Skip to content

Carbon footprint of Israel’s war on Gaza exceeds that of many entire countries
Exclusive: Climate cost of war is more than than the combined 2023 emissions of Costa Rica and Estonia, study finds

I think that’s one of the ones we can simply dismiss. Whether the whole thing is a good or a bad idea is not affected by how many millimetres of Greenland melts in 2,500 AD.

Nina Lakhani Climate justice reporter

Well, unless you’re desperately looking for a story of course.

And who knew The G employed one of those?

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

23 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
John
John
11 months ago

who knew The G employed one of those?

And a woman of colour with a non-British name to boot.

Barely 30 years ago “Dave Angel – Eco Warrior” was a funny if utterly ridiculous minor character in the Fast Show.

Bongo
Bongo
11 months ago

Bing tell me EST + CR has a population of 7m, versus ISR + Gaza population of around 13m. But cement for all those tunnels, UN transports, MPs flying in from the UK to tour the West Bank, and rocket propellants does have a CO2 footprint of some significance.

Marius
Marius
11 months ago

Did we miss her earlier stories on the ‘carbon cost’ of Russia’s war on Ukraine, the war in Yemen, the Syrian civil war and the various African conflicts underway?

John
John
11 months ago

Marius

I would have expected her to be at least mildly interested in the carbon cost of the ongoing exchanges of seasonal greetings between India and Pakistan.

Grikath
Grikath
11 months ago

Ah no, John…. That’s Cultural

Agent Smith
Agent Smith
11 months ago

Israel’s war on Gaza?

Surely, “Hamas’ ill-advised murderous attack on Israel”?

starfish
starfish
11 months ago

And what is the carbon footprint of the Hamas and Hezbollah war on Israel?

All that concrete production for the metro system?

Steve
Steve
11 months ago

Why, do we need Estonia?

Western Bloke
Western Bloke
11 months ago

Having read a brief summary of the report, it fails to include the positive impact of killing lots of people, who will now no longer be using the planet’s resources. Depending on their age, that’s 30, 40, 50 years of individual CO2 saved.

If you’re going to write a serious report on the impact of war on climate, you also have to include the positives.

Overall, going nuclear would probably make the war carbon negative.

Norman
Norman
11 months ago

WB, this is just a silly brown girl with feelz. Don’t expect any sense to come out of that head. “Climate justice”, FFS? Is it unjust that Scotland is on average much colder than southern Spain? The fucking Sahara was there before the Industrial Revolution, as were the fetid jungles to its south. Mauritius and the Seychelles are still there.

Jesus, what a silly, grifting bitch.

Baron Jackfield
Baron Jackfield
11 months ago

Isn’t she the silly devil who appeared to be shocked when she found out that Main Battle Tanks aren’t “sustainable”?.. or electric??

Bloke in Wales
Bloke in Wales
11 months ago

Isn’t she the silly devil who appeared to be shocked when she found out that Main Battle Tanks aren’t “sustainable”?.. or electric??

Give the MOD a chance, they’ve only been studying that for a couple of decades! You can’t expect a snap decision.

Gamecock
Gamecock
11 months ago

Yep. If the subject is ‘carbon footprint,’ why did she pick sides?

∴ The subject is not ‘carbon footprint,’ it is STOP ISRAEL!

John
John
11 months ago

∴ The subject is not ‘carbon footprint,’ it is STOP ISRAEL!

A clear case of Thunbergitis.

rhoda klapp
rhoda klapp
11 months ago

Electric tanks? The French did it in 1915. It didn’t need batteries because it had a mains lead…

https://www.chars-francais.net/index.php?view=article&id=1964:1915-cuirasse-aubriot-gabet&catid=33

Twas not a success.

Tractor Gent
Tractor Gent
11 months ago

Gamecock: Props for the ∴ sign. I haven’t seen that for a while.

Mike Finn
Mike Finn
11 months ago

Aren’t carbon footprints an evil creation of oil companies? Oil companies, not consumers are responsible for emissions. It’s therefore clearly BP that is responsible for the war. All wars in fact. QED.

john77
john77
11 months ago

She talks about holding states responsible for the climate impact of war, but seems to be blaming Israel, the victim of a vicious murdering attack by international terrorrists claiming to be a government. Who started the war? So who is responsible?
Answers on the back of a postage stamp big enough to contain five letters.
For avoidance of doubt I, personally, am highly critical of Netanyahu, but the idea that one is not allowed to defend oneself against a genocidal attack is utterly repellant.

Boganboy
Boganboy
11 months ago

Western Bloke
May 30, 2025 at 9:17 am

Thank you WB. If you take her and HAMAS seriously, Israel is obviously the most climate conscious party in the war. HAMAS assure us that the Israelis have killed far more people than they have!!

bobby b
bobby b
11 months ago

” . . . cost of war is more than than the combined 2023 emissions of Costa Rica and Estonia . . . .”

Not a high threshold. Have you ever tried to find an electric outlet in Costa Rica?

Gamecock
Gamecock
11 months ago

My GT350R probably emits more than Costa Rica.

bloke in spain
bloke in spain
11 months ago

Climate justice reporter?
Is the Mediterranean suing because it’s not allowed into Greenland?

Old Glyn
Old Glyn
11 months ago

” . . . cost of war is more than than the combined 2023 emissions of Costa Rica and Estonia . . . .”
Isn’t this what’s called ‘bathos?’

23
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x