to criticize ideas, not people. Please avoid:

  • Name-calling
  • Ad hominem attacks
  • Responding to a post’s tone instead of its actual content
  • Knee-jerk contradiction

Instead, provide reasoned counter-arguments that improve the conversation.


Notify of