Energy Quote of the Day: Turning to Renewable Energy to 'Become Better Warfighters'
- Posted on August 31, 2014
- 142 views
It’s no secret the US military seeks to increase its renewable energy production capacity as a way to reduce reliance on the sometimes unreliable civilian power grid while decreasing liquid petroleum consumption which is expensive and dangerous to transport. And unlike purely commercial renewable energy projects competing for high profit margins, the military is in many cases willing to pay a premium for the increased security that comes with generating its own electricity and transport fuel, but that ironically means the Pentagon often requires private project finance support in order to reach its energy goals.
The environmental benefits associated with renewable energy are also secondary where the military is concerned.
Take it from the Secretary of the Navy, Ray Mabus. According to Secretary Mabus, the military is turning to renewable energy to “become better warfighters. That’s the only reason. There are some good side effects — things like reducing carbon and things like climate change — but that’s not the reason we’re doing it. We’re doing it to reduce a vulnerability.” – As reported by American Council on Renewable Energy
Despite fairly high upfront investment requirements, considerable long-term cost savings opportunities come with the shift toward renewables as indicated by the following statistics.
Indeed, 99% of the over 500 military bases on U.S. soil rely on the commercial grid, a reliance that, according to the Defense Science Board, represents a “primary energy challenge.” And this reliance has had real consequences: in 2012 alone, the Department of Defense reported 87 power outages of eight hours or more at its bases.
And our military’s reliance on fossil fuels has cost both lives and money. 1 out of 8 U.S. Army casualties in Iraq happened while protecting fuel convoys. That’s over 3,000 troops, an immeasurable price to pay. In Afghanistan, every gallon of fuel used cost the military an average of $400 by the time it was “dropped in” to a tank. And the volatile fluctuations in the price of fuel meant an extra $3 billion in unplanned expenses for the Department of Defense from 2011-2012. – ACORE
|Breaking Energy provides access to news, analysis, thought leadership, reference materials and discussions about the day’s most important energy market trends. Breaking Energy participants stay ahead of breaking news, participate in high-profile events and enjoy access to the central hub of the industry community as it transforms in response to fast-moving changes in energy politics and regulation, deals with financial challenges and leads technological advances.|