Environmental impact of the conflict in Gaza: evaluation of consequences and perspectives for the future

  Focus - Allegati
  31 October 2024
  16 minutes

Linda Lorenzon (Junior Researcher G.E.O Environment)

Abstarct

The Gaza Strip, already susceptible to environmental deterioration as a consequence of conflict, inadequate urban planning and restricted resources, is confronted with intensified difficulties as a result of recent escalations against the Israeli military forces. Prior to October 2023, international aid projects had the objective of improving water, waste, and energy management. However, recent bombings have caused unprecedented destruction, resulting in the crippling of essential infrastructure and an exacerbation of pollution and environmental degradation. Furthermore, military conflicts worldwide also result in the emission of greenhouse gases, thereby contributing to the global climate crisis. Mitigating these impacts is a challenging but achievable goal. It necessitates transparent emission tracking, the adoption of renewable energy sources, and collaborative efforts towards military decarbonisation, in order to facilitate a sustainable future. It is imperative that environmental protection and the advancement of human rights are prioritised in order to ensure a brighter future for the Palestinian population of the Gaza Strip, and indeed for generations to come.

1. Introduction

Gaza is a small, densely populated, coastal strip of land with poorly planned urbanisation, poor accessibility to modern technology and clean energy sources, and has been affected by decades of conflict. The preconditions for a vulnerable environment prone to climate degradation were thus evident long before the conflict escalation on 7 October 2023. Due to the enforced Israeli military occupation and the reluctance of Hamas, which has controlled the Palestinian authorities since 2007, efforts to protect the environment and rehabilitate degraded ecosystems have been strictly constrained. In the period preceding the recent intensification of hostilities the last October, life in the Gaza Strip, although complicated, was more sustainable for both Palestinians and the surrounding environment. UN investment tried to improve the environmental management, including the construction of desalination infrastructure, the development of wastewater treatment facilities, and the implementation of renewable energy projects. However, the intensified bombardment has resulted in unprecedented levels of destruction, with over 39 million tons of debris created and significant damage inflicted upon essential infrastructure, including hospitals, water treatment facilities, and electricity systems. Furthermore, the environmental impact of ongoing conflicts globally also gives rise to an increase in greenhouse gas emissions. Military emissions, in particular, have been identified as a significant but poorly monitored contributor to this phenomenon.

2. The environmental situation in the Gaza Strip before the current conflict

The entire occupied Palestinian territory - from the Gaza Strip to the West Bank, including East Jerusalem - even before the recent attacks, was affected by significant environmental change and degradation. Undoubtedly, high population growth, accompanied by rapid and poorly planned urbanisation and military conflicts, greatly contributed to reach this situation. Indeed, in a report published in 2020, UNEP had already described some powerful factors of environmental degradation in the Palestinian Territories occupied by Israeli forces (UNEP, 2024). The main ones were: freshwater crisis, pollution of the marine environment, contamination of soil caused by discharge of raw, untreated wastewater, polluted soil, water and air by unregulated industries. Particularly, a freshwater crisis in Gaza was caused to overdrawing from the coastal aquifer and poor water quality caused by agricultural pesticide use and sewage runoff. One thing of concern is the quality and type of contaminants found in the groundwater, “nitrate concentrations in the aquifer were six times higher than World Health Organization recommendations, and chloride concentrations were also high” (UNEP, 2024). Pollution of the marine environment is a problem related principally by the discharge of untreated wastewater into the sea, which impacts both marine ecosystems and human health and desalination operations.

Another important cause of environmental degradation is soil contamination also caused by the discharge of raw, untreated sewage into farmland and the widespread disposal of solid waste in informal and illegal dumps, many of them located near urban areas of farmland. In addition, both soil, water and air have been contaminated as a result of pollution from unregulated industries, including electronic and vehicle waste processing industries. In fact, “in Gaza, unregulated industries have been found to contribute to the high incidence of childhood lead poisoning” (UNEP, 2024).

Moreover, not to be underestimated is Gaza's location in the eastern Mediterranean Sea, where the climate crisis is already contributing to changes in the water cycle and temperatures. The entire Mediterranean region has been identified by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as a “climate change hotspot with a large number of vulnerable natural ecosystems and socio-economic sectors” (Ali, 2022).

Despite these obstacles, also thanks to UN intervention, investments have been made in environmental management over the past five years, especially in the fields of: Infrastructure for water desalination and wastewater treatment, plans to recharge the coastal aquifer, shift to renewable energy, solid waste management and terrestrial ecosystems.Such investments have helped to control contamination and protect people, terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystems from extreme pollution, thus protecting the health of civilians, flora and fauna.

3. Environmental degradation and disruption of essential facilities after the conflict's escalation

However, the new escalation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has clearly had a major impact on people and the environment in Gaza. The conflict itself has indeed interrupted almost all environmental management systems and services, including ecosystems services, while creating new environmental hazards.

Israel's intense bombardment led to an unprecedented intensity of destruction in terms of infrastructure - such as schools and hospitals -, productive assets and service provision. Sewage and solid waste management systems and facilities collapsed. The destruction of buildings, roads and other infrastructure has generated over 39 million tonnes of debris, some of it contaminated with unexploded ordnance, asbestos and other dangerous substances, which forced more than 85% of Gaza's population to leave their homes (UNEP, 2024).

This is a major problem, indeed, the recent conflict in the area has produced a volume of debris 14 times greater than the combined total from all conflicts since 2008, thus over the past 16 years. The 63% of structures in the Gaza Strip are damaged, of whom 30% are completely destroyed, to such an extent, that this latest analysis estimates that 114 kilograms of debris were generated for each square meter (UNITAR, 2024). A report by the Netherlands-based organisation PAX for Peace, entitled ‘War and Garbage in Gaza’, paints a desolate picture of the waste management crisis in the territory. In fact, as they point, whilst the effects of the war on Gaza's health infrastructure have been widely broadcast on television, the focus has not been on the situation unfolding in the remaining hospitals in the region: “with no proper disposal mechanisms, medical products are dumped in the open. […] such waste can release chemicals and radioactive substances into the earth or underground water, leading to the spread of diseases like hepatitis B and C" (Zwijnenburg & Zigka, 2024).

The situation regarding debris and toxic substances spread in the environment is just one of the terrible consequences of the escalation. Indeed, Israel's disruption of fuel and electricity supplies has had widespread effects on health care, water treatment and domestic life throughout the Gaza Strip. Distribution networks and electricity installations were severely damaged, which resulted in those few remaining buildings, mainly hospitals and residential housing, being without power and external connection to the world for long periods (World Bank, 2024).

In addition, the lack of electricity blocked water treatment plants, causing environmental degradation due to untreated wastewater and drinking water shortages. In fact, all water sources for Palestinians in Gaza have been disrupted. The provisional damage assessment by the UN, EU and WB records that 57% of the water infrastructure and assets have been destroyed or partially damaged, including desalination plants in the northern and central areas (WB, 2024). Due to the damage to infrastructure and the lack of electricity, the water, sanitation and hygiene system has collapsed, even more so due to the displacement of over one million people in southern Gaza, which has put immense pressure on the precarious water and sanitation services. To such an extent that water availability in April 2024 was estimated at 2-8 litres per capita per day (l/c/d), compared to 85 l/c/d before October 2023 (WB, 2024). Considering the above data, it is arguable that the occupation, the bombing, the destruction of infrastructure, and the degraded environment are making Gaza truly unliveable.

4. Soil, water and air contamination: other conflicts related impacts

The conflict has been characterised by aerial bombardment of buildings, accompanied by bombardment from the sea and land and the locations most affected by bombardment from the sea include Gaza City, Rafah City, Beit Hanoun. It is clear from Israel's statements that an exceptionally large amount of munitions was used in a densely populated area. The Mines Advisory Group (MAG), a partner of the UN Mine Action Service, estimated in February 2024 that more than 25,000 tonnes of explosives, ‘equivalent to two nuclear bombs’, had been used in the Gaza Strip since 7 October 2023 (MAG 2024).

In addition to buildings, green spaces and agricultural land were also heavily damaged. To get the full picture, one must consider that the conflict did not begin on October 7 but decades earlier, and in all these years the Palestinian territory and its inhabitants have suffered immeasurable damage and losses. Since 1967, the Israeli government's military actions have prompted the uprooting of more than 2.5 million trees in the occupied territories of Palestine, including more than one million olive trees, which were also a vital source of income in the region. The destruction of native trees and crops has exacerbated habitat fragmentation of local species and accelerated biodiversity loss and desertification in Gaza (Abdelraouf, 2023).

Furthermore, rockets and missiles not only cause immediate humanitarian crises and property damage, but also have dangerous long-term impacts. Given that modern armed conflicts use large quantities of ammunition, heavy metal contamination has been recorded as a result of intensive bombardment containing heavy metals and explosive chemicals, all of which are toxic even in small quantities. In general terms, hazardous materials contained in munitions cause direct and immediate toxicity to flora and fauna (causing mortality, growth reduction, stress, disease and damage to organisms) and/or bioaccumulation through food webs, leading to concentrated amounts of these substances in certain organisms when they enter the environment (UNEP, 2024).

Making the situation even more difficult is the issue of the reconstruction of the Palestinian territories. The director of the Regional Bureau for Arab States at the U.N Abdallah Al Dardari said 40 years of development gains in Gaza have been lost, amounting to an investment for the overall reconstruction of nearly $50 billion. Moreover, according to the UNPD, even in the best-case scenario it would take until 2024 - 16 years - to rebuild destroyed houses, without repairing damaged ones. “That means that the levels of education and literacy will be affected dramatically at the end of this conflict,” he stated. “But more dangerously, in our analysis, the impact of the conflict will stay with us for a long time, unless we quickly address temporary schooling, temporary health care, psycho-social support to the population, and bringing back basic services like water, sanitation, and electricity” (Besheer, 2024).

5. What can be done to mitigate military’s carbon footprint?

Furthermore, it is important to acknowledge the significant environmental impact of armed conflicts, which contribute to the emission of vast quantities of greenhouse gases and the spread of environmental degradation on a global scale. This raises a crucial question: what measures can be taken to reduce the carbon footprint of the military in order to promote a more sustainable future?

According to a recent report by the Observatory on Conflict and the Environment on a global level, “the armed forces are responsible for 5.5% of greenhouse gas emissions, a percentage so large that it can no longer be ignored” (Parkinson, 2022). To give a more precise idea, the Observatory compared the military to a State: if the world's armed forces were a single nation, they would have the fourth highest carbon footprint, behind only China, United States and India. Given the degree of control governments have over the size of their armed forces, there is a huge and largely unrecognised opportunity to reduce emissions, if they wanted to.

These military GHG emissions reported to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) fall into five key categories: energy; industrial processes and product use; agriculture; land use change and forestry; and waste. However, it should be kept in mind that some of the military emissions are currently classified in the civil aviation and shipping sectors. Therefore, a major problem is that data for military GHG emission are frequently scarce and of low quality, hidden within civilian categories or not collected at all: “the root cause of this problem was government concern about potential restrictions of military activities - which led to exemptions first under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol” (Parkinson, 2022).

Greenhouse gas emissions cannot be effectively managed without measuring them, and the international norms that are supposed to regulate them are chaotic and contradictory. Currently, under the UNFCCC, countries are obliged to provide an inventory of their GHG emissions. While, in 2015, the Paris Agreement made the reporting of military emissions voluntary, which has meant that there are considerable gaps in the datasets submitted to the UNFCCC and no accurate data on the true extent of the problem. Even during the UN Climate Change Conferences (COPs), the focus, although on environmental issues, was never truly on the military emissions of the various States of the world.

Hence, although the defence sector is essential for national security, it consumes large quantities of fossil fuels. Despite efforts to reduce emissions, this sector's contribution to GHG emissions is expected to increase due to rising global military spending. The most efficient and fastest way to reduce or rather eliminate military’s carbon footprint? Not to make war.

In the context of an ongoing prevalence of armed conflict, the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions is a challenging yet attainable goal, particularly through the implementation of strategies that mitigate their impact. Two significant challenges must be addressed: firstly, the accurate measurement and communication of emissions, with transparent data and consistent methodologies; and secondly, the reduction of dependence on fossil fuels. Indeed, “clarity and consistency across different initiatives are essential to mitigate climate change successfully without compromising national security and causing detrimental impacts along the value and supply chain” (Parkinson, 2022). The key to reducing dependence on fossil fuels is to consider and utilise renewable energy and emerging technologies. This is an essential step in every sector, including defence.

According to researchers at Queen Mary University of London, who compiled a report analysing in depth military greenhouse gas emissions, there are four pathways to military decarbonization: refuel, repower, redirect and review. To reduce the army's carbon footprint, it is needed to adopt alternative fuels (refuel), then develop alternative propulsion systems that could radically change the operation of military systems and platforms (repower). Then offset the carbon costs of military emissions through sequestration, outsourcing or by asking companies and/or nature to bear a greater share of the mitigation burden (redirect). Finally, rethink the strategic posture and force structure, including the size of military forces (review). The decarbonisation of military operations will require progress along all four paths, mainly because “together with the defence sector, government, society and industry all have a part to play in reconfiguring the socio-technical systems and imaginaries that determine when, with what and for what ends militaries are deployed” (Neimark, 2022).

Nowadays, thanks to the research that has been done and the need to fight climate change, some countries and organisations are mobilising to tackle this issue. In fact, the European Defence Agency (EDA), emphasised the urgency of the issue stating that the EU and NATO have recognised the need to prepare the defence systems for the post-2030 landscape (Vincorion , 2024). Nevertheless, as far as Green Defence is starting to become a reality, the path will require close collaboration between industry, the armed forces and policy makers. Not forgetting that collaboration will have to involve not just a few but most countries around the globe, first and foremost, the most polluting and reticent.

6. Conclusion

In conclusion, the worsening environmental, infrastructural and humanitarian challenges in the Gaza Strip reflect the urgent need for sustainable rehabilitation interventions and strategies to mitigate ongoing degradation and support long-term reconstruction and resilience. The destructive impacts of the conflict, including unprecedented levels of debris, water and soil contamination and infrastructure collapse, have exacerbated existing environmental vulnerabilities, posing serious risks to public health, biodiversity and local livelihoods. Despite the efforts of international agencies, first and foremost the UN, to implement systems for water treatment, waste management and renewable energy, the escalation of the conflict has effectively reversed much of this progress, pushing Gaza's environment and population to a critical point.

From a broader perspective, the environmental consequences of military conflicts, particularly in relation to greenhouse gas emissions and ecological damage, highlight the need to address the role of armed forces in contributing to the global carbon footprint. It is imperative that military emissions are addressed through the implementation of strategic reduction pathways, using alternative fuels and renewable energy sources, in order to effectively combat climate change. It can no longer be postponed; it is urgent to integrate environmental considerations into conflict resolution and peacebuilding processes. Without significant and unified efforts Gaza and similarly affected regions will continue to suffer severe and unsustainable impacts on human and ecological health. However, by cooperating and using the right means, it is still possible to embark on the path to a sustainable and resilient future.


Bibliography

UNEP, “Environmental impact of the conflict in Gaza. Preliminary assessment of environmental impacts”, Jun. 2024.

https://www.unep.org/resources/report/environmental-impact-conflict-gaza-preliminary-assessment-environmental-impacts (A-1)


Ali, E. W. “Mediterranean Region in Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability”, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cross Chapter Paper 4, 2022 https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/chapter/ccp4/ (B-1)

UNITAR “Gaza: debris generated by the current conflict is 14 times more than the combined sum of all debris generated by other conflicts since 2008”, Aug. 2024

https://unitar.org/about/news-stories/news/gaza-debris-generated-current-conflict-14-times-more-combined-sum-all-debris-generated-other (A-1)

Zwijnenburg W., Zigka M., “War and Garbage in Gaza. The public health and environmental crisis from widespread solid waste pollution”, Paxforpeace, Jul 2024.

https://paxforpeace.nl/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2024/07/PAX_War_and_Garbage_in_Gaza.pdf (B-1)


World Bank, Gaza Strip Bi-Weekly Damage Summary: 28 December 2023 to 10 January 2024”. World Bank Gaza Strip Interim Damage Assessment, 3 April 2024

https://palestine.un.org/en/265025-gaza-strip-interim-damage-assessmentMarch

(A-1)

Parkinson S., Cottrell L., “Estimating the military’s global greenhouse gas emissions”, Conflict and environment observatory (CEOBS), Nov. 2022.

https://ceobs.org/estimating-the-militarys-global-greenhouse-gas-emissions/

(B-1)

Neimark, B. et al. “Confronting Military Greenhouse Gas Emissions”, Addressing challenges in decarbonising militaries, Interactive Policy Brief, London, UK, 2024

https://www.qmul.ac.uk/sbm/media/sbm/documents/Confronting-military-greenhouse-gas-emissions,-Neimark-et-el,-Interactive-policy-brief-(2024)-%5bDigital%5d.pdf (B-1)


Abdelraouf M., Ruizi Y., “Environmental Impacts of the Current War in Gaza”, Gulf Research centre, GRC Commentary & Analysis, Nov 2023

https://www.grc.net/documents/654a0ad259ea7EnvironmentalImpactsoftheCurrentWarinGaza2.pdf (B-2)


Besheer M., “UN: Reconstructing Gaza could cost $50 billion”, Voice of America English news, May 2024
https://www.voanews.com/a/un-reconstructing-gaza-could-cost-50-billion/7595519.html (B-1)

Vincorion, “Green Defence at Eurosatory 2024: A Paradigm Shift in Security Policy”, Press, Jun 2024 https://www.vincorion.com/en/discussion-green-defense-eurosatory-2024/ (B-1)
Share the post