Center for a New American Security

• Defense News reports that the surge of troops into Afghanistan will strain supply lines into an "exceedingly prohibitive environment."
• The Wall Street Journal reported on the Environmental Protection Agency's declaration that greenhouse gases are “a danger to public health.”
• DOD Energy Blog reports on the military's plans to use nuclear power on installations, as laid out in a new paper by the Army's Reactor Program Manager.
• Pakistan's Daily Times report on calls for greater food security in Pakistan's Federally-Administered Tribal Areas, where al Qaeda and Taliban elements (pdf) are believed to be operating.
• According to Wired Science, the Department of Energy's new ARPA-E research agency is gearing up for a new round of funding for submitted projects. ARPA-E wants its research to focus on car batteries, carbon capture, and “microorganisms that can convert sunlight and carbon dioxide directly into fuels.”
• Green Inc. reports on Copenhagen, noting the Danish representative's plea for wealthy countries to foot the mitigation bill for poorer countries. Green Inc. also has a nifty chart depicting the climate policy progress of various countries.

President Obama announced on Tuesday that he is deploying 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan, beginning in early 2010. For troops already deployed and in theater, the onset of winter will exacerbate logistical challenges in Afghanistan as many of the main supply routes are narrow, dangerous roads that are easy for insurgents to target, and even more difficult to maneuver during the winter.

Photo: U.S. Marines conduct a convoy patrol on December 31, 2004 along the Khost-Gardez pass in Afghanistan in order to disrupt insurgent activity along the supply route. Courtesy of U.S. Marine Corps Cpl James L. Yarboro and the U.S Department of Defense.

Two weeks ago I wrote about the debate around what role the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) could play in analyzing climate change.  As I noted in that post, the CIA has already been playing a role since the mid-1990s. That got me thinking about the debate back when the CIA first stood up its Environment Center and started using its satellites to collect climate data. For this week’s Reading Old Magazines I took a look at an October 17, 1995 op-ed in The Washington Times, “Is the CIA being led astray?” While this is a newspaper article and not our usual old magazine, author Bruce Fein, a lawyer and free-lance writer with The Washington Times, offers some interesting points that help one understand the debate back when the CIA firsts began integrating climate change into its work.

During that time opponents seemed to bemoan looking beyond traditional security threats to include environmental concerns and climate change into intelligence assessments. “The national security of the United States is ill-served…by an agency without personnel made of sterner and less starry-eyed stuff,” Fein wrote. His suggestion that incorporating these concerns might pacify national security experts and intelligence analysts is indicative of the attitude at this time that including threats other than war was a luxury that could undermine hard security priorities.

• The Wall Street Journal reports on the geopolitics surrounding the Nord Stream Pipeline and how Russia is purposefully excluding Central European states with Germany’s help.
• Food security is an increasingly important issue for political and military leaders, the Financial Times reports.
• The New York Times reports on the human costs of Haiti’s environmental degradation, specifically how deforestation has led to scores of deaths. Meanwhile, Scientific American explores the role of recycling in the stabilization of Haiti.
• The DoD Energy Blog gives a first person account of energy use by Marines in Afghanistan.  
• Green Inc. explores the possibility of using models of oil reserve management for extending water supplies.

• The New York Times features a story on the people of Basra, who are miserably poor because they are unable to share in the vast oil wealth under their feet.
• The United States has delayed sending food aid to Somalia amid fears that it could be seized "by militants linked to al-Qaeda," The Washington Post reports.
• South Africa’s Mail & Guardian reports on a group of international military advisors working for The Hague who believe that climate change will contribute to conflict and instability in a number of ways.
• The Ottawa Citizen profiles Rear Admiral Neil Morisetti, a British military official who is trying to convince foreign governments of the security threats of climate change.  
• Danger Room’s David Axe writes in World Politics Review about a new strategy in Afghanistan that focuses on farmers. 

Yesterday the Woodrow Wilson Center's Environmental Change and Security Program hosted the Army Environmental Policy Institute’s 31st sustainability lecture on the Department of Defense’s (DoD) strategic energy opportunities and challenges. Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Environment, Safety, and Occupational Health Tad Davis introduced keynote speaker Dr. Amory Lovins who sits on the Defense Science Board’s Task Force on DoD Energy Strategy and helped advise the 2008 DSB report, More Fight – Less Fuel.

According to Lovins, DoD’s long energy logistics tail is putting the Department’s core mission at risk and it is paying for it in “blood, treasure, and lost combat effectiveness.” Fuel and fuel logistics are what has become largely understood as the “soft underbelly” of the Department of Defense. As Lovins pointed out, 1/2 of DoD personnel and 1/3 of its budget are dedicated to logistics. When the Defense Science Board was conducting its study several years ago it concluded that 1/2 of in-theater causalities were associated with convoys as well (though Lovins noted that this number does not reflect today’s total).  Lovins also pointed out that of the military’s top 10 most fuel-intensive platforms, 8 are noncombat systems. “It’s an odd way to fight a war when the water heater uses more fuel than a helicopter,” Lovins said.

Instead of writing a full recap of day one of the Naval Energy Forum, I thought I’d just present the highlights (below) as I Tweeted (Twittered?) them yesterday. You can watch today’s proceedings on the Navy’s website; our own Sharon Burke presents around 10:45 a.m. during a panel discussion on "Greening DON." Many interesting tidbits throughout the day, and noteworthy that they had about 700 attendees and still turned away another 100. These issues are growing concerns for the nation and for the U.S. military, in no small part because of the leadership the Navy has shown. My kudos to all our Navy friends for hosting this forum.

1. RADM Cullom: anticipating lots of littoral growth in Africa + lots of energy trade by sea equals energy is important.
2. RADM Cullom: energy and climate change linked; nod to ADM Titley and task force climate change.
3. RADM Cullom: logistics is an Achilles' heel of ours
4. LtGen W Williams: greatest need in usmc is to change behavior on the battlefield
5. In afghanistan biggest logistical vulnerability is water

“Energy has always been an important point in the military,” said Dr. Barbara McQuiston, special assistant for energy at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), in an October 6, 2009, interview with Armed with Science – a Department of Defense webcast. “You can go back to history and look at fodder to feed the horses in the Napoleonic wars; and you can look at today, all the way to Afghanistan where energy is a key enabler and, at times, a key limitation.”

Scientists at DARPA are working with multiple private sector partners on energy technologies that could have a “real game-changing nature [for] the future,” McQuiston said. In particular, DARPA scientists have a robust portfolio that includes programs in “energy creation, energy conversions, and energy control” aimed at improving tactical energy independence by shrinking the long logistics tail of forward deployed military units in countries like Afghanistan.

• Poorly-located wells in Khost Province, Afghanistan, originally built by well-meaning NGOs, have had negative impacts on irrigation for local farmers, according to Stars and Stripes.
• Scientific American has taken notice of the Navy’s proposals to test fuels made from algae and other sources.
• Reuters reports on one Canadian company's plans to explore mining for rare earth elements—in Norway, oddly enough—in partnership with the Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corp.
• Improved lithium batteries may be able to store energy more efficiently, powering cars and easing the transportation sector off its reliance on oil, according to The New York Times. As the Natural Security team has noted, however, this may be a case of trading one dependency for another.
• On the other coast, the San Francisco Chronicle reports that California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed an executive order mandating a renewable portfolio of 1/3 of the energy sold by utilities within the state.

We wanted to note the important natural security news items from the weekend, but this will be our only post today. Happy Labor Day everyone!

• Yesterday, The New York Times reported on local unrest in some Iraqi villages near Chinese oil operations in Wasit province.
• The Washington Post detailed on Saturday some of the water and resulting farming woes of Israel and Jordan, as well as the solutions each country is attempting.
• Several sources, including Reuters, are reporting that a bilateral climate change deal with China is likely to result from President Obama’s trip there in November.
• Multi-National Force-Iraq noted how U.S. forces and contractors are adjusting to water shortages, in an example of working with local Iraqis to best manage resources.
• Investigations continue into Friday's NATO bombing of two fuel tankers that had been hijacked by insurgents, which served as yet another example of the recently increasing attacks on fuel convoys.