The Department of Defense (DoD) is the largest single consumer of energy in the United States. In 2007, it consumed 1100 trillion btu—more than the entire country of Nigeria, and at a higher per-capita rate than all but three countries in the world. At the same time, energy is the key enabler of US military combat power. Huge energy consumption, increased competition for limited energy supplies, ever increasing energy costs, and no comprehensive Energy Strategy or oversight of energy issues within the DoD have created vulnerabilities. These include potential fuel and electricity supply disruptions to battle zones and other global deployments , as well as foreign policy and economic vulnerabilities. The DoD needs a comprehensive energy strategy that (1) improves National Security by decreasing US dependence on foreign oil, (2) maintains or improves combat capability.
Both current foreign wars (Iraq 2003-, Afghanistan 2001-) have been, at one point or another, defended on the grounds that they strategically secure liquid petroleum reserves, pipelines, export points and refining stations that are critical to U.S. energy needs (mostly those in Iraq) and those of American allies. In particular, Afghanistan contains the most direct and efficient access points to transport oil and natural gas supplies to and from Central Asia and China through the Khyber Pass. Its border with Iran has also been thought to create strategic leverage against the world’s second-leading producer of oil. Though other factors—the “war on terror,” and “democratization”—have also been used to justify the continued American presence in these regions, the only strategic raisons d’etat for continuing to occupy these nations would seem to involve their relevance to current US energy needs. These wars have already exceeded a trillion dollars and sent thousands of American soldiers to their death. The costs of caring for wounded veterans returning from are sure to treble the fiscal impact of the wars in the future. By broadening our energy generation and storage options, the US can avoid these “wars of necessity” in the future, saving crucial dollars and preventing immeasurable losses of lives and loved ones—priorities within, and beyond, the DoD.
US combat capabilities also have much to gain from clean-energy innovation and investment. Napoleon talked of his army “marching on its stomach.” The meat and bread that provided the joules for the low-tech armies of the 19th century still power today’s modern militaries, only in the form of liquid carbon fuels. US power projection is entirely dependent upon its ability to generate, transport and store energy rapidly and securely. The “long tails” that supply and resupply current US global deployments are limited in their efficiently by the physics of liquid carbon: dozens of miles of gasoline trucks and protective humvees, jet-fueled C17s and oil-powered frigates are needed to transport energy to today’s frontlines. These deliver not only an inefficient yield, but are often slow and insecure as well. As wars become increasingly unconventional, and supply lines more complicated and vulnerable, the US is forced to squander much of its force potential to maintain these lines, and even abandon some aspects of its combat capacities altogether.
While much continues to be done within the DoD to improve the energy efficiency of its operations and the fuel effiency of its vehicles, to accomplish any of these broad goals the DoD must promote critical research for future energy technologies. The DoD has a long tradition of innovation spillovers into the consumer economy, stretching from recent breakthroughs in global positioning technology to the Internet (ARPANET). But even innovations as minor as developing lighter rechargeable batteries are estimated to the save the DoD hundreds of millions annually from the costs of replacing out-modeled batteries and reducing their “fully-burdened-costs.” Tactically, smaller more durable batteries enhance U.S. force capabilities in unconventional conflict zones that require lengthy and covert special operations missions (see: Afghanistan, Iraq).
As groundbreaking as these more modest projects can be, even more ambitious research projects have even greater potential not only for the military, but also for civilian market spillover that could greatly contribute to overall US economic growth and competitiveness. Two such projects standout: algae based jet fuels and micro-nuclear reactor technology. This spring, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) successfully extracted oil from algal ponds at a cost of just $2/gallon, and has been working to begin large-scale refining of that oil into usable fuels at a cost of less $3/gallon. Though private industry has invested nearly $600 million into the project, DARPA’s hopes of expanding the breakthrough into a 50 million gallon annual refining operation to begin supplying the Air Force with 50-50 fuel blends by 2013 will require significant public investment.
Similarly, the late-third/early-fourth generation nuclear reactors—smaller, safer and more efficient alternatives to the large 2G light-water reactors currently deployed—are promising for US military operations, as well as general US energy needs. Unfortunately, America’s symbolic aversion to developing nuclear technologies have stymied domestic innovation in these key technologies. With effective support and communication, however, the DoD could gain from these reactors as they strive to develop “net-zero” energy self-sufficient bases. Smaller “pocket-nukes” are still in development and, with investment support, could revolutionize the mobility of US forces as force deployments become increasingly unconventional.
At the same time, the Navy is studying cheaper and more efficient alternative energy propulsion systems for its carriers, submarines and frigates, and is also considering proposals to create an “all-nuclear fleet” in the next 20 years. With broader federal investments within the DoD’s research and development budget, a breakthrough in either of these technologies would enable U.S. naval forces to extend farther, faster and cheaper into critical seas, straits and oceans than any other naval force in the world. This strengthens U.S. “off-shore balancing” capabilities, the essential instruments of a status-quo global power. The benefits, moreover, of producing, distributing, installing and marketing industrial-domestic versions of these technologies would be a boon for the U.S. energy sector, job creation and overall economic growth.
In addition to serving as a crucial locus of clean energy innovation (CEI) through federal investment, DoD can play a critical role in creating markets for emerging technologies through direct procurement. Without a reliable demand for new energy technologies, private firms will not aggressively pursue energy technology innovation, nor will they find public-private partnerships with DoD/DARPA worthwhile. In the US, most attempts to create demand for low-carbon energy technologies have focused on establishment of a carbon price. While this approach could push some innovation in the long run, there are serious political-economic complications within carbon pricing that make it a less than comprehensive solution. By contrast, direct government procurement coupled with direct government investment are powerful ways for the federal government to stimulate CEI. DoD’s unique purchasing capacities can create, on its own, a sufficient market with credible sustainability for many capital-intensive investments that remove risky “bet-the-company” labels from CEI projects—projects that, as noted above, are likely to benefit the DoD as much, if not more, than anyone else.
At the moment, the National Training Center in Fort Irwin, CA, Fort Carson in Colorado, and Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada all host cutting-edge solar photovoltaic energy generation arrays. The array at Nellis was at one point the world’s largest and the 15 MW it produces cover approximately one-third of the bases total power needs. More broadly, the Air Force is the largest renewable energy power purchaser in the U.S, and the third largest procurer in the world. Four Airforce bases currently rely entirely on renewable energy for power, while several others use a combination of solar and wind. As only 9% of current power for military facilities rely on alternative energies, there is much room for future procurement and the potential forum for market introduction that DoD presents has only begun to be tapped.
For more than two decades, federal energy policy has been afflicted by paralysis. Although much energy legislation has been passed into law during this period, America’s energy security has grown worse with each passing year. This deteriorating condition has created enormous economic and national security vulnerabilities. The time for action arrived long ago. We must not waste another moment. The DoD has much to gain from CEI, and its role in promoting it will not only resolve critical concerns central to the Department, but also a gathering crisis confronting the nation as a whole.
Leave a comment