“Water is a huge problem, as you all know, in Pakistan and Afghanistan. And Tajikistan has one of the greatest water potentials in the world. . . we have got a water resources task force now set up in the Department to examine how we can additionally help the countries of the area, and particularly Pakistan with the water issue.”
Special Envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke, Briefing on his Recent Trip to Afghanistan, Pakistan, Central Asia, Georgia and Germany, March 2, 2010.
“With more than 140 years of service in the Arctic and 11 statutory responsibilities there, the U.S. Coast Guard is at the center of efforts to adapt to [climate] change in the Arctic,” writes Christine Parthemore in her working paper, Promoting the Dialogue: Climate Change and the Maritime Services. “Its missions in the Arctic include protecting indigenous populations and marine life as well as law enforcement and interdiction. These missions give the Coast Guard unique responsibilities for managing the effects of environmental change on human populations in the Arctic.”
In Promoting the Dialogue, Parthemore explores the impact of climate change on the maritime services (specifically the U.S. Navy and U.S. Coast Guard) and synthesizes how these services are integrating climate change into their strategic and operational planning. “With access to the global commons and stability abroad potentially at stake, analyzing and addressing the effects of climate change will remain important to the ability of the Navy and the Coast Guard to successfully fulfill their missions,” Parthemore writes.
Photo: A U.S. Coast Guard cutter prepares to transport a science team to a remote ice floe to analyze Arctic sea ice. Courtesy of Aerographer’s Mate 1st Class Gene Swope and the U.S. Coast Guard.
Yesterday I made the journey over to the Hill to check out an interesting hearing for the House Armed Services Committee Readiness Subcommittee over energy management and initiatives on military installations. The hearing, overseen by Chairman Solomon Ortiz (D-TX), heard the testimony of four Defense Department officials: Dr. Dorothy Robyn, Deputy Under-Secretary of Defense for Installations and Environment; Mr. L. Jerry Hansen, Army Senior Energy Executive; Mr. Roger M. Natsuhara, Acting Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Installations and Environment; and Mrs. Debra K. Tune, Performing the Duties of Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Installations, Environment and Logistics. 
The opening testimonies from the four defense representatives can be accessed here: DOD; Army; Navy and Air Force. The hearing can be viewed here.
Rep. Ortiz started on two colossal renewable energy projects that the military services have undertaken, at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada and Fort Irwin, California. Despite his evident pride in renewable projects such as this, the initial concern of the hearing was how these and other energy initiatives have the potential to affect DOD operations and readiness negatively. Specifically, he cited the potential for wind farms and solar arrays to disrupt military training and radar, weakening both in-theater and homeland effectiveness. Each witness named this as a potential concern in their respective testimonies, which prompted Ortiz to inquire as to any established basis of information or study to support these concerns. Dr. Robyn noted that, to her knowledge, no projects have gone forward that have created any such problems. Natsuhara followed later with a reasonable statement what concerns them most is what is not known about the effects of most projects, but none of the panelists were able to offer any data supporting, or disproving, the concern for radar disruption.
Whether it’s to save money at the gas pump, reduce the impact on the environment, or get the solo ticket in the HOV lane inside the Beltway, people today are buying a lot of hybrid vehicles.
If you knew you would spend billions of dollars on fuel each year, saving money with hybrid vehicles would have an even bigger impact on the bottom line. That’s one reason why the Navy is investing in hybrid power plants for its ships.
For more reasons that just fuel savings, the Navy has a long-term goal of building completely integrated electric drives for new ships. But for ships in service today, the Navy is looking to hybrid-electric power plants on ships to save fuel costs. The USS Makin Island is the first Navy surface ship to be equipped with such a system.
Makin Island uses gas turbine engines and an auxiliary propulsion system (APS). The APS uses induction-type electric motors to power the ship’s shaft and drive the ship for roughly 75 percent of the time underway.
The demonstration does not stop with just one ship. Last summer, the Navy signed a contract with General Atomics and DRS Technologies to demonstrate the use of hybrid propulsion in the DDG-51 class destroyer in FY 2011. The Navy estimates it will cost $10 million to retrofit this system into each ship. Installing the hybrid electric drive system onto a DDG-51 class destroyer may reduce steaming costs by an estimated 16 percent and save approximately $2.5 million per year.
Makin Island is already saving us money. When she made her trip from Mississippi around South America to San Diego last fall, she consumed 900,000 less gallons of fuel than what another ship of her class would have consumed on the same journey. That translated into about $2 million saved just in the transit to homeport.
The benefits of hybrid drive propulsion on board Navy ships extend beyond the business case for saving money on fuel. It’s also about the mission. The operational impact of using less fuel at sea translates into more steaming days between underway replenishment. The added endurance allows ships to sail independently for longer periods of time and adds greater flexibility to expeditionary operations.
Yesterday was full of fun with the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the FY2011 budget. Here are the natural security-related exchanges from the transcript, beginning with Secretary Gates confirming that DOD is indeed working on alternative energy:
Senator Begich (D-Alaska): I'm trying to rapid-fire these, knowing my time is limited. Do you still -- in your DOD presentation of the budget, do you still have a very robust -- another issue separate -- alternative renewable energy program? I know that's been a big plus, to be very frank with you, with the military. You have been leaders in this area. Are you still fairly in your mind aggressive in this arena?
Sec. Gates: Yes.
* * *
In this line of inquiry, Senator Jeff Sessions seems quite concerned with fuel costs. Rather than drilling Admiral Mullen on this point, he could refer to page 87 of the QDR, which states that “DoD must integrate geostrategic and operational energy considerations into force planning, requirements development, and axquisition processes. To address these challenges, DoD will fully implement the statutory requirement for the energy efficiency Key Performance Parameter and fully burdened cost of fuel…”
Senator Sessions (R-Alabama): With regard to our procurement of major weapons systems, I know that the Department of Defense, Admiral Mullen, has focused on life- cycle cost. And I guess you would agree that things such as fuel and maintenance are important factors to evaluate if you're going to evaluate the cost of a weapons systems over a period of years.
Adm. Mullen: Yes, sir.
Senator Sessions: I know we did that on the tanker aircraft, and in fact, fuel and that sort of things are counted as evaluating that aircraft. Are you -- should that be applied to a procurement program like the Littoral Combat Ship, that the cost of fuel over its lifespan, should that be accounted for?
Adm. Mullen: I've long been concerned about lifecycle costs; I think, Senator Sessions, you know that, long before now. And the secretary pointed out, and I think very importantly, in his opening statement, that the programs that he cut last year actually had some lifecycle value, focused on about $330 billion. As far as what's in an RFP and what it's going to be focused on, that's something that I really can't comment on if that RFP is --
Senator Sessions: Well, I don't know, we've got our RFP in the Littoral Combat Ship that I'm told does not have factor for fuel costs.
Adm. Mullen: But you know more about it than I do. I haven't seen it.
Senator Sessions: Well, if that's so, would you be willing to look at it and ask questions, if that's a wise decision?
Adm. Mullen: Again, I've -- as I've said, I've been -- long time I've been concerned about lifecycle costs. Actually, one of the, I think, weaknesses of the acquisitions system is typically the line is not involved in it. The uniform side is not involved in it. So I'm not involved from that -- from that point of view --
The tragedy of human suffering in the wake of the recent earthquake in Haiti generated an outpouring of public and private support (PDF). In short order the movement to the ports and airfields of Haiti began, as relief workers and multinational troops surged the western front of the Island of Hispaniola with aid. What soon became apparent was that Haiti, already plagued by poor infrastructure, had become a logistical nightmare: Even with the influx of aid, hospitals vital to the relief effort(including those left standing and those erected in the field) have been virtually paralyzed due to an electrical grid that is in some places only temporarily functional, and in other places non-existent.
Securing adequate energy has been paramount for workers responding in Haiti, a priority driven home by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as she declared in Port-au-Prince on January 16 that she and Haitian leaders “discussed the priorities of restoring communications, electricity and transportation.” Without reliable access to electricity, the effectiveness of additional aid for medical treatment and recovery operations can suffer. So I decided to scan the news for indications of how energy is being provided.
Efforts to restore electricity in Haiti have been largely executed through an influx of gas-powered generators. Engineers have already attempted to triage energy distribution, providing what they could for the most pressing needs. In an effort to provide the fuel necessary to keep the generators running, the UN World Food Programme has shifted focus from foodstuffs to securing “an estimated 10,000 gallons, or nearly 38,000 liters, of fuel per day,” according to a recent U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) report (PDF). However, according to that document, USAID workers soon found that the fuel feeding the generators can raise other concerns:
as additional gasoline becomes available, roads have become more congested, hampering delivery of relief items. In addition to resulting in delays, the USAID/DART notes that traffic congestion increases security concerns, necessitating trucks to increase speeds and ensure that contents are not visible.
The relief effort’s current appetite for fuel has been somewhat staved off as solar panels and other self-sustaining sources of energy find their ways onto Haitian soil amongst the mountains of food and medical supplies.
Christine Parthemore and Will Rogers released their working paper, Promoting the Dialogue: Climate Change and the Quadrennial Defense Review, this morning. The working paper provides observations on how the Department of Defense incorporated climate change into the 2010 QDR and some possible outcomes of that process. "When the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) is sent to Congress on February 1st, it will offer an unusual opportunity to shift how the national security community views climate change," write Parthemore and Rogers.
To learn more about the "Promoting the Dialogue" project, click here.
Yesterday, CNASer Commander Herb Carmen and I were lucky to witness Navy Secretary Ray Mabus and Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack singing a memorandum of understanding on biofuels and renewable energy. Citing national security, economic and environmental rationales for increasing domestic energy production and innovation, the two departments agreed to cooperate to advance the president's energy and climate agenda. Loved the symbolism. Loved the explicit linking of security, environment and economy. Loved the corncob pen from Iowa that Sec. Vilsack gifted to Sec. Mabus. We'll be watching for news of how this partnership is working in practice. Have a great weekend everyone!
Naval Base Ventura County became the first Naval installation to receive the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Silver certification. Port Hueneme Building 1100, the Naval Facilities Engineering Command, was awarded the certification on January 8, 2010.
"We are proud of having the Navy's first sustainable, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certified existing building," said Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center Commanding Officer, Capt. Paz B. Gomez, in a press release. "By using less water and energy throughout our facility, we will reduce harmful greenhouse gas emissions and save thousands of dollars annually in energy costs for the fleet and American taxpayers. Moreover, as more military and civilian facilities adopt green building designs, our nation will become more energy independent and less reliant on foreign sources of energy."
Naval Base Ventura County takes its place next to USMC Camp Lejeune, the first Marine Corps base to be awarded Silver certification.
Photo: Port Hueneme Building 1100. Courtesy of the U.S. Navy.
If you put your ear up to the Oval Office and listen very carefully, you can hear the gentle sound of ocean waves lapping. That’s because the presidentially-mandated Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force (hereafter “the task force”) has just released its full report to supplement the interim report (pdf) already released in September. We have covered issues relating to the task force periodically on this blog, but I wanted to create a one-stop reference on the task force for you, dear readers.
President Obama authorized the task force on June 12 (pdf). It is an interagency effort, guided by the Council on Environmental Quality and consisting of representatives from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Department of the Interior, the U.S. Coast Guard, the U.S. Navy, and other agencies. The task force was charged with “developing a recommendation for a national policy that ensures protection, maintenance, and restoration of oceans, our coasts and the Great Lakes. It will also recommend a framework for improved stewardship, and effective coastal and marine spatial planning.” (Note: though I hail from the greatest city in the country, I’m not going to focus on the Great Lakes here). To this end, task force members traveled the country and held a series of public meetings (pdf all) to gather information on ocean issues. These matters may appear to be solely the purview of environmental policy makers, but the world’s oceans raise major security issues for U.S. national security policy makers as well.
Following on our theme of blogging about last weekend’s visit to the USS Harry S. Truman, we offer a shaky and hopefully entertaining photo of two natural security bloggers – Christine on the left and Will on the right – as the photo of the week. Here we are strapped into a C-2 COD (Carrier Onboard Delivery), a critical logistics aircraft which they told us was the safest plane in which to land on the carrier.
