How to fuel a war: EU eyes new front for green agenda

Officials claim renewable energy could power European militaries after the Iran war exposed a key vulnerability EU and NATO officials fear that European armies would be unable to conduct a major military operation – such as a hypothetical war with Russia that Brussels continues to claim could be imminent – without a secure supply of fossil fuels. EU lawmakers and NATO officials met this week to assess how reliance on oil affects military readiness, according to Euractiv. The proposed solution looks distinctly like a notorious Brussels brainchild – conceived in strict adherence to the EU’s green agenda, impractical, and intended to be borne by the bloc’s national governments. Europe’s fuel squeeze Only two months ago, US President Donald Trump was blaming Cuba’s communist system for a lack of jet fuel – deliberately caused by his administration’s naval blockade of the island nation. Now, capitalist European governments are facing similar pressures after disruptions linked to Trump’s war on Iran. In its latest monthly report, the International Energy Agency warned that Europe – which sources roughly three-quarters of its jet fuel from the Middle East – could soon face physical shortages. Analysts estimate this could happen by June if only half of lost supply is replaced, or by August if 75% is restored. Airlines for Europe (A4E), a major industry group, has already called for coordinated kerosene purchases to tackle the situation. Read more Europe has ‘six weeks’ of jet fuel left – IEA chief Tanks don’t run on electricity “Fossil fuels are the Achilles’ heel of our defense,” Finnish MEP Pekka Toveri, a former general, reportedly said after the EU/NATO meeting, noting that “Leopard tanks do not run on electricity.” NATO’s director for defense enablement and resilience, Julien Kita, said modern military equipment is even more fuel-hungry than previous generations.

He warned: “In the unlikely scenario of a full-scale NATO operation, the air domain would account for around 80% of fuel demand. And that requires a lot of fuel.” Polish MEP Kamila Gasiuk-Pihowicz echoed the concern, saying the EU could “invest millions in rearmament… but if we cannot secure fuel for tanks and jets, there will be nothing to move.” European intelligence agencies claim a large-scale conflict with Russia is likely to break out by 2030, even as Moscow denies any hostile intentions. Tanks must go green During the discussions, officials reportedly proposed ‘carbon-neutral’ fuels as the main long-term solution, including biofuels, hydrogen, and products derived from renewable electricity. Read more What is fueling unrest across the EU? Biofuels are essentially a by-product of farms that governments subsidize for political and food security considerations. The others are meant to store energy generated by wind and solar power, balancing the power grid. Hydrogen – a highly-volatile fuel that is difficult to store – remains far from becoming a viable substitute for hydrocarbons. It only found use as rocket propellant for space launches and in some niche applications, such as air-independent propulsion in German Type 214 submarines. The Toyota Mirais, which almost a decade ago became the first commercially-available car to run on hydrogen fuel cells, is one of the worst-selling models. Just 210 units were bought last year, down from 499 in 2024. But how will the EU pay for alternative fuels for war? While domestic manufacturing of non-fossil fuels can potentially solve scarcity of supplies, warfare is as much a calculation of what you can afford as it is what you can do with the capabilities. Cheap mass-produced drones became the dominant feature of the Ukraine conflict. They also give Iran leverage over