By Eric Lindeman
Leading by example, the four U.S. military services are showing they understand the critical strategic and operational relationship between the nation’s dependence of fossil fuels and increasing its energy efficiency and deploying alternative energy systems.
“National security experts have been clear in their warnings–America’s dependence on foreign sources of energy constitutes a threat–militarily, diplomatically and economically,” said Phyllis Cuttino, director of the Pew Charitable Trusts’ climate and energy programs.
“But, the Department [of Defense] is doing more than sounding an alarm. It has enacted energy goals and is inventing, testing and deploying new technologies and alternative fuels to meet those goals.The military is, in many respects, leading the way and helping to reenergize America’s future.”
The Pew Charitable Trusts’ Project on National Security, Energy and Climate is that latest national think tank to examine the energy policies of the U.S. Department of Defense in relation to the nation’s security. And, in Reenergizing America’s Defense, published last week, DoD got pretty good marks.
At both facility and operational levels, Pew found, Defense “has set ambitious energy goals, and signs of growing competition for leadership among the branches are evident. Today’s military leaders clearly understand that forward-looking approaches to energy and climate can save lives and money and reduce emissions.
“While work remains to be done, the military continues to build on its successful record in managing resources and investing in long-term innovations. DoD is well-positioned to help manage the threats caused by climate change, to assist in the transformation to a clean energy economy, and to compete effectively in the worldwide development of new energy technologies.”
Pew stressed that Defense Secretary Robert Gates has identified energy as one of the department’s top 25 “transformational priorities.” He supported the establishment of the Office of the Director for Operational Energy Plans and Programs last year to provide leadership and oversee planning of the U.S. armed forces.
Moreover, in its Quadrennial Defense Review, issued this February, DoD acknowledges that climate “will shape the operating environment, roles, and missions” the department takes on, and that “DoD will need to adjust to the impacts of climate change on our facilities and military capabilities.” The review for the first time makes a clear assessment that climate change could “act as an accelerant of instability or conflict, placing a burden to respond on civilian institutions and militaries around the world.”
Climate change, national security and energy dependence are related global challenges, Pew reiterated. But climate change, significantly, is expected to be a threat multiplier, “stoking instability in some of the most volatile regions of the world and, in turn, threatening America’s security.”
In what it termed the “DoD Energy Burden,” Pew noted the staggering and, recently, oft-cited fossil fuel consumption of the U.S. military.
DoD accounts for about 80 percent of U.S. government energy consumption. Of that total, 75 percent is liquid fuels for aircraft, ships, combat vehicles and forward-deployed generators–more than 300,000 barrels of oil daily. The other 25 percent of DoD’s energy consumption is electricity to run facilities and bases, which depend on the aging and vulnerable U.S. transmission grid.
“In 2008,” Pew reported, “DoD’s energy budget was $20 billion, but many experts recognize this as only a fraction of the military’s true energy costs. Internal DoD research has documented much larger costs associated with the ‘fully burdened cost of fuel’–the cost of the people and operations required to deliver the fuels that are used to fly the jets, power the tanks and run the expeditionary bases.”
About 70 percent of the tonnage the Army delivers to a battlefield is related to fuel and water. According to Pew, the Marines have found that 90 percent of fuel in Iraq is used for combat support, and only 10 percent for operations. Fully burdened costs of fuel can range from two to 20 times the pump price for aerial refueling, to hundreds of dollars a gallon when delivered to a forward area. In that scenario, some estimates run as high as $400 a gallon.
At the same time, high and unpredictable oil prices threaten to divert funds from military operations and procurement, making defense budgeting exceedingly difficult. On average, every $10 change in the per-barrel price of oil represents more than $1.3 billion in additional DoD energy costs.
Some of those energy variables could be changing in the foreseeable future under today’s DoD policy guidance and the concrete efforts of the four branches, each of which has long-term goals to increase energy efficiency and reduce carbon emissions.
In recent years, the Army has begun to address energy and related environmental considerations more effectively. In 2008, the service established a Senior Energy Council to provide sustained, high-level leadership to Army energy policy, programs and funding, including renewable energy, efficiency and environmental assessment.
Today, projects under way at Army facilities include:
- A 500-megawatt solar generating plant at Fort Irwin, Calif., that will help power the base and reduce the facility’s vulnerability to power disruptions. The Army has named Fort Irwin a “net-zero plus” installation, meaning it will produce energy in excess of its needs, and hopes to end the base’s reliance on the public electric grid within a decade.
- A transition to 4,000 electric vehicles during the next three years, which will give the Army one of the world’s largest electric fleets. The fleet will help avoid emission of more than 100,000 tons of carbon dioxide and cut the use of liquid fossil fuels by more than 11 million gallons.
- Demonstration of biomass conversion for use as fuel at six pilot projects.
- Development of a 30-megawatt geothermal project at Hawthorne Army Depot in Nevada.
- Adoption of model performance contracting arrangements at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., whereby energy efficiency improvements are made by a private-sector firm at no upfront cost to the Army, with resulting savings shared by the base and the contractor.
- Use of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds to develop lighter, more-deployable power systems and micro-grids for forward operating bases.
For the Navy, about 75 percent of total energy usage is for sea operations, while 25 percent is for shore operations. Shipboard diesel fuel represents the Navy’s largest energy requirement, accounting for 51 percent of total petroleum use, followed by aviation fuel at 42 percent.
The Navy has taken significant steps to respond to the twin challenges of climate change and energy use. It has established two panels, Task Force Energy and Task Force Climate Change. Their initiatives include:
- Offering incentives to industrial suppliers to meet targets for energy and system efficiency, including examining systems’ lifecycle energy costs, evaluating the fully burdened cost of fuel and the contractor’s own energy footprint.
- Reducing the Navy’s oil use in the commercial fleet by 50 percent by 2015.
- Launching the “Great Green Fleet,” a strike group fueled completely by alternative fuels, by 2016.
- Producing half of all shore-based energy requirements from alternative sources and making half of all its bases net-zero in energy consumption by 2020.
- Conducting tests to certify biofuels for use in jet aircraft fuel and as shipboard diesel fuel.
The Air Force, DoD’s largest energy consumer, spent about $9 billion on energy in 2008: 84 percent for aviation fuels. To reduce that usage, it created a comprehensive energy program and policy, “Air Force Energy Plan 2010,” the objective of which is to “make energy a consideration in all that we do.”
The plan focuses on three goals: reduce demand across aviation, ground operations and installations; increase supply by developing renewable fuels for aviation, ground operations and installations. These goals include meeting 25 percent of base energy needs with renewable energy sources by 2025 and obtaining 50 percent of aviation fuels from biofuel blends by 2016.
Pew cited Air Force “sources” as claiming the service leads all federal entities in clean-power purchasing, with 37 bases meeting some portion of their electrical requirements with renewable sources. Of those, Nellis AFB, Nev., is home to one of the largest solar arrays in North America, providing more than 25 percent of base energy, and another, the Soaring Heights community at Davis-Monthan AFB, Ariz., now under construction, will rely on solar power for 75 percent of its residential needs.
For the Marines, Commandant Gen. James Conway, has prioritized energy efficiency in facilities, operations and expeditionary capabilities. At the 2009 Naval Energy Forum, he called for net-zero operations on Marine installations, envisioning “bases and stations [that] provide as much energy as they make use of.” The three main long-term goals for the Marine Corp include:
- Reducing energy intensity 30 percent by 2015, against a 2003 baseline.
- Reducing water-consumption intensity 16 percent by 2015, from a 2007 baseline.
- Increasing renewable electric energy to 25 percent by 2025.
Pew concluded that DoD has been “historically a leader in technological innovation,” creating transformational tools like the Internet and the Global Positioning System through the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. “Building on this history, DoD can be a leader in creating alternative fuels, advanced energy storage and more efficient vehicles on land, in the air and at sea.”