Commanders in Iraq Urgently Request Renewable Power Options
Related Stories: Americas - USA, Asia - Central, Corporate Innovations, FOCUS Articles, Field Reports, Fuel & Power, Issues - Political, Leadership & People, Lobbying, Logistics, Middle East - Other, New Systems Tech, Other Corporation, Power Projection, Pre-RFP, Public Partnering, Transformation, Warfare - Lessons
(click to view full)
On July 25, 2006 Al-Anbar commander and U.S. Marine Corps Maj. Gen. Richard Zilmer submitted an MNF-W priority 1 request pointing to the hazards inherent in American supply lines, and noted that the up to many of the supply convoys on Iraq’s roads (up to 70%, by some studies) are carrying fuel. Much of that fuel isn’t even for vehicles – it’s for diesel generators used to generate power at US bases et. al. In response, the document requests alternative energy solutions to power US forward operating bases… and the US military looks like it will act on the request.
DID has covered a number of Pentagon projects to use alternative energy at various installations, but Zilmer’s request is believed to be the first formal request from a front-line commander. Not to mention the first formal request that acknowledges the security dimension of alternative energy sources in response to the growth of “systempunkt” terrorism and the non-linear battlefield. This is also an issue of cost, and reports indicate that foresighted CIA venture funding has even produced a front-runner for the coming contracts. Now, the US Joint Chiefs of Staff has denied Maj. Gen. Richard Zilmer’s request – but evaluation by the US Marines and Army Rapid Equipping Force continues…
The request reportedly calls for 183 renewable energy systems of various power capacities. More than anything else, however, Zilmer’s letter is about changing assumptions.
Well-known renewable energy advocate Amory Lovins, who advises a Defense Science Board panel on fuel efficiency, was quoted by Defense News as saying that the Pentagon’s fuel cost calculations have traditionally been based on wholesale prices, and have not taken into account the actual cost of delivering it to front-line units. Before the Iraq war, “fuel logistics were assumed to be free and uninterruptible.” Former CIA director and current energy adviser to the Pentagon and Congress James Woolsey adds this: “If you’re talking about getting the gas to an M1A1 tank in Fallujah, the supply lines, the tanker vehicles and their protection could drive the cost up to $100 a gallon or more.”
Which, interestingly enough, is about the price level that Halliburton subsidiary KBR got into trouble for, when it was responsible for providing fuel to US forces in Iraq.
The US military’s research and engineering director John Young has reportedly commissioned a task force on energy efficiency and renewable fuels, and says the Pentagon is trying to develop a more accurate calculation for the delivered price of fuel to forward-deployed troops. These calculations will then feed into future acquisition programs, adding much more weight to energy efficiency criteria.
(click to view full)
Meanwhile, in Iraq, the emerging conclusion is that one of the best ways to reduce casualties on the roads is to reduce the number of vehicles forced to use them. Defense News reports that the request said:
“If this need is not met, operating forces will remain unnecessarily exposed to IED, RPG, and [small arms fire] threats and will continue to accrue preventable Level III and IV serious and grave casualties resulting from motor vehicle accidents and… attacks. ...Continued casualty accumulation exhibits potential to jeopardize mission success.”
In addition…
“As we transfer control to the Iraqis, the addition of renewable and self-sustainable energy at the outlying bases will enable the Iraqis to operate independently, lessening the need for coalition forces to provide future logistics support….”
As Terry Pudas of the Pentagon’s Office of Force Transformation put it: “This is the beginning of the people trying to understand that the whole notion of energy means being more effective in operations.” A March 13/08 speech by Rep. Roscoe Bartlett [R-MD], ranking Republican member of the House Armed Services Seapower & Expeditionary Forces subcommittee, said that:
“70% of the tonnage delivered to deployed forces is fuel. Fuel delivery convoys to deployed forces add costs to the logistical chain and create targets for IEDs, the single greatest source of casualties in Iraq. Additional personnel protection measures to reduce casualties from IEDs, such as air cover or air transport substitutions for ground convoys, increase costs further.”
Zilmer’s document encloses a list of requirements a successful renewable energy system fielded to Iraq must be able to satisfy, and Iraq’s and Afghanistan’s climates certainly make solar power a very strong option. As the Penatgon considers deployment in climates ranging from Afghanistan’s mountains to Iraq’s river valleys, however, the ability to operate in climates from cold to tropical and wet to dry is an obvious need. The military’s reliance on diesel fuels, mostly derivatives of JP-5 and JP-8, means that generators and backups must be able to handle these jet fuels. Power output must cover a range of devices from 100 – 240 volts, and have enough storage capacity to run continuously for a minimum of 24 hours. Finally, the usual military requirements of transportability and storage enter in, since flexibility in getting them to global trouble spots and then moving them around in-theater is a major benefit for combat commanders.
As DID has noted, some efforts and directives are already pushing the US military in this direction. The Common Core Power Production (C2P2) program is a year-long demonstration & validation DoD/ USAF program to seek alternative, environmentally-sound fuel sources for troops in deployed locations. It would be deployed as part of BEAR (basic expeditionary airfield resources), or as backup power sources for stateside bases, and a fuel cell system is already being demonstrated at Robins AFB.
According to InsideDefense.com, Zilmer’s request singles out the Mobile Power System (MPS) (also knows as transportable hybrid electric power station, or THEPS), a containerized solution built by SkyBuilt Power. THEPS reportedly provides about 5kW of power on average, depending on weather conditions – not a huge amount, but potentially a useful amount for tactical scenarios.
SkyBuilt is an Arlington, VA firm who aims to become “the Dell of renewable energy systems.” Hopefully, this won’t entail the same drama of success, followed by government-subsidized Chinese competitors, but we digress. The firm has received funding from the CIA’s In-Q-Tel, a venture arm set up to fund innovative technologies that could benefit US national security.
Inside the Pentagon reportedly added that once the system is deployed, “the [ISO standard shipping] container can be used for a myriad of other, non-energy related functions like housing a command and control center.” This kind of dual transportation/use functionality is among the factors driving the gradual global military trend toward containerized systems, from hardened troop transports to field hospitals and even temporary bases. See this article for more examples.
With respect to costs, there’s no doubt that diesel generators are far less expensive – in the short term. As the MNF-W request noted:
“Comparison of the true costs (capital costs, maintenance, fuel, fuel logistics, etc.) of a 10 kilowatt diesel generator shows that a SkyBuilt Power MPS solar/battery system can cut those costs by at [least 75%] while improving reliability, saving manpower [and] spare parts, reducing or eliminating fuel costs, handling, and logistics, and providing a low heat signature…. The up-front capital costs of a 10 kilowatt diesel generator are around [$7,500-$10,000], much less than a MPS (around $100,000 depending on the configuration), but after only [three to five] years these costs are recovered….”
InsideDefense.com also added a follow-up recently, noting that The Army is moving ahead with plans to develop and test renewable energy systems in Iraq and Afghanistan next year, with the aid of its Rapid Equipping Force. A broad agency announcement is expected later this month, soliciting ”...innovative off-the-shelf products to provide integrated concepts for power generation that will reduce the amount of fuel shipped to remote operating bases and observation posts in a theater of operations” according to Air Force Capt. Brian Smith, project officer for REF’s renewable and hybrid energy research.
As DID’s articles today note, SkyBuilt may well face competition from military contracting veterans like Boeing, whose Spectrolab subsidiary just won a project in Australia which also aims to provide renewable, high-output solar power to far-flung communities. We will continue to cover this initiative as is develops.
UPDATES:
(click to view full)
June 2007: The USA’s Joints Chiefs of Staff has rejected Maj. Gen. Zilmer’s request, saying the solar and wind-powered technologies are “not mature enough” to send out the the battlefield. Danger Room relays the news from Inside Defense.
May 7/07: SkyBuilt announces that it had been selected as one of the three companies chosen to perform trade studies and design renewable energy trailer mounted power stations to reduce fuel use in the field for US Marines under the Multi-National Forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. This award is for Phase 1 of a three Phase program called DREAM, Deployable & Renewable Energy Alternative Module. SkyBuilt announcement, no permalink.
April 2007: National Defense Magazine’s “Alternative power sources sought for remote bases” covers alternative energy and water options for the front lines, and mentions that the US Army’s Rapid Equipping Force is evaluating Skybuilt’s transportable hybrid electric power station (THEPS). This is part of a larger effort. The director of the Rapid Equipping Force, Col. Greg Tubbs, has asked a group of energy experts to find commercial products that can be deployable within 18 months and that will reduce fuel consumption by 40%.
WIRED Danger Room later adds that he 45-day trial involves 4 units; the US Army REF is considering shipping units to 2 Djibouti and Kuwait for assessment, and then ordering more for Iraq and Afghanistan if the verdicts are positive.
Additional Readings:
- US Naval War College – Cebrowski Institute’s web site. Includes transcripts et. al. from the ongoing “Energy Conversation” series, sponsored in part by the Pentagon.
- Air University, Maxwell Air Force Base – War Without Oil: A Catalyst For True Transformation [PDF format]. Thesis by Michael J. Hornitschek, Lt Col, USAF. Hat tip to the Defense Tech article by Stephen Trimble, “Oil Free by 2050,” who highlighted it as a notably visionary piece. Is the vision achievable at reasonable cost? Read this Feb 17/06 thesis and decide.
- InsideDefense, via Military.com (Aug 11/06) – Renewable Energy Systems Wanted in Iraq. InsideDefense.com’s article is worth reading in full.
- DID (March 28/06) – Fuel & Energy Issues Continue to Get Spotlight in US Military. Includes recent US military fuel use & cost figures.
- DID’s (March 17/06) – Energy Conservation Moving Up Pentagon’s Agenda.
