Site icon The Center for Climate & Security

Climate Security Provisions in the 2025 National Defense Authorization Act

By John Conger

One of the 118th US Congress’ last tasks was passing the FY 2025 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The House passed the bill on December 11, and the Senate passed it on December 18. As in each of the past several versions of this bill, some provisions relevant to climate and security were included. 

The highest profile debate came over the continuing effort by Congress to block requirements and regulations proposed by the Biden Administration requiring Department of Defense (DoD) contractors to track their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (Sec. 319). In last year’s NDAA, a one-year moratorium was put in place on requiring a DoD contractor to report its emissions. This year’s measure extended that moratorium by two years (Sec. 316). More significantly, it prohibited the Department from promulgating the regulation at all. While Congress remains concerned about putting excessive administrative burdens on DoD contractors, many defense firms already track and publicly report this information. 

Earlier this year, the International Military Council on Climate and Security published Military Innovation and Climate Change, exploring whether the military could innovate its way out of its climate challenges. One of the points made by this report was that while DoD publishes information on its own emissions, it really doesn’t have an estimate for the emissions generated in its supply chain. If it could find a way to minimize the burden, it would significantly help the Department to understand its environmental impact.

In addition, the House had previously incorporated a provision blocking actions based on President President Biden’s climate-related Executive Orders. The agreement dropped this provision, deferring to the President on direction given to the Defense Department and other federal agencies through Executive Orders. President Trump will have his own, and it will be important that they continue to support the military’s ability to maintain resilience to climate impacts.

The bill does not significantly cut the Department’s climate-related investments, though most of the cuts in previous years showed up in the defense appropriations bill rather than the defense authorization. Resolution on appropriations levels will likely have to wait until the spring. It also includes three measures that address climate resilience:

In conclusion, this was a relatively quiet year for climate within the NDAA. Congress sent a fairly conclusive signal that it didn’t want to focus on contractor emissions and continued incremental progress on DoD’s resilience efforts. Next year’s dynamics will be different, with changes both in Congress and the Administration, and given that the past is often prologue, we recommend readers review the NDAA provisions from 2017 and 2018—the last time President Trump served with a Republican Congress. 

Given accelerating climate risks and their security consequences, we hope the incoming Administration considers the security benefits of, at the very least, maintaining and reinforcing the climate resilience provisions enacted in the NDAA over the past several years. Risks are increasing, and the military needs to be able to operate in a future shaped by climate change.

Exit mobile version