By Joel Highfill & Wilson Beaver, The Daily Signal | November 15, 2024
The United States military, charged with defending the nation, is instead using defense research and development dollars to learn how to compost.
According to the latest U.S. Army Budget Proposal, $3 million has been allocated this year for what has euphemistically been labelled “Installation Composting for Land Resilience.”
This misguided project is both a waste of taxpayer dollars, and a distraction from the military’s core task of providing combat capability to defend American security interests.
Unfortunately, military research and development accounts are rife with this sort of science project with no military benefit. This project is part of a broader $14 million initiative spread over the next five years which falls under the Army’s Net Zero program.
The Net Zero strategy aims to reduce the Army’s environmental impact by focusing specifically on energy, water, and waste management.
Sounds great, right? Wrong. It points to a deeply concerning shift in the military’s focus. The $3 million dedicated to compost research is explicitly described as funding for “demonstration of composting operations” and “climate change guidance for Integrated Solid Waste Management.”
How many studies must be done to understand composting, something which has been around for centuries? The U.S. Army has been consistently “researching” such matters and spending $14 million more over the next five years is unlikely to produce different results.
On top of that, the redundancy of this research initiative is astounding. Not only has the U.S. Department of Agriculture already invested $11.5 million in composting and waste reduction projects across the states, but the Environmental Protection Agency has dedicated billions to the research of climate resilience.
The Army is essentially duplicating an effort already undertaken by a federal agency specifically tasked with agricultural or environmental concerns.
It doesn’t stop there. A similar study was conducted by the Army in 2013 and 2014 in which profound conclusions were drawn such as that composting is the “most direct means of addressing all waste components.”
The Army justifies such research expenditures by pointing to a future reduction in costs associated with solid waste disposal, but at least some cost reductions should have been achievable base wide in 2015 after the first study with guidance for composting operations went public. Composting has been an inherent aspect of military installations for decades since the DOD requires each base to develop an integrated solid waste management plan. That’s been the case since at least 2008.
That’s not to say the military should ignore environmental concerns completely or that composting is bad. Composting is great. But such considerations should simply be integrated into existing operations, not a cycle of standalone multimillion-dollar initiatives that risk compromising the Army’s primary purpose.
The issue isn’t just the three million wasted taxpayer dollars, or even $14 million if you view the project in its entirety, it’s the precedent it sets. Will we see funds for producing our already depleted missiles diverted to trace the carbon footprint left by firing such weapons?
Thus, the broader issue at hand extends well beyond an incessant $14 million escapade into supposed composting research.
The Net Zero Program, of which composting research is but a small part, demonstrates a significant shift in military priorities. Another central goal of the program is to decrease Army greenhouse gas emissions 50% by 2030 and reach net zero emissions by 2050.
In fact, Defense Secretary Loyd Austin remarked back in 2021 that the department would “immediately take appropriate policy actions to prioritize climate change considerations in” military operations. These ambitious goals are unrealistic on a large scale and extremely detrimental to national security.
While the U.S. prioritizes reaching net zero emissions, adversaries like China continue to expand their military capabilities without such aggressive self-imposed constraints. The Army’s priority should remain focused on effective defense and readiness; defense dollars spent elsewhere wastes valuable resources on redundant, non-essential, feel-good initiatives that present minimal military benefit.
At this point, regardless of whether or not the military has grasped composting fundamentals, the continued investment in projects and climate change policies under the Net Zero program diverts critical funds from military readiness.
As America faces an increasingly unstable global security landscape it is critical the military’s core mission of being combat capable is the priority.
No matter how climate-resilient the U.S. is, our advanced waste management systems or lack of emissions will most likely not provide an adequate deterrent to our adversaries.
Joel Highfill is a member of the Young Leaders Program of The Heritage Foundation.
Wilson Beaver is a policy adviser for defense budgeting in the Allison Center for National Security at The Heritage Foundation.
Original article link
