And last month, the Defense Department quietly released a
for reducing its massive carbon footprint, including by “transitioning to a zero-emissions non-tactical vehicle fleet.” also included provisions in the NDAA requiring the military to purchase more electric non-tactical vehicles. In an interview, Garamendi slammed his GOP colleagues for trying to restrict EVs for “ideological” reasons.
“It’s just stupid,” he said. “I’d be happy to tell them that to their face and probably will. Put your ideology and your politics aside and get down to reality. The military actually would like to have EVs.”Richard Kidd, who served as one of the top climate officials at the Pentagon until he retired in May, said the GOP amendments fail to recognize the tactical advantages of EVs.
In particular, he noted that electric and hybrid combat vehicles emit less heat and noise, so they are harder for enemies to detect.“Some of the proposals would actually deny the military hybrid and electric technologies that make the forces safer and more capable,” Kidd said., who served as assistant secretary of defense for operational energy during the Obama administration, agreed with this assessment.
“We’re getting a really visceral, searing lesson in why a vehicle that uses less fuel on the battlefield is important,” she said.Still, both Kidd and Burke acknowledged that it’s difficult to recharge EVs on the battlefield, a problem highlighted in a recent