Military Advisory Board findings on US Transportation, Fuels

Military Advisory Board findings on US Transportation and Fuel Choices . . . .

October 2011

Full PDF and Online Viewer at the site.

Website Summary:

http://www.cna.org/EnsuringFreedomofMovement

==============================

In 2006, CNA brought together 11 recently retired three and four-star generals and admirals to form a Military Advisory Board (MAB), with the goal of examining the national security implications of climate change. Over the last five years, the CNA MAB has published three reports on the nexus of energy, climate, and national security. In this report the MAB focuses on the national security implications associated with shifting the U.S. transportation sector to alternative fuels.

Discussions of energy are discussions of national security. One directly affects the other. The CNA Military Advisory Board’s (MAB) previous reports have made clear the deep connections between energy, the economy, climate change and security. In this report, the MAB narrows in on one aspect of U.S. energy posture—our heavy reliance on oil, especially imported oil and calls for immediate and aggressive actions to move our transportation sector away from oil and toward alternative, domestically produced sources of energy in order to improve our national security posture.

Findings:

America’s dependence on oil constitutes a significant national security threat.

A 30 percent reduction in our use of petroleum would significantly improve our national security.

We can achieve a significant portion of a 30 percent reduction through greater efficiency in how we use oil.

There are many promising alternatives to oil as a transport fuel—some available today, others on the horizon. If managed properly, all of the most promising alternative fuels examined can lower overall national security risks rather than continuing our overreliance on oil as a singular fuel source.

Recommendations:

To assure our national security, government must take action to promote the use of a more diverse mix of transportation fuels and to drive wider public acceptance of these alternatives.

In the immediate future, our nation’s leaders must develop a comprehensive energy roadmap or strategic plan to enable consistent and strategic energy policies and investments.
The U.S. must take swift and aggressive action to reduce our use of oil.

The Department of Defense should continue to be a leader in advancing alternative tansportation fuels while balancing mission effectiveness and overall efficiency. DOD must be provided the necessary resources so innovation and experimentation with alternative fuels is not traded for military capability and capacity. DOD should be provided with the necessary authority to establish long-term alternative fuel contracts as a way to assure markets and lower the alternative fuel price.

Military Advisory Board findings on US Transportation and Fuel Choices . . . .

October 2011

Full PDF and Online Viewer at the site.

Website Summary:

http://www.cna.org/EnsuringFreedomofMovement

==============================

In 2006, CNA brought together 11 recently retired three and four-star generals and admirals to form a Military Advisory Board (MAB), with the goal of examining the national security implications of climate change. Over the last five years, the CNA MAB has published three reports on the nexus of energy, climate, and national security. In this report the MAB focuses on the national security implications associated with shifting the U.S. transportation sector to alternative fuels.

Discussions of energy are discussions of national security. One directly affects the other. The CNA Military Advisory Board’s (MAB) previous reports have made clear the deep connections between energy, the economy, climate change and security. In this report, the MAB narrows in on one aspect of U.S. energy posture—our heavy reliance on oil, especially imported oil and calls for immediate and aggressive actions to move our transportation sector away from oil and toward alternative, domestically produced sources of energy in order to improve our national security posture.

Findings:

America’s dependence on oil constitutes a significant national security threat.

A 30 percent reduction in our use of petroleum would significantly improve our national security.

We can achieve a significant portion of a 30 percent reduction through greater efficiency in how we use oil.

There are many promising alternatives to oil as a transport fuel—some available today, others on the horizon. If managed properly, all of the most promising alternative fuels examined can lower overall national security risks rather than continuing our overreliance on oil as a singular fuel source.

Recommendations:

To assure our national security, government must take action to promote the use of a more diverse mix of transportation fuels and to drive wider public acceptance of these alternatives.

In the immediate future, our nation’s leaders must develop a comprehensive energy roadmap or strategic plan to enable consistent and strategic energy policies and investments.
The U.S. must take swift and aggressive action to reduce our use of oil.

The Department of Defense should continue to be a leader in advancing alternative tansportation fuels while balancing mission effectiveness and overall efficiency. DOD must be provided the necessary resources so innovation and experimentation with alternative fuels is not traded for military capability and capacity. DOD should be provided with the necessary authority to establish long-term alternative fuel contracts as a way to assure markets and lower the alternative fuel price.

only one thing missing (at a minimum - assuming i buy the argument oil to green is possible [which i don't, but i'll play along])

money to make all this cool alternative shit

oh well

grown men wishing upon starz is down right embarrassing

hmmm, messed up a post . . .

only one thing missing (at a minimum - assuming i buy the argument oil to green is possible [which i don't, but i'll play along])

money to make all this cool alternative shit

oh well

grown men wishing upon starz is down right embarrassing

These guys are the MIC (military industrial complex). They have Money. Plenty of Money -- and I guess the Stars on their collars to wish upon.

I tend to view their claim of a 30% down shift in Oil use by US as fairly do-able without great grief.

Dunno if you follow this from the outside, but in the real world I work energy and a fair amount of DoD -- this is a Really Big Mind Shift.

hmmm, messed up a post . . .

only one thing missing (at a minimum - assuming i buy the argument oil to green is possible [which i don't, but i'll play along])

money to make all this cool alternative shit

oh well

grown men wishing upon starz is down right embarrassing

These guys are the MIC (military industrial complex). They have Money. Plenty of Money -- and I guess the Stars on their collars to wish upon.

I tend to view their claim of a 30% down shift in Oil use by US as fairly do-able without great grief.

Dunno if you follow this from the outside, but in the real world I work energy and a fair amount of DoD -- this is a Really Big Mind Shift.

my real world job is in energy (20 years) - if you had 2 billion dollars and wanted to permit a coal fired power plant or a 500MW solar plant or a 600 mile long transmission line - you would call a guy like me.

alternative energy has it applications, but saving the day is not one of them.

hmmm, messed up a post . . .

only one thing missing (at a minimum - assuming i buy the argument oil to green is possible [which i don't, but i'll play along])

money to make all this cool alternative shit

oh well

grown men wishing upon starz is down right embarrassing

These guys are the MIC (military industrial complex). They have Money. Plenty of Money -- and I guess the Stars on their collars to wish upon.

I tend to view their claim of a 30% down shift in Oil use by US as fairly do-able without great grief.

Dunno if you follow this from the outside, but in the real world I work energy and a fair amount of DoD -- this is a Really Big Mind Shift.

my real world job is in energy (20 years) - if you had 2 billion dollars and wanted to permit a coal fired power plant or a 500MW solar plant or a 600 mile long transmission line - you would call a guy like me.

alternative energy has it applications, but saving the day is not one of them.

Still doing some variations of that, as we speak.

Shutting the Coal plant(s) down now, and the Solar is back-logged waiting to get rid of the Coal surplus.

And power lines are still sort of in fashion, but I sort of suspect the the Distributed nature of what's coming may be hard on those folks, too.

But back to part about saving the day . . . does not so much need saving as just stopping being stupid with what we have got.

Still doing some variations of that, as we speak.

Shutting the Coal plant(s) down now, and the Solar is back-logged waiting to get rid of the Coal surplus.

And power lines are still sort of in fashion, but I sort of suspect the the Distributed nature of what's coming may be hard on those folks, too.

But back to part about saving the day . . . does not so much need saving as just stopping being stupid with what we have got.

solar backlogged? utilities sign PPAs with solar/green developers JUST TO GET THEM OUT OF THEIR OFFICE...they do not want solar on their wires...they can almost tolerate wind. and if you are talking CSP - forget it - market is dead - water is scarce - and electricity is too cheap. then there is the whole issue of subsidies - without them - green is GONE - and from my sources - subsidies are on the chopping block (barring an oil embargo) - green is dead.

shutting down coal plants? read a report from Standard Charter 2 years ago - by 2015 1/2 of coal generators will be shut down - and NG will make up the deficit ( ) {{pssst - best use of NG is for transportation NOT baseload electricity so you and i get to play PONG on a HDTV}}...well I think the report is likely right - with a kill off raging by 2015 most all generators will be shut down. workers tend not to show up to work if they can't get food or gas. but hey - even if the kill off is postponed - who is spending 2 billion to get a coal plant built or for THAT MATTER solar (google Tessera Solar's 709MW CSP Project)?

distributive generation VS transmission...currently IPPs can make around 15%-17% IRR on transmission - now they tell you these projects are for green power...i have heard from a very high level that these projects are to consolidate the independent electrical grids in the country (WSCC/Bonville/TVA/ERCOT etc) and this makes sense to me - as electric utilities go BK - an effort to nationalize EVERYTHING will be in play - but hey -check back with me in 3 to 5 years and lets compare notes again.

what is HOT right now in the green field is 1-5MW behind the meter projects typically constructed on carports of schools and hospitals as well as on military bases. these projects are to save the school/hospital a few cents on their price of electricity (from .128kwh to .085kwh) can add up, but it is akin to pissing on a volcano.

money to finance large solar is NOT THERE - and now with solar gate all the rage - tax dollars will be even harder to come buy (hearing that brightsource may get some of their money taken BACK from the feds) electricity needs to be over .22kwh AND a FIT needs to be a part of that equation (Feed in Tariff)

I can say i am very busy in merger and aquisition work - 5,000MW since January...big dogs swallowing up little dogs, but this is no more then what we all saw in 2002-2007 flip a house has a new look - "flip a panel" is the new game...developers just want to "build value" in a young project (option land/get a PPA/do some due diligence) then sell to a greater fool - they have NO INTENTION of building most all green you speak of.

on being smarter - yeah - I agree with you, but that is meaningless bantor - our brains have not changed much in 200 years and the same issues of exceeding carrying capacity plagued the egyptians, greecians, ottomans, romans, english, mayans, incas etc...individually we may be intelligent - collectively we are dumb asses - really - your vision of homa sapien (knowing/wise) is a fantasy...controlling our populations and living sustainably will NEVER happen in a meaningful way (yes PM small enclaves here and there have pulled this off...so what?) - humans are not smarter than yeast Phildo.

Fucking beautiful post

Still doing some variations of that, as we speak.

Shutting the Coal plant(s) down now, and the Solar is back-logged waiting to get rid of the Coal surplus.

And power lines are still sort of in fashion, but I sort of suspect the the Distributed nature of what's coming may be hard on those folks, too.

But back to part about saving the day . . . does not so much need saving as just stopping being stupid with what we have got.

solar backlogged? utilities sign PPAs with solar/green developers JUST TO GET THEM OUT OF THEIR OFFICE...

Along with the state mandates that most utilities are under.

But do you follow that we agree? The Biggest Utilities Really Do Not Want solar. At least most of them. I am doing work under ERCOT -- if you are familiar with the Texas market? Biggest player just loves Coal and flirts with wind. Only Solar is from small scale local. On the other hand -- a couple of the City-Based Utils -- Austin and San Antonio are Very Favorable to Solar. Some of their rebates have gotten so high at times that contractors get in fist-fights waiting in line to sign up.

they do not want solar on their wires...they can almost tolerate wind. and if you are talking CSP - forget it - market is dead - water is scarce - and electricity is too cheap. then there is the whole issue of subsidies - without them - green is GONE - and from my sources - subsidies are on the chopping block (barring an oil embargo) - green is dead.

Agreed that the Treasury Grants will not likely be renewed past EOM Dec. 2011. So we are signing up some Million$ as "safe harbor" and/or under construction to coast through next year. Wind has been popular to the Biggie Corps -- but most location wind production profiles do not well fit Time of Use of power -- best wind at night, most power is used in the day.

While CSP hits the daily peak near perfect -- it suffers from tech-glitz. Pretty sad on that. Have done myself cheaper than Coal -- which was/is Google's goal in that domain. But most of the dingbats in the field seem obsessed with sticking storage on it, which doubles the cost. What is the point? Day time peak premium matches Solar Thermal production -- sell into the peak and be done with it.

shutting down coal plants? read a report from Standard Charter 2 years ago - by 2015 1/2 of coal generators will be shut down - and NG will make up the deficit ( ) {{pssst - best use of NG is for transportation NOT baseload electricity

Agreed that Coal is a dead man walking. Dunno we will get things shut down that quick, but you may be correct -- bankruptcy has a way of quickly re-ordering things.

btw, NG is not favored for baseload. All the old Nukes and Coal already own that market.

Most places baseload is already in surplus, and going more so, anyway. NG are natural peaker plants. But you already know that.

Overall, I am looking for overall baseload demand to keep dropping.

so you and i get to play PONG on a HDTV}}...well I think the report is likely right - with a kill off raging by 2015 most all generators will be shut down. workers tend not to show up to work if they can't get food or gas. but hey - even if the kill off is postponed -

Sorry if I do not chime in, but rather roll my eyes -- the Great Die Off, as with the Great Pumpkin, is something that might likely be more fantasy than fact -- by far. Fair enough? I am not trying to piss in your cheerios on that, but it is starting to sound like the late night religion Revelations End-Times Show.

who is spending 2 billion to get a coal plant built or for THAT MATTER solar (google Tessera Solar's 709MW CSP Project)?

There you go. Tech-glitz. Tessera was one of the first to go down in the surplus of the Great Recession -- or whatever we are calling this now. They took something as simple as dirt and had to try to make it Rocket Science. Retards.

And for real -- the Coal is going Off-Line. Aint nobody with a brain buying into that crap. But someone like . . . say . . . Buffett . . . who bought into trains last year stands to make some good money with all the PRB coming out of Wyoming.

distributive generation VS transmission...currently IPPs can make around 15%-17% IRR on transmission - now they tell you these projects are for green power...i have heard from a very high level that these projects are to consolidate the independent electrical grids in the country (WSCC/Bonville/TVA/ERCOT etc) and this makes sense to me - as electric utilities go BK - an effort to nationalize EVERYTHING will be in play - but hey -check back with me in 3 to 5 years and lets compare notes again.

Naw, we match on that. Even the Edison Institute came out and said the only real hope for the generation industry at this point is Electric Cars.

what is HOT right now in the green field is 1-5MW behind the meter projects typically constructed on carports of schools and hospitals as well as on military bases. these projects are to save the school/hospital a few cents on their price of electricity (from .128kwh to .085kwh) can add up, but it is akin to pissing on a volcano.

Yeah, should have the pix on the front page of one we recently did >>>

http://411nrg.com/

We work the rebates, grants and funding much harder so it turns out Much More favorable to the customers.

money to finance large solar is NOT THERE - and now with solar gate all the rage - tax dollars will be even harder to come buy (hearing that brightsource may get some of their money taken BACK from the feds) electricity needs to be over .22kwh AND a FIT needs to be a part of that equation (Feed in Tariff)

I can say i am very busy in merger and aquisition work - 5,000MW since January...big dogs swallowing up little dogs, but this is no more then what we all saw in 2002-2007 flip a house has a new look - "flip a panel" is the new game...developers just want to "build value" in a young project (option land/get a PPA/do some due diligence) then sell to a greater fool - they have NO INTENTION of building most all green you speak of.

That was how I happened to be dragged back in to -- laughing and shaking my head -- Big Power Land a little ways over a month ago. Part of why I wandered back in here -- LATOC-lite, as it were -- to get a sniff of which way(s) the wind is blowing. Guess you are familiar with CSAPR -- Coal Power Land is going bonkers.

http://www.epa.gov/airtransport/

But overall we agree that the Corps cannot save themselves -- let alone US. So now that we have jacked off about what we do and do not in the real world, and what is and is not -- let's start over at the starting theme of this thread? -- .MIL is coming to town.

on being smarter - yeah - I agree with you, but that is meaningless bantor - our brains have not changed much in 200 years and the same issues of exceeding carrying capacity plagued the egyptians, greecians, ottomans, romans, english, mayans, incas etc...individually we may be intelligent - collectively we are dumb asses - really - your vision of homa sapien (knowing/wise) is a fantasy...controlling our populations and living sustainably will NEVER happen in a meaningful way (yes PM small enclaves here and there have pulled this off...so what?) - humans are not smarter than yeast Phildo.

Sure. Have a coffee cup with the warning about Never Under-Estimate the Stupidity of People in Large Groups.

Titanic, Lemmings, Chasing Weapons of Mass Destruction . . . on and on.

Stupid is as Stupid does.

A 30 percent reduction in our use of petroleum would significantly improve our national security.

"our" is who? Is the nation (and nationalistic thinking) including "our" military?

Or like:
"Yo hummer-drivin' dude! If you consume 30% less petroleum, we (USA-types) could all feel safer."

??? he wouldn't understand and neither do i.

O and i'm one of those types who thinks "national interest" is a very useful myth for the 1%.

the military will get theirs and the rest will starve

i have said often - you want a view of 'merika's future look to north korea.

ito tessera - the technology doesn't work - had nothing to do with surplus - strang thing about the engine - the hotter it is outside - the less efficient it runs AND hydrogen does NOT like to be captured...it was dead before it started.

i ain't gonna get into the whole killoff religion thing with you - it ain't and 7 billion is too many.

but here's my question to you phil - you pick a number - any number you like (10 billion - 100 billion - 1 trillion - a Google) of humans you think can fit on this rock...then tell me what the plan is when your number comes up?

really phil - what do you propose to do as king of the world?