The end of an era.  The news claims it started 30 years ago.  The era of shuttle flights. But, really, the first shuttle’s genesis started when I entered college in 1968, or when President Nixon signed the bill approving its development and construction in 1971.  And, the water system development happened in mid-70s.  But, this discussion really isn’t about the space shuttle.

We all have heard about the improvements to our daily life because of NASA’s scientific/technological developments.  (No, I am NOT talking about TANG.)  That’s going to be the ultimate result of terminating the federal space program.

And, what we don’t often hear about are the improvements in our lives that arise from the military developments. For example, the Army Natick Research Center has provided many improvements to our clothing and textiles for decades.   But, the real topic for today is renewable energy and our military’s effect upon its adoption.

For as long as America has been putzing around with the Shuttle, we’ve been dallying with alternative energy.  My graduate efforts included the development of power from honest-to-goodness-waste, a project that is still not fully implemented.  They also included the conversion of Athabascan tar sands to fuel, in-sit coal gasification, energy storage and conversion (like in batteries), solar panels- all sources still not fully utilized (although the first is well on its way).  I could go on and on.

But, if you are associated with the military, you know that energy provisions are a logistical nightmare for our troops.   And, as a civilian, you can’t possibly have forgotten about the recent fiasco when Pakistan elected to blockade NATO transport convoys in October (2010).  These fuel transports all went up in flames.

And, therein lies the primary issue.  We put significant numbers of troops and materiel at risk, just delivering the fuel necessary to keep our forces in power.  The military knows this well.  (Supposedly 1 marine is killed for every 50 convoys dispatched to our two Middle East wars.)

It is a logistical nightmare transporting the megatons of fuel needed to maintain our forces.  So, the goal for our armed forces  is to convert 50% of all energy usage to non-fossil fuel sources within 9 years (2020).  This is even more significant because military uses comprise 2% of the total American consumption of fossil fuels.

To attain this conversion, the military will have to pay more for its energy right now.  New fuels are expensive- but as the volume of use increases, the cost curve drops- a lot.  As an example of this dramatic change, the Navy/Marine Corps has an RFP (request for proposals) for 100,000 gallons of aviation  and 350,000 gallons of maritime biofuels (10700 barrels).   Add to that, another 100 megawatts of solar energy for base use- to achieve the specific goal that each of their bases to produce as much energy as it uses by 2020.

The military is not pursuing alternative fuels, just because.  Modern warfare has changed.  Years ago, the military fought wars with a defined front confronting the enemy. Behind those front lines, virtually all the “ground” was under their control.  Now, the military is fighting wars in various places with no secure means to deliver supplies to the front.  Like Afghanistan.  And, not only the volatile price of oil- but the cost of getting it to the troops out at the front-  means the costs for that fuel can reach $ 10,000 a barrel (with transportation and security included).  If one can produce its own fuel nearby – even at a cost of $ 150 a barrel (yes, oil in the states is $ 90 to 100 a barrel), we are talking significant savings for the armed forces.

It also means the military needs much more efficient engines- to cut their energy consumption. And, you can bet these changes will make a difference for civilian energy needs and supply.

As long as Congress does not cut these items in their zeal to cut expenditures, too.

Share this: