GR 173 Energy security and the USA military By Lawrence P. Farrell Jr., President National Defence Industry Association The inextricable link Weather and energy have become focal points of a much needed discussion in the United States about climate change, energy dependence and, not surprisingly, national security. A recent military advisory board at the Center for Naval Analysis (on which the author serves) study entitled National Security and the Treat of Climate Change looked at how climate change presents a serious national security threat that could affect Americans at home, influence military operations abroad heighten global tensions. One of the key findings was that climate change, national security and energy dependence are a related set of global challenges. The panel specifically avoided passing judgement on the science of climate change, but instead focused on exploring the consequences of global warming as a threat multiplier in fragile regions of the world, which in sum could exacerbate conditions that lead to failed states the breeding grounds of extremism and terrorism. The military advisory board estimated that climate change will require the Pentagon to prepare differently for future national security scenarios. Rising sea levels could threaten coastal bases at home and aboard. Increasing storm activity could deter the military s ability to perform routine maintenance or carry out regular exercises. Changing ocean salinity could require alterations in sonar and submarine systems. Drought conditions might prompt new logistical plans and equipment for moving water to US troops in war zones. Security responses to these problems all intersect, in one way or another, with the question of energy. Logistics The conclusions of the study, in many ways, brought full circle concerns about the role of energy as a key determinant of success on the battlefield. It s a simple equation: If you can move troops and material more quickly, with less tonnage, but deliver the same level of firepower, you can be far more efficient. While most people Page 1 of 7
assume that tanks and other heavy vehicles comprise the bulk of the Army s load, in fact nearly 80 percent of the tonnage moved on the battlefield is fuel and water. Today, fuel is by far the US military s most pressing logistics challenge, as well as a security and operational limitation. As has been seen in Iraq during the past four years, the truck convoys that transport the essential fuel and water to US troops have been the target of thousands of roadside bombs, which have resulted in many casualties. US troops bring in 890,000 gallons of fuel a day across the southern border from Kuwait. This is a glaring example of dependence on fuel becoming a dangerous liability. More broadly, the United State s dependence on fossil fuel also has proven to pose serious national security challenges that transcend the economic consequences of having to import most of American oil from the Middle East and other volatile regions. Most of the places supplying oil are rough neighbourhoods. Supply and demand According to the American Petroleum Institute, energy demand worldwide will increase dramatically by 2030. Today, 85 percent of US consumption is supplied by petroleum (40 percent), natural gas (23 percent) and coal (22 percent). By 2030, these three energy sources will account for 87 percent of US consumption. But the absolute demand for all three will rise substantially with coal leading the pack at 53 percent. All this happens while US domestic oil production falls 16 percent and imports grow by 34 percent. Refinery capacity only sees minor increases while refinery utilisation grows from 93 percent to 95 percent. These are troubling indicators that point to rising prices for refined gasoline, diesel and aviation fuel. Electricity demand also will rise, by about 51 percent. The US demand, it should be noted, assume a 39 percent efficiency improvement by 2030. This scenario gets even more complicated by predictions that by 2030, world energy use will grow even faster than US consumption. The need for alternatives Developing sources of renewable energy and innovative ways to reduce fuel consumption on the battlefield not only improves military operational and logistical performance, but also Page 2 of 7
helps curtail dependence on foreign sources of energy. Innovation in the energy arena can only enhance the US security and the security of American fighting men and women. A promising initiative came out of the Defence Department in June 2007, when Ken Kreig, undersecretary for acquisition, technology and logistics, mandated a pilot programme that requires three major weapon systems to consider energy efficiency as a key parameter in their designs. Candidates for this effort are the Air Force next-generation long-range strike aircraft, the Army and Marine Corps Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, and the Navy s CG-X cruiser. A US Navy study on the latter, to include a nuclear fuelled variant, is expected to report shortly. The House of Representatives said in May 2007 that all new major combatant vessels should use nuclear power unless exempted by the US Secretary of Defense. The cost thereof could reduce the number of platforms procured. Energy obviously is not just a military issue. As the US Defense Department moves out to address its energy problems, it has the opportunity to set a template for the rest of America to follow. This quest will require additional commitment, time and resources. At the 2007 Joint Services Environmental Management conference in Columbus, Ohio, R. James Woolsey Jr., foreign policy specialist and former director of the Central Intelligence Agency, pointed out that American reliance on imported petroleum and on the electricity grid represent huge vulnerabilities that need to be addressed sooner rather than later. The United States spends $1 billion a day to buy oil. Such a staggering amount of treasure that is allocated to foreign oil raises serious questions about who ultimately benefits in the enormously lucrative oil market. Woolsey urged us to ponder the uncomfortable thought that the United States could be funding both sides of the war on terror our side and theirs. Further, the United States critical dependence and that of other developed and rapidly developing nations on imported oil has made is a strategic commodity. Vehicles, the electric grid and alternative energy sources Woolsey s proposed solution to the problem offers, as its central feature, the notion that oil should cease to exist as a strategic commodity. Military transportation must eventually shift its demand to sources not dependent on imported petroleum. Mobility constitutes 74 percent of the US Defense Department s energy use. To achieve this goal, the nation would have to Page 3 of 7
pursue a portfolio of technologies and approaches to energy conservation and fuel efficiency, some of which are near at hand. For vehicles, he proposes a move to plug-in hybrid vehicles. Since most folks drive less than 40 miles per day, most of their driving could be on battery power. Their recharging would be at night during off-peak hours. Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles have batteries that can be recharged by connecting a plug to an electrical power source. Plug-in hybrids have characterises of both conventional hybrid electric vehicles and of battery electric vehicles. While they usually are passenger vehicles, they can also be used as commercial passanger vans, utility trucks, school buses, scooters and military vehicles. Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles are sometimes called grid-connected hybrids or gas-optional hybrids. Plug-in hybrids use no fossil fuel during their all-electric range to the extent that their batteries are charged from renewable energy sources. Toyota and General Motors have announced their intentions to mass produce plug-in hybrid automobiles. Currently, conversion kits are available for hybrids such as the Toyota Prius. The kits extend their electric-only range and add plug-in charging. Plug-in hybrids achieve well above 100 miles a US gallon fuel efficiency and even much more depending on the range driven each day. But Woolsey also adds that if millions of Americans begin driving plug-in hybrids, they would shift the demand from petroleum to the electric grid and that is a significant point. So it would be imperative for the United States to make its electric grid more robust, resilient, efficient and diversified. Improvements are needed in transmission capability, efficiency of coal-burning plants, more nuclear power and moves to renewable sources. The discussion also underscores issues of great concern to the Defense Department access to liquid sources of energy for mobility, the costs and efficiency of fixed installations, and the strategic security implications of obtaining imported petroleum. Military infrastructure, both on the battlefield and at permanent bases, needs more efficient ways to provide installation energy. Both the military and the civilian worlds are co-dependent in their use of the same technologies for energy. Advances and improvements in one quickly affects the other. But they also compete in the sense that they both depend on diminishing supplies and increasingly expensive oil supplies. Page 4 of 7
For mobility the answer could be in renewable fuels such as cellulosic ethanol. There are other possibilities such as coal gasification, an approach the Air Force is exploring, although there are concerns about carbon emissions. (Trials are currently underway with jet fuel produced from coal by the Fischer-Tropsch process. Such a process might also use biomass.) For fixed energy generation, the wide-ranging portfolio of renewable includes wind, geothermal, solar, ocean waves and other wave flow sources. Some other fuels like nuclear fusion seem to be well into the future so they are not available for near term or as a transition energy source, but fission is available, well-developed, and environmentally friendly. One other interesting approach is the research currently underway in low energy nuclear reactions. As the grid is developed and diversified a vast increase in the efficiency with which fixed installations use energy is needed. The United States must prepare for the reality, in which rampant demand for energy will create fierce competition for scarce resources. Unfortunately, the nation is not making enough progress in developing new energy sources and shifting demand to more secure and renewable sources. Pressure on the electric grid only will intensify. In addition to fuel-efficient vehicles, there are other technologies that America must further explore. One is fusion; which is still many years out. The Naval Research Laboratory in partnership with the Department of Energy, academia and industry is planning to develop by 2028 a fusion energy prototype using lasers to fuse deuterium and uranium. An interim target is to have a fusion test facility up and running by 2018. A by-product of this process would be hydrogen a source for other energy applications such as fuel cells. Fuel cells have seen great progress, almost unnoticed. Because they are based on electrochemistry, not combustion, fuel cells tend to be low emission and high efficiency. They are quiet, with few moving parts, and can employ a variety of fuels. This makes them highly suitable for military use in portable power systems, vehicles, weapon systems, installations, communications, electricity and heat. Some of the most significant fuel-cell developments are the upcoming introduction of the Honda FCX automobile scheduled for production in three to four years and the U212 non-nuclear submarine auxiliary power unit, which permits a three-week undersea operation. Page 5 of 7
The National Fuel Cell Test and Evaluation Center is operated by Concurrent Technologies Corp. in Johnstown, Pa. A portion of the plant is powered by a large 2,500 Kilovolt-Amps fuel cell. Another 126 Defense Department facilities have complete or partial fuel cell power. Amongst other experimental/prototype technologies are battery powered aeroplanes; a fuel call based on breaking down cellulous using microbes; and cheaper and more efficient solar cells. Conclusion Tony Tether, director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, cited alternative energy to reduce military reliance on petroleum as one of DARPA s top priorities. The agency s focus is on portable, efficient, compact power sources. This has led to research into solid oxide fuel cells. Other areas are high efficiency solar cells and biofuels, in an effort to develop an affordable surrogate for military JP-8 fuel. Research is ongoing with oil-rich crops like rapeseed and other plants. Algae, fungi and bacteria are areas of investigation. The Army estimates that energy costs constitute 11 per cent of its installation s budgets. The Army s strategy is to increase energy efficiency in new and renovated facilities, reduce fossil fuel dependence, conserve water and improve energy security. The Army is focusing strongly on renewables. The Air Force has calculated that 82 per cent of its energy use is in aviation. Its objectives are to reduce demand, increase supply and change the culture. It is looking to science and technology to aid in achieving these goals. One initiative, which has received widespread media coverage, is the production of aviation fuel from coal. Worldwide energy demand is climbing and supplies, while tight now, are becoming even tighter. Projections show that the United States will import 60 per cent of its petroleum by 2025. It seems evident, too, that no one solution or technology will suffice. What will be needed is a portfolio of new sources and programs to reduce and redirect demand. The U.S. military recognises the problems and has initiated research and programs to address them. The energy issues the USA faces are wide ranging. The electric grid will be stressed. Refined petroleum will be more scarce and more expensive. Page 6 of 7
Given the rapidly increasing demand for energy, the situation is likely to deteriorate. The projected resources to meet the escalating demand do not change until 2030. More needs to be done to diversify sources and diminish the demand for traditional fossil fuels. It is becoming increasingly clear that the solution to energy challenges require a portfolio of approaches that factor both supply and demand. Other than the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the global war on terrorism, energy security is the most vital topic on the United States national plate. This paper is an edited version of a series of President s Perspectives written by Mr Farrell for the National Defence Industry Association members in the USA in late 2007, reproduced with permission. Disclaimer The views of authors are their own. The UK Defence Forum holds no corporate view on the opinions expressed in papers or at meetings. The Forum exists to enable politicians, industrialists, members of the armed forces, academics and others with an interest in defence and security issues to exchange information and views on the future needs of Britain s defence. It is operated by a non-partisan, not for profit company. UK Defence Forum papers are archived at www.ukdf.org.uk - the last three years being accessible only to members and subscribers. Prior to that they are in the public domain subject to usual conventions. Members wishing to comment on papers can access a noticeboard via the members area of the website www.ukdf.org.uk December 2007 Page 7 of 7