Decarbonisation in the defence sector: a conversation with Deborah Allen

Military Technology journalist Caterina Tani recently interviewed Deborah Allen, ASD Climate & Defence Task Force Chair and Group Director, Climate, Environment & Infrastructure at BAE Systems. The conversation revolved around decarbonisation in the defence sector.

Climate change is a challenge to everyone, and the European defence industry is working to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the sector, which is considered responsible for about 1% of man-made GHG emissions globally. Current initiatives include reducing emissions from operations, collaborating across the supply chain, and focusing on the full life cycle of military products. Besides cutting emissions, new technological advancements, such as aviation fuels or electric vehicles, also bring operational advantages to the armed forces. But, while it presents many opportunities, decarbonisation also brings several challenges.

Selected quotes from the interview

MT: What are the main challenges for the defence sector when it comes to decarbonisation?

 "The main challenge is always that operational capability will come first. Without security, there is no sustainability. What we're trying to do is to identify where capability and sustainability match. For instance, when it comes to improving the efficiency of a combat aircraft, if this can be improved, the aircraft will have a broader range, can go further, and it's better for the pilot. Are we doing that because of carbon? No, because of the advantage this brings."

MT: How do greening and decarbonisation impact life extension programmes and interoperability?

"As for life extension and midlife updates, more and more ministries of defence are wanting 'fuel agnostic' products. They're asking [industry] to design for the future and run on sustainable aviation fuel and synthetic fuels. For most things, a diesel engine can be adapted to a synthetic fuel. The problem is that there's not enough synthetic fuel."

MT: How are green and defence priorities reconciled in times of significant military expenditure and needs?

"Common question. For the law, over the last three years, carbon emissions across the European primes have gone down by 10%, even though companies have ramped up. This shows that it's not 'either-or'. In addition, when we're designing new products that will be used in five, ten, 15, 20 years' time, we take all the learning from what's happening in Ukraine and what warfare looks like in the 21st century."

MT: What is the military utility of decarbonisation on the battlefield, if any?

"For years, all ministries of defence have been trying to reduce the amount of fuel they use at the frontline because it's very expensive to get there. Transporting a litre of diesel to the frontline takes another seven to 40 litres. This is because you need to get it there, transport it, store it (we've seen in Ukraine our fuel storage has become weaponised) and provide the security needed to protect it along the way."

MT: Can military assets be maintained effective and ready for combat while undergoing decarbonisation?

"Once a tank is used in battle, there's not much you can do; it is running on a certain fuel. You need that fuel. It will operate as designed, which is why it is so important to do things upfront. What is being used in Ukraine is what was probably designed 20-30 years ago. What we need to do is to ask: what will the battlefield of the future look like? What will be available?"

MT: Everything regarding the defence budget is changing, and defence is becoming the main priority. Additional financial resources are required to transition and maintain interoperability. Is it easy, feasible, or realistic, considering budget constraints?

"We have this debate a lot in the defence industry: how much will this cost? If you look at it as adaptation, then it is just a necessary cost. This is what the future battlefield is going to look like, therefore, we need to plan for it."

MT: How does this subject relate to the current, fluid situation? Why should we deal with sustainability in defence in this way when China has a different approach and Russia does not care at all?

"In China, in terms of battery materials are very far-sighted. They have looked to the future and said: what will be important in the future? How do we get a strategic advantage? They are now one of the world's largest suppliers of electric battery components, so we're all dependent on China."

MT: How can decarbonisation change the logistic footprint of deployed units?

"The real focus of deployed units is to reduce dependency on complicated logistic chains. They look at it as a question of whether they could generate more food in the location. Anything that doesn't require a lot of transport is good because if those transport steps put lives at risk, the whole chain is at risk."

MT: What about the decarbonisation of jets or big assets?

"The Eurofighter Typhoon can fly on 100% synthetic aviation fuel (it has been tested), and the same goes for the Falcon 1OX in France and the Gripen in Sweden. It's just that there's not enough fuel, and the fuel isn't in the right places, so what we need is a civil world to get into that mass production of synthetic fuel, and so then NATO can say: 'This is the standard we will have around all the countries'. That's quite a long journey."

M: Besides fuels, are there other things which can be done to reduce energy use?

"Even with ships, there are interesting statistics of one of the carriers, the UK carrier - people say: 'Being green is all about switching off the light'. HMS Queen Elizabeth has 27,000 lightbulbs, they were replaced by LED and that reduced the requirement of the air conditioning system by 12%, considerably reducing the amount of energy being drawn to operate the ship."

MT: Stoltenberg said we cannot choose between robust and environmentally sustainable defence - is this true after Ukraine? Are decarbonisation and energy efficiency still priorities?

"Climate is going to drive us away from fossil fuels, so that means we have got to adapt. We have got to look at the environmental sustainability, and for that, climate [will] make some materials scarcer. Therefore, obsolescence and mid-life updates will come under threat."

MT: When it comes to the whole debate concerning taxonomy, defence investments and the BEI. Does decarbonisation of defence play a role when it comes to having easier access to financing?

"Yes, because there is a perception that defence is a 'dirty', 'unsustainable' industry that was driving the EU taxonomy, initially [classifying defence] as not 'green'. We want to explain what the defence industry is that it is responsible for; it is decarbonising - it's not claiming to be green, but it is moving - it is doing what it can."