Strikes on oil facilities, missile bases and ships in the US‑Israel–Iran conflict are raising alarms about lasting harm to human health and the environment. UK nonprofit Conflict and Environment Observatory (CEOBS) has documented more than 300 incidents of potential environmental damage — from attacks on energy infrastructure to assaults on vessels in the Persian Gulf — but says that likely understates the true scale. The US has claimed strikes on thousands of sites, suggesting current analyses “are just the tip of the iceberg,” CEOBS director Doug Weir told DW.
The United Nations has warned that strikes on oil facilities risk “serious environmental consequences across the region,” with immediate threats to safe water, breathable air and food. After recent attacks, Tehran experienced “black rain” — oil mixed with precipitation — and thick black smoke blanketed the capital, prompting health warnings and reports of headaches and breathing difficulties. Atmospheric scientists say the emissions likely included fine particulates, sulfur dioxide, volatile organic compounds and other toxic combustion by‑products. These pollutants can penetrate deep into lungs and raise risks of respiratory and cardiovascular disease, especially for infants, older adults and people with preexisting conditions.
Beyond acute air pollution, bombed military and energy sites can leave persistent contamination. Bombed oil facilities can disperse toxic pollutants that accumulate on roads, roofs, soils and croplands. Attacks on military sites and missile bases can release fuels, heavy metals, PFAS and residues from explosives; some substances, like TNT, are persistent and pose carcinogenic risks. Assessing contamination is difficult without on‑site testing: investigators must rely on satellite imagery, radar damage maps, social media and news reports, leaving many unknowns about what materials were present and destroyed.
Marine ecosystems face elevated risk as attacks on navies and commercial shipping increase the chance of oil spills. The Persian Gulf supports reefs, seagrass beds, pearl oysters, green turtles and the world’s second‑largest dugong population, and sustains coastal fishing communities. Sunken or damaged ships can leak fuel and other hazardous materials for years; CEOBS and others note pollution from conflict has extended beyond the Gulf, with oil slicks reported off Sri Lanka after a torpedoed frigate sank. Attacks on vessels in the Strait of Hormuz and elsewhere therefore threaten biodiversity, fisheries and livelihoods across a wide region.
The environmental footprint of war also includes large greenhouse‑gas emissions. Waging war produces massive CO2 emissions: analyses of other conflicts show hundreds of millions of tons of CO2 equivalent in the opening years. Militaries are major fossil‑fuel consumers; if considered a country, the world’s militaries would rank among the top emitters. Yet military emissions are generally excluded from national climate reporting under the Paris Agreement, obscuring this contribution to global heating.
Iran was already grappling with chronic water shortages, severe air pollution and ecosystem degradation made worse by climate change and governance challenges. Conflict compounds these pressures and is often followed by weakened governance in which environmental protection is deprioritized. Weir warned that Iran’s historically limited transparency around environmental harm could mean little information or international support for cleanup, and limited domestic capacity to manage contamination.
In short, the environmental and public‑health consequences of these strikes may persist long after active hostilities end — affecting air, soil, water, marine life and climate — while assessment and remediation remain constrained by lack of access, data and governance capacity.
Edited by: Jennifer Collins