 |
| Inside the Middie Dome |
Quick reminder for all DOD Energy Fans that the Army Energy Initiatives Task Force Summit is tomorrow, 3 November 2011 from 0900-1300 at the Admiral Gooding Center, Navy Yard in Washington, D.C.. We will hear from the White House and Army Energy folks on the way ahead for large, 3rd party financed, renewable energy projects to help the Army meet its goal. They are looking for some $7.1 Billion in investment over the next 10 years, so bring your checkbooks!
Several times in these postings, I have chided the government over the issue of vision without resources. It appears that the Army is now putting its money where its mouth is. Last week the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Huntsville office released a request for information for “Sources Sought: Renewable and Alternative Energy Power Production for Army Installations”. The estimated value of the proposition is between $50 million and $900 million.
Before we go popping champagne corks, we need to review the bidding. A Sources Sought notice is simply a summary posted by an agency so that they can see what is out there in support of a project possibility. It is not a solicitation for work, nor is it a request for proposal. (Reference the Federal Acquisition Regulations, Subpart 7.3 and OMB Circular A-76). If there are sufficient “sources”, the government may develop a scope of the work they require that can be later refined into a statement of work (SOW). The SOW would then be included in a request for proposal or quote (depending on specificity) for discrete project requirements. This is akin to chumming the water to bring the big fish in.
In this particular case the USACE “intends to solicit and award multiple, indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (ID/IQ) contracts for use in competing and awarding Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) task orders”. They are looking for contractors to come build renewable and alternative energy production facilities for Army use that are on or near Army installations. The contractor will be responsible for financing, building, operating and maintaining energy production facilities. The reason a contractor would do this is for a guarantee that the Army and/or local utility (depending on the local laws) would purchase the power on a long term basis. According to the announcement, “the length of contract for the sale of the energy to the Army cannot exceed 30 years”. WHAT??
Ok, this is going to get a little legally nerdy. For a long time, only one of the Services felt that they had the authority to enter into long term power purchase agreements for renewable energy other than geothermal. U.S. Code 2922A says that the Service Secretaries can enter into energy or fuel contracts up to 30 years, but only for (1) “under section 2917 of this title” (geothermal) ; and (2) “for the provision and operation of energy production facilities on real property under the Secretary’s jurisdiction or on private property and the purchase of energy produced from such facilities”. Unless waived, it still requires the SecDef’s approval, so who is really calling the shot? Secretary Panetta!
For some time the Navy has interpreted piece of Code differently. At the 2011 Association of Defense Communities, CAPT Clayton Mitchell presented NAVFAC Energy Offices view. In their opinion, Section A(2) is the operative statement, but applies to all energy, not just geothermal. This provision has never been used; the Navy’s Miramar Land Fill Gas project could be the first to test the water.
At last week’s USAF Alt Energy Symposium in Tuscon it was stated (by person unknown), that DOD was intending to move forward on the use of 2922A for energy other than geothermal and now we have the Army hinting that they will do likewise. All they have said is that it cannot exceed 30 years, not that they would do 30.
The big deal here is that 30 year power purchase agreements are a big deal. Banks like 30 year income streams guaranteed by the U. S. Government. Absent the default of the USG, this is money in the bank. It is also a way to energy security via third party financing and public/private partnerships. I hope that lots of companies submit for this “Sources Sought” and lots of great partnerships are established. I also hope that the scope of this is closer to the $900M than the $50M (Congress, are you listening?).
DOD has to have energy security and it is worth paying a nickel extra for clean, economic and secure energy. I have cautioned that DOD should not be looked to as the driver of the clean energy market. DOD’s mission is to fight and win the Nation’s wars, not stimulate the economy or open markets. That being said, a significant investment for energy the Army already needs, in renewable technologies cannot help but have a positive effect on those industries. We still have a long way to go. Dan Nolan
The Army and Air Force are joining together for this year's energy forums. Scheduled for 19-20 July at the Hyatt Regency, Crystal City, Arlington, VA, registration is now open here.
Today in sunny San Antonio, the ASA, IE&E dropped the seventh veil and revealed the names of the 17 Army/Joint installations selected for the Net Zero Energy, Water and/or Waste contest. With over 100 applicants in the three categories, the winners are as follows (drum roll please):
A Net Zero Energy Installation produces as much energy on site as it uses, over the course of a year. The Army's Pilot Net Zero Energy Installations are:
Additionally, the Oregon Army National Guard has volunteered to pilot a unique and challenging Net Zero Energy initiative, which includes all of their installations spread across the entire state. This strategy will be included in the environmental analysis.
A Net Zero Water Installation limits the consumption of freshwater resources and returns water back to the same watershed so as not to deplete the groundwater and surface water resources of that region in quantity and quality over the course of a year. The Pilot Net Zero Water Installations are:
A Net Zero Waste Installation reduces, reuses, and recovers waste streams, converting them to resource values with zero landfill over the course of a year. The Army's Pilot Net Zero Waste Installations are:
Net Zero Installation is comprised of three interrelated components: Net Zero Energy, Net Zero Water, and Net Zero Waste. Two installations have volunteered to be integrated Net Zero Installations:
At a later briefing by the DASA, E&S a timeline for NEPA was shown that indicated that the intent was to begin site specific NEPA work as early as November 2011. Since site specific work cannot be done until a project is selected and all projects will be funded via ESCP, UESC or EUL, the timeline to get RFPs out, proposals back, down selection and contracting is very tight. This, coupled with the fact that IMCOM has to reduce its civilian work force by 10,000 by October 2011 according the LTG Lynch, IMCOM CG, means a very aggressive timeline to accomplish fearsomely complex contracting with less folks to do it. I hope the benefits of being selected for this pilot program are worth it. I am reminded of the old say, “Be careful what you wish for; you might get it”. Dan Nolan
*Winner in two categories
Acronym Soup:
ASA, IE&E – Assistant Secretary of the Army for Installation, Energy and Environment
DASA, E&S – Deputy Secretary of the Army for Energy and Sustainability
NEPA – National Environmental Protection Act
ESCP – Energy Savings Performance Contract
UESC – Utilities Energy Services Contract
EUL - Enhanced Use Lease
IMCOM – Installation Management Command
The Army is leveraging available authorities for private sector investment, including using power purchase agreements (PPA), enhanced-use leases (EUL), energy savings performance contracts (ESPC), and utilities energy service contracts (UESCs) as tools to achieve these objectives.Third party financing has many obstacles. PPAs require cooperation of the utilities and electricity produced at competitive rates. EULs require a PPA to work and PPA may not be economic. ESPCs require measurement and verification performed by the same vendor who performed the work, a bit off putting for some commanders. UESCs require no M&V at all. All physical work done on federal property requires National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) work, which if left to the contractor, increases the cost of the project (if the government picks up work it can be done cheaper and faster). An example of the contractor having to bite that bullet is the Fort Irwin effort. In that case, an EUL is used, coupled with a PPA. According to a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' paper, this $2 billion/13 year 500MW solar project, begun in December 2008 is now in the second year of what is hoped to be a two year NEPA permitting process.
In an interview with bloggers last October, Katherine Hammack, the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Installations, Environment and Energy announced that the Army would be taking a holistic approach to the concept of Net Zero. It was recognition that one can’t consider energy without considering the other two key commodities that impact it: water and waste. The Army has now published its vision for Net Zero, "Everything" in a new document. They have defined Net Zero as a force multiplier. They have also asked installations to nominate themselves for the program which will select five winners in April. Installations will have to fill out forms and write essays that show how they can be NZ Energy (produces as much as they use over a year), NZ Water (limit the consumption of freshwater resources and return water back to the same watershed so (as) not to deplete the groundwater and surface water resources of that region in quantity and quality over the course of a year) and NZ Waste (zero landfill). The NZ energy and waste are clearly measureable, but the water goal seems a bit obscure.
If an installation is selected, there is no guarantee of additional funds, but Ms. Hammack has stated she will, “leverage available resources and expertise to provide initial training and technical support throughout the pilot process”. Further, the vision states that the intent is to leverage private sector investment using “power purchase agreements (PPA), enhanced-use leases (EUL), energy savings performance contracts (ESPC), and utilities energy service contracts (UESCs) as tools to achieve these objectives”.
Right now there are seven Army installations in the running for the trifecta of Net Zero. Hammack will announce the winners at the Installation Management Command's Garrison Commanders Conference in San Antonio, Tx on 19 April 2011. This is a bold, audacious goal. But it needs a champion. Enter Chairman Lynch.
In Hot, Flat and Crowded, Tom Friedman has a chapter entitled “China for a day”. He muses on the ability of China to direct a massive infrastructure to become more energy efficient and use more alternative energy. It is what gives China the competitive advantage, the ability to operate within the decision cycle of her opponents. We do not have that same advantage in a free society. But we do have DOD. LTG Rich Lynch, Commander of the Army’s Installation Management Command (call sign: Defender 6) has embraced the Net Zero vision. He lays out the steps to reaching NZ through reduction, repurposing, recycling and composting, energy recovery and disposal. IMCOM has the potential to provide the leadership necessary to achieve this goal. IMCOM can be China.
What are really required are the public/private partnerships necessary to make this happen. The Army and industry, at all levels, must recognize what has to be done to make these partnerships work. Both sides need to realize that the partnership must be mutually beneficial. This means reasonable cost for enhance use leases and reasonable margins for ESPCs and UESCs. And DOD must engage the utilities or no PPA will ever be economical. As these instruments are applied to the NZ Water and Waste commodities, the same requirements obtain.
The Army is setting the vision, but industry must carry the load. We look forward to the announcement of the 5 winners (?) this year and for the twenty five to come. The lessons from these efforts will inform what every city, town and village in the nation must do to truly gain energy security.
The January 2011 edition of Soldiers Magazine was themed “Modernizing the Force”. The magazine described the Army’s concept for keeping pace with everything from munitions to uniforms in an era of shrinking budgets and an over stretched force. The technologies ranged from GPS guided artillery munitions to bringing back the Light Assault Weapon (LAW). In addition to the suite of unmanned vehicles and robotic surrogates, Army efforts in energy are highlighted in the final articles.
R&D for Soldier power in the form of conformable, rechargeable batteries and propane fuel cells are discussed. Conformable, prismatic lithium ion batteries are commercially available. The real challenges are the propitiatory connectors required for different power using devices. Fuel cells running on JP8 are also under development at TARDEC; this will tamp down the arguments from DLA-E about single fuel on the battlefield.
Another piece discusses how Charlie Troop, 5-73rd CAV ”discovered 25 solar-powered water filtration machines locked up in an old hangar at Forward Operating Base Hammer, east of Baghdad”. The troop repaired and deployed the systems and began providing 30K gallons of water a day on sun power. The unit that replaced the troop took up the mission. A local village leader said. “Saddam couldn’t get us water. Bin Laden couldn’t get us water. Muqtada Al-Sadr couldn’t get us water. Now, the American Soldiers have finally brought us water.”. A great news story, but one wonders what the Army is doing to follow up on that success. The article does not say who produced the systems, who procured them or whether more are being deployed.
A couple of CONUS energy efforts were also featured. A series of small renewable energy projects from solar walls at Fort Drum to “the Army’s largest solar power site” , a 2 MW array at Fort Carson, described in this January 2008 article. No word on the much touted 500 MW arrays planned for Fort Irwin, CA.
A cooperative geothermal exploration program pairs the Navy with the Army to explore the potential for 30 MW of power production at Hawthorne Army Depot, Nevada. The program, begun in December 2009 with an MOA between the departments, is based upon the Navy’s success with their 20 year old, 250 MW plant at China Lake. Their project sells the power to the local utility with the Navy receiving payments from the plant operator. Standing by for news on what the study produces.
This particular article finishes with Doug Waters, manager, Renewable Energy and Net-Zero Energy Installations Program, Facilities Policy Division, ACSIM stating that the Army will bring on 1,500 MW of renewable energy power by 2017. Mr. Waters was the senior Army official quoted in the series of articles. 300 MW a year for the next five years; now that is a bold, audacious goal. We look forward to seeing that plan.
DOD and the Department of the Army named Richard Kidd as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Energy and Partnership. This post, vacant for nearly two years, is responsible for Army Energy Security and, among other things, Utilities Privatization.
Mr. Kidd, a 1986 West Point grad and former Infantry Officer, has extensive experience in government, serving with the U.N., State Department and Department of Energy. Most recently he was responsible for the Federal Energy Management Program. No one has more extensive knowledge of the mandates and policies surrounding energy that are profligate in the Federal Government. In that position he worked tirelessly to promote closer relationships between DOE and DOD. This culminated in an agreement signed in July 2010. The MOU focuses on cooperation between the agencies to enhance energy security. Kidd inherits the Army Energy Strategy Implementation Plan which focuses on “identifying, integrating and executing specific actions to achieve the Energy Security Objectives (ESOs)”. We wish him the best of luck as he works to identify the resources necessary to execute this very ambitious strategy.
Just returned from the Fort Bliss Tank and Automotive Research and Development Command (TARDEC) two-day Renewable Energy Rodeo and Symposium in balmy El Paso Texas. The event, hosted by Major General (MG) Bromberg, the Commanding General of Fort Bliss, and Dr. Bochenek, Director, TARDEC, featured 50 industry and government displays and over 200 attendees. The idea for this event came out of last year's Association of the United States Army Symposium in Washington D.C.. MG Bromberg and Dr. Bochenek were panelists on an Energy breakout session, and their conversation became an unprecedented collaboration between the U.S. Army's Research and Development Command (RDECOM) and their Training and Doctrine Command.
All of the major defense industry players were there as well as some very interesting new comers. Dr. Bochenek and MG Bromberg even brought in the Department of Energy, the ubiquitous Richard Kidd, Director of the Federal Energy Management Program. Mr. Kidd has been tireless in promoting greater interaction between DOD and DOE and he deserves recognition for his efforts. There were many great panel discussions with subject matter experts from DoE labs, the Army Corps of Engineers, and even DoD in the form of Drex Kleber, the Tony Robbins of the "Green Hawks". As the last speaker of the last panel on the last day, Drex was between us and a beer, yet he keep everyone's attention with a great discussion on why we do not need Culture Change, we need Culture Exploitation to create behavior change. Check him out at the next energy conference, bar mitzvah or mall opening he does.
As good as the conference was, it was notable for who was not there. I will admit I am a bit of a glass half empty guy on this subject. The discussion on Enhanced Expeditionary Energy Self-Sufficiently was given by Dr. John Barnett from the National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL) and veteran of the Marine Energy Assessment Team's (MEAT) deployment to Afghanistan. Dr. John did a great job, but I would like to have from someone in Training and Doctrine Command describe how we are considering the deployed energy challenge in terms of doctrine, training, organizations, leader development, material, and soldiers.
Dr. Cynthia Lundgren from the Army Research Lab (ARL) did a decent job discussing Army Energy Initiatives, but I was hoping that someone from the acquisition community could also have been there to discuss current efforts like the HI-Power program. DOD really did try to answer, then-USMC MG Zilmer's 2006 request for hybrid power with $30 million to the Army, but there was no one there who was knowledgeable on the program. Finally, the Corps of Engineers was ably represented by Stacy Hirata, Chief of Installation Support, but I could find no one from Installation Management Command or Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management in the crowd other than some folks from Fort Irwin and Fort Bliss. Their absence was definitely noticed.
Despite the holes in the attendee list, MG Bromberg and Dr. Bochenek are to be saluted for stepping up to the plate for the Army on energy. For an organization consumed with the daily prosecution of two wars, the health and well being of an over stressed force and the critical impact of the SecDef's recent decision to spend real money on those wars, they were able to pull it off. I also want to commend their staff for making it happen; this was no mean feat to execute in the short time they had. Well done COL Simonelli and staff.
Sadly, we were informed that MG Bromberg would be leaving his command for a new assignment. I hope it comes with another star and greater authority. We need him. The good news is that he will be succeeded by MG Dana Pittard, late of HQ, TRADOC and a former commander of the National Training Center at Fort Irwin. MG Pittard has been in the energy security arena since his days at Irwin and I am sure he will take up the torch from MG Bromberg for Fort Bliss. Again, thanks to everyone who made this such a superb conference. See you in Dallas for GovEnergy.Thanks Dan. Myself and many DOD Energy Blog readers will be joining you there.
Army
Energy security is a key component of Army installations, weapons systems, and operations. The Army has developed a comprehensive energy security strategy, and is acting now to implement initiatives to make us less dependent on foreign sources of fuel and better stewards of our nation’s energy resources. In support of these goals, we fielded the largest hybrid vehicle fleet within the Department of Defense. Energy will continue to be a key consideration in all Army activities in order to reduce demand, increase efficiency, seek alternative sources, and create a culture of energy accountability, while sustaining or enhancing operational capabilities.
Navy
In order to meet our readiness challenges, the Department is working to develop greater energy independence and conservation ashore and afloat. Energy costs siphon resources away from vital areas. The potential for disruption and the possible vulnerability of energy supplies could threaten our ability to perform on the battlefield. The Department of the Navy has made good progress in increasing energy efficiency, reducing energy consumption, and capitalizing on renewable energy sources. We are the Department of Defense lead for solar, geothermal, and ocean energy, and today, 17% of our total energy requirements are provided through alternative or renewable sources. The Navy and Marine Corps can, and should, do more. As we continue to increase conservation and develop alternative energy options, the Department of the Navy can mitigate the impact of energy volatility, use energy as a strategic resource for operational advantage, and become a leader in environmental stewardship.
Air Force
As part of our institutional effort to consider energy management in all that we do, the Air Force requests $250 million for energy and water conservation projects in FY11. This investment will ensure we meet the President’s efficiency goals by 2015. In FY10, the Air Force finalized an energy plan that directs the development and use of reliable alternative energy resources, and reduces the life-cycle costs of acquisition programs. Additionally, the plan recognizes that aviation operations account for over 80 percent of the energy used by the Air Force each year, and directs Airmen and mission planners to continue managing aviation fuel as an increasingly scarce resource.
The direction we want to go is twice as much power on a vehicle and half the weight on a soldier, to get us away from having to cart around 6-8 batteries. When it comes to vehicles, there is a critical need to get away from the logistical tail that dragging around extra generators brings to a mission. [Army Capabilities Integration Center] ARCIC wants to build that generating capability into a truck, as opposed to relying on external sources like generators.Then there's this part re: new tactical energy management systems from BAE. I'd say you have to like the improvements you get with the application of these approaches and technologies:
Critical to the expeditionary nature of combat, as well as the multiple humanitarian and peacekeeping missions the military has been tasked with in recent years, the power-management system also has the ability to produce 30 kw. of export power. This is essential for operations in places like Haiti where, after the recent earthquake, infrastructure was destroyed and millions of people were left without electricity and clean water. By exporting so much power, one vehicle is able to perform tasks such as powering a command center, field hospital or water-purification system—all without having to haul around generators and the fuel needed to run them, which adds time, expense and complexity to the logistics chain.There's more too. Recommend you read through to the end. Not sure whether present or future energy metrics are playing a role here, or whether it's just good common sense plus innovative engineering getting together to accomplish some big breakthrough things. Either way, this work by the Army (and also the Marines) is one of the best developments of the year so far. Let's watch it. And thanks again, Ollie.
