Center for a New American Security

Successfully implementing new energy programs at DOD installations often requires a sophisticated understanding of state regulatory bodies and coordination with public utility commissions. A recent example at the Twentynine Palms Marine base in California demonstrates why and what is at stake.

According to a recent Greenwire report, the Marine base’s natural gas cogeneration plant that produces electricity and hot water – powering at least 57 percent of the base – is running up against regulatory challenges as California prepares to put into force its 2006 landmark climate change bill that aims to cut the state’s greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.  While most state and federal greenhouse gas requirements exempt combat-related activities – especially for tactical vehicles – DOD’s installations are not fully exempt from those regulations. Acquiring additional exemptions requires DOD to reach an agreement with the individual state and local regulatory bodies enforcing those laws.

The Department of Defense is already making its case to the California Air Resources Board to reduce the burden on the Twentynine Palms base, according to Greenwire. “In comments filed last December with the California Air Resources Board (ARB), the Pentagon argued that the law may amount to an unconstitutional tax by a state on the federal government,” the report said. “Moreover, federal law could prevent DOD from participating in the trading portion of cap-and-trade scheme, the military argued. Being unable to buy allowances, DOD said, the base may be forced to produce less electricity from the plant in order to meet emission requirements.” That, of course, would hurt the base's efforts to reduce its reliance on the vulnerable civilian electric grid.

If you can today, thank a veteran for her/his service, or at very least keep America's vets in your thoughts today. Notably, the VA has also launched a new blog - VAntage Point - that is full of good reads.

Happy Veterans Day, everyone!

I'm going through my backlogged email from my week out of the office. While I was gone, my officemate, CNAS's USMC Senior Military Fellow LtCol Paul Deutsch was kind enough to pass along this year's "Commandant's Planning Guidance." Generally:

The future security environment requires a mindset geared toward increased energy efficiency and reduced consumption, thus allowing us to operate lighter and faster. We will aggressively continue our pioneering efforts in energy through our Expeditionary Energy Office, with goals of reduced energy demand in our platforms and systems, self sufficiency in our battlefield sustainment, and a reduced expeditionary foot print on the battlefield.

Under "Priority #2: We will rebalance our Corps, posture it for the future and aggressively experiment with and implement new capabilities and organizations":

Increase Energy Efficiency Director Expeditionary Energy Office (E2O) - develop a plan to decrease the Marine Corps’ dependence on fossil fuels in a deployed environment. Implementation of the plan shall begin during FY 11 and be fully funded in the POM 13 budget cycle. Concentrate on three major areas: (1) increase the use of renewable energy, (2) instilling an ethos of energy efficiency, (3) increase the efficiency of equipment. The objective is to allow Marines to travel lighter — with less — and move faster through the reduction in size and amount of equipment and the dependence on bulk supplies. (Due: 18 Feb 11)

In its description of the future security environment:

The future will not be like today. As we look ahead, we see a world of increasing instability and conflict, characterized by poverty, competition for resources, urbanization, overpopulation and extremism. Failed states or those that can not adequately govern their territory can become safe havens for terrorist, insurgent and criminal groups that threaten the U.S. and our allies....

The developing world is trending toward a more youthful demographic. Already pressurized by a lack of education and job opportunities, the marked increase of young men in underdeveloped countries will likely swell the ranks of disaffected groups, providing a more pronounced distinction between the “haves” and “have-nots.” At the same time, increasing competition for scarce natural resources — fossil fuels, food and clean water — will likely lead to tension, crisis and conflict. (emphasis all mine)

Despite Paul's Michigan alum status, it's always good to keep up on the language the leaders of each service uses in describing these challenges.

Last night, we hosted a top secret, off-the-record, “this didn’t happen” energy event with government and private sector experts who have a broad range of energy and national security expertise. Okay, so maybe it wasn’t as top secret as we’re making it out to be given the fact that we’re touting it on the blog this morning. But for the 42 of you reading this post this morning, certainly consider yourself in the know.

What follows below are some brief thoughts on the future of the military, the Department of Defense and our energy needs. We offer these points up as some food for thought as we take a step back from the event last night and go easy on the writing this morning:

We are all here because we care about energy security – finding reliably available, affordable, and sustainable supplies sufficient to meet our demand. DOD’s energy security is a more complex concept perhaps than that of the rest of the economy: our operations depend on global supply availability, adaptability for use in multiple platforms, and infrastructure resiliency. The ability of our soldiers, sailors and Marines to do their jobs is on the line. And as we were reminded last week by the news of refined fuel being smuggled from our allies in Iraq to Iran, in defiance of new U.S. sanctions, the geopolitical impacts of our current energy system often hit U.S. security and foreign policy interests particularly hard.

In recognition of the new, thought provoking CNAS publications released yesterday ahead of our Fourth Annual Conference, the Natural Security team will be analyzing our colleagues’ work this week on the blog, providing, of course, a Natural Security spin on the reports. Today’s featured report: To Serve the Nation: U.S. Special Operations Forces in an Era of Persistent Conflict, by Michele L. Malvesti.   

“[Special Operations Forces] are in the midst of a resurgence, with their core capabilities aligning with the irregular and potentially catastrophic security threats of today’s geostrategic environment,” writes Michele L. Malvesti in her recent report, To Serve the Nation: U.S. Special Operations Forces in an Era of Persistent Conflict.

When it comes to Natural Security, it may not be obvious how natural resources issues and climate change engage Special Operations Forces (SOF), their interests and core capabilities. But as Malvesti points out in her report, “U.S. Special Operation Forces are ideally suited to help protect and advance U.S. security interests in an increasingly complex geostrategic environment,” including, perhaps, the complex challenges associated with climate change and natural resource issues.  

Take climate change in particular. We have reported here on the blog before that SOF already play a role in responding to humanitarian crises in the wake of severe natural disasters, such as tropical storms. In fact, in a previous post here, I shared a Defense Department photo of U.S. Navy SEALs providing humanitarian relief to Filipinos in the aftermath of Tropical Storm Ketsana that left nearly a half-million displaced in the Philippines last September.

We take today to remember the men and women of the U.S. Armed Forces who have sacrificed their lives in service to our nation. And we thank the U.S. military men and women who, every day, continue to risk their lives to protect the United States - and their families who endure.

Photo: Flags of the U.S. Navy's Task Force Trident fly at half-mast in respect of two American and one Romanian NATO service members at Camp Mogensen at Forward Operating Base Lagman, Afghanistan on May 13, 2010. Courtesy of Chief Mass Communication Specialist Jeremy L. Wood and the U.S. Navy.

One of the things I find myself doing time and again while checking out any lengthy defense document is looking at the broad array of projects DOD branches will be, theoretically, undertaking. One of the common characteristics, however, is that due to the large volume of potential projects they often are simply listed and the really cool ones (read: Natural Security-related ones) get buried amidst projects to increase the number of portojohns at Wright-Patt AFB in Dayton, Ohio and the like (though that’s not a real project).

Check out eleven cool projects (including their costs and location in the FY 2011 NDAA), all of them are mapped out to their exact location, thanks to Google Earth!

Hey all. Not too much of a blog today, as we're a little preoccupied setting up for just about the most epic event to hit D.C. since Lady Gaga was last here in September.

The Willard's sure to be packed with the 450+ who have already confirmed their attendance for the event, hope you're one of them. You're not? We can make an exception for our blog reader faithfuls. Just RSVP here and we'll make sure you get a chance to check out the event that's been a topic of discussion all around town.

Taking part in the dialogue over issues of natural security (as featured in one of our latest publications, Broadening Horizons) will be the likes of Rear Admiral Philip H. Cullom, Director of Fleet Readiness Division on the Navy Staff, David Kilcullen, President and CEO of Caerus, and CNAS' own Bob Kaplan and Christine Parthemore.

Want to know the big news? The event is going to feature a keynote address from the Honorable Carol Browner, Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change.

Check out some live tweeting action on the CNAS twitter page. Hope to see you there!

Yesterday we released the third installment of our Promoting the Dialogue series on how climate change may affect DOD missions, equipment and capabilities. We’ve focused the resulting writings on ground, air and maritime forces, COCOMs, and the QDR and strategic planning processes. The most recent piece covers the ground forces, which for the purpose of this paper (and regardless of precision) includes the Army, Marine Corps and National Guard.

I will admit that one of the driving themes in my mind as I wrote this paper was the increasing frequency with which commentators are putting forth this answer to the question of how climate change will affect the U.S. ground forces: it will drive an increase in terrorism.

Now, I’m no terrorism expert, but you can’t hang out at CNAS and not at least understand the basics, even if it’s just by osmosis. I think that the leap to stating that it will directly drive an increase in terrorism is a bit of a distraction (and note that this suggestion often specifies Islamic extremism-based terrorism, not the Midwestern kind that seems to have been taking place in my hometown lately). I’m not saying that I fully understand the dynamics of what this linkage could be, but I do know enough to know that it would be complex and take a great deal of study to determine. Meanwhile, there may be more direct linkages between climate change and security challenges that are more important to focus our research efforts toward.