Richard Tice, MP for Boston and Skegness and deputy leader of Reform UK, has challenged the Ministry of Defence (MoD) over its financial commitment to achieving net zero targets, questioning the extent of spending in this area over the past five years.
Tice’s written parliamentary query asked: “How much his Department has spent on measures to achieve net zero targets in the last five years.”
Responding to the question, Luke Pollard, Minister for the Armed Forces, emphasised the MoD’s contribution to the UK’s legal commitment to reach net zero by 2050. He highlighted: “The Ministry of Defence (MOD) is fully committed to contributing to the UK achieving its legal commitment to be Net Zero by 2050.”
Pollard noted progress in reducing emissions, revealing a decline from 3,650,000 tCO2e in 2019-20 to 3,012,000 tCO2e in 2023-24. However, he did not provide a specific figure for spending on decarbonisation measures.
Instead, he argued that such measures are part of broader operational investments: “Defence spending is investing in building our warfighting capability and to enhance operational advantage and resilience to protect our values and interests. Benefits of decarbonisation are a positive spillover and are not differentiated from this investment.”
Pollard highlighted trials integrating alternative fuel sources and renewable energy technologies as examples of investments that serve dual purposes, stating: “Trials integrating alternative fuel sources and renewable energy technology can further unlock an ability to operate for longer periods without resupply and at greater reach across a dispersed battlefield.”
While the Armed Forces Minister’s response underscored the MoD’s efforts to cut emissions, questions remain unanswered about the financial scope of these initiatives.
For those seeking further details, the MoD refers to its Annual Report and Accounts, Annex D, which includes information on Defence energy use and emissions.
What he should be asking is what are the total costs for MOD infrastructure projects where DREAM and SEAT assessments are required. They add absolutely nothing to achieving net zero but require the employment of dedicated consultants for contractors and of course MOD assessors. This coupled with the additional fees required to employ other consultants to undertake specific reports to achieve credits is a monumental waste of time and money.
I see it every day.
They thought that having petrol in an armoured vehicle was risky, so now they want to replace it with a ticking bomb which will melt the entire vehicle if it develops a fault or gets hit with something sharp..
AA
We should stop wasting all this money on net zero crap and just get back to buying as much oil and gas from Saudi, Iran, Venezuelan and Russia as possible. That’s how we make Britain great again.
We could stop all these guys building wind turbines off the East Coast of England and Scotland and get those fellas back to some proper work down the pits.
I had several great uncles who all worked down the pit and they loved it, off course they often ended with complaints like white finger and black lung and none of them lived past their 60’s but then that probably saved a fortune in pension contributions.
Failing that we could just write another cheque to France for a few hundred billion for some more EPR’s.
They would been lucky to make to Sixty
I keep forgetting the Monster Raving Loony Party now has five seats in Parliament…