How can war be fought differently to help avoid "climate change"?

Clear objectives based on vital national interests. Overwhelming, annihilating combat power focused on enemy COGs. Basically, the Powell doctrine. Reasoning: A 6 month war of absolute violence and destruction, vs a 10 year war of drip-drip attrition will do far more to avoid climate change than any marginal improvements in efficiency we gain by reducing pollutants produced by tanks, airplanes, and ships.

Use cleaner fuels? JP fuels are crap. Synchronized breathing to cut back on CO2 emissions. Meetings will be limited to 15 minutes max, and powerpoint slides are no longer than 10 slides at a minute each. We will enact AWS or alternate work schedules so the troops aren't driving their cars as much. PT formation will be held via Facetime on iPhones. Staff Duty/MP's will ride Segways. We will begin the rapid issuing of laser weapons. Marines will give up the traditional sword and have the option of caring a light saber. Counseling statements will be written on MRE paper to maximize time and effort and not waste trees. Due to the harmful gasses that come from MRE heaters, they will be scrapped and the MRE will be eaten cold unless they're heated from the exhaust of a vehicle (yes plenty of troops have done that one for real). We will have DARPA begin testing on Flux Capacitors to power vehicles and possibly large items. We will stop having JE's burning sh*t in 55 gal barrels. We will save it and use it to power buildings and the methane gas can power vehicles. Tough times require extreme measures. Harvesting passed gas from humans would give tons of methane gas that again could power small buildings, and is a natural energy source. The older you get the more pungent the gas, and we need that.

To be honest the only way I could think of which would actually reduce "climate change" would be to go back to sticks and stones CPT Jack Durish. Of course these sticks and stones would have to by lying on the ground so as not to disturb a "precious" ecosystem. This in a tongue-in-cheek response. I think it is beyond ludicrous to attempt to wage war in such a way that the poobahs of climate change theory would be satisfied that the warfare would not "impact the climate."
It has been difficult to get our adversaries to adhere or agree to the Geneva and Hague conventions. I would love to see the expressions on the leaders of ISIL, North Korea and Iran when a diplomat presents the climate change warfare limitation agreement for their signature.