Energy Storage for DOD & IC Energy Security

Try not to get greedy, but it looks like legendary but MIA DOD Energy blogger Dan Nolan has just emerged and offered up a tapas-sized post. Let's see how he does:

One of the nation’s mission critical facilities is going green or at least getting more energy secure. DOD has deployed 1.6MW of solid oxide fuel cells in support of undisclosed NSA facilities at Fort Meade, MD. The system, supplied by Bloom Energy and installed by ARGO Systems, a Service-Disabled, Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB), was announced yesterday. You can read the press release here.

In watching fuel cell development over the past decade, I was always told they were 5 years away, and had been for the last 15! Apparently, someone was able to figure out the value of energy security that is provided by a sustainable, reliable, and secure power generation system. I guess if you are running the servers that are processing EVERYTHING (according to Glenn Greenwald) maintaining energy security is important. As much battering as the good folks at the NSA have been taking, let me be the first to say, “Way to Go, Green!” - Dan Nolan

DOD Energy Tech Advance: NRL's Seawater-to-Fuel Alchemy

Sorry, it's been a while, but this news echoed something a Navy friend in Idaho told me earlier this week and I was compelled to post. It's not about transmutation of lead into gold, it's not water into wine, rather it's something far more important to US and DOD operational energy assurance: a process to turn seawater into fuel for ships and aerial vehicles.

Here's a blurb from DOD's science blog (bet you didn't know DOD had a science blog):

The potential payoff, according to the Navy, is the ability to produce fuel stock at sea or in remote locations. Aside from being convenient – utilizing resources around you for an immediate need is a benefit that speaks for itself – this will reduce the logistics tail on fuel delivery with no environmental burden. This also increases the Navy’s energy security and independence.

Vice Admiral Phil Cullom, no stranger to the DOD Energy Blog comments on what drives research like this:

We need to reinvent how we create energy, how we value energy and how we consume energy.

Seems to me the NRL researchers are turning Cullom's aspirational words into a near-term reality.  Great stuff. You can read the full post, including videos, HERE.

Image credit: "The Alchemist" by David Teniers the Younger on Wikipaintings.org

Hybrid Hopes for Greatly Reducing Operational Base Fuel Requirements

Sounds like a microgrid disguised as a generator.  See what you think:

Today, the U.S. military powers its operating bases with diesel generators that run continuously. The problem is that it’s difficult to match the generating capacity with the actual power load from air conditioners, electronics, and other gear, which fluctuates during the day and in different seasons. And when the demand for power is lower than the generator’s full capacity, the fuel efficiency drops off dramatically and the maintenance increases.

...

Earl Energy’s FlexGen “hybrid generator” is wired to a diesel generator running at full capacity, which is how it's most efficient. When there is excess power, the diesel generator charges the batteries. If the batteries have enough stored energy to meet the demand for electricity, then the generator shuts off. In tests in Afghanistan, the Earl Energy system allowed the generators to run three to six hours a day, compared with around the clock before it was installed, says Doug Moorehead, the CEO of Earl Energy.

Often in stories like these there's a rub.  But if those real-world results from Afghanistan were achieved without any many compromises, then this is clearly a big win in an area we've made almost no progress for decades.  Will be keeping an eye on Moorehead and Earl Energy for sure.

Full IEEE Spectrum article: HERE.

Conference Alert: Defense Energy Summit

Haven't been this enthused about an energy conference since GovEnergy (RIP).  The line-up of speakers would be hard to beat. Though there's a caveat.

The vast majority of senior DOD and government speakers haven't yet confirmed, most likely due to frozen travel budgets (tagged with * below). Maybe some of them, like Senator Cornyn, even though Texas is a quite large, can simply drive. But the challenge is more significant for Washingtonians.

Listed Speakers

• Sharon Burke, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Operational Energy Plans and Programs US Department of Defense
• Jonathan Powers, Federal Environmental Executive, The White House
• Senator John Cornyn, State of Texas*
• Chuck Hagel, Secretary of Defense*
• Richard Kidd IV, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Energy & Sustainability, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army Installations, Energy & Environment, US Army*
• General Martin Dempsey, Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff*
• Thomas Hicks, Deputy Undersecretary of the Navy/Deputy Chief Management Officer, US Navy*
• Kevin Geiss, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Energy, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Installations, Environment and Logistics, US Air Force*
• John Lushetsky, Executive Director, Army Energy Initiatives Task Force, US Army*
• Honorable Katherine Hammack, Assistant Secretary of the Army (Installations, Energy & Environment), U.S. Army
• Chris Smith, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary and Acting Assistant Secretary for Fossil Energy US Department of Energy

Nevertheless, the program looks very strong with or without the keynotes. I'll be there for sure.*

Details

When: November 11-13, 2013
Where: Austin, TX
For more info and to register: www.defenseenergy.com

A Different Kind of Weapon: We'll Attain the Future with Lasers

From DEB's FutureWatch desk, we bring you tales of 1.9 Gigajoules, and the potential to power all the world's grids sans fossil fuels. Bring on better electricity storage, and we may get to worry about other things in the future besides energy. There's security in that.

You may call me a dreamer, but I'm not the only one. Dan is too. As well as the folks at the National Ignition Facility (NIF) at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California. See what you think. Andy

An Important Argument to Watch for DOD's Energy Future

In the energy sector, the price of a barrel of oil isn't the only thing that's highly volatile. The future is too.

Here's a LINK to a recent piece in the Wall Street Journal where energy gurus Daniel Yergin and Vinod Khosla debate how quickly cleantech will begin to substantially supplant fossil fuels in the US.

This is Yergin responding to a question about the future, starting with a look back to the very recent past:

... [T]he world was going to run out of oil. It was peak oil. And we were going to be importing so much natural gas that we would be paying $100 billion a year to import natural gas. That was five years ago. The picture changed. The picture will change in five years.

and,

[Regarding national security], we've talked a lot about natural gas today. But what is also striking is what's happening in U.S. oil, with what's called tight oil and the development of that. You look at Canadian oil sands. You look at what's happening offshore of Brazil. And you see this kind of re-balancing of world oil going on, where probably 10 years from now the Western Hemisphere will be getting a lot less oil from the Eastern Hemisphere to begin with.

In case you couldn't tell, DOD Energy Bloggers like Dan and myself have a passion for cleantech and a more sustainable energy future for the US and the US military. But more than that, we put the interests and security of the country and the armed forces well ahead of our goals for new energy sources and energy efficiency.

I think you can hear in Yergin's response a sense that the world has just shifted, and that the US has moved quickly from a net energy importer to a potential energy exporter and that this condition may hold for the near and mid-term future.

Clearly, DOD's got to keep itself fully up-to-speed on the current version of the energy future and I believe it is.  This re-balancing thing ... there's security in that. Andy Bochman

Local Energy Efficiency Co. Makes Good (with DOD)

Local to me, that is. Also local to the point of origin of the USA. That's Lexington, Mass-based FirstFuel Software. The company and its product sound solid, though I'm sure Dan's going to ask why they're not called FifthFuel.

We blogged on the OSD's installation energy test bed program a few months ago HERE, and in one of the embedded links, you can find DOD's description of how it intends to explore FirsFuel's capabilities:

This project will demonstrate the Rapid Building Assessment tool for DoD buildings, a software powered information service for accelerative energy efficiency adoption across building portfolios. The tool uses statistical methods and advanced data mining techniques to provide building-specific performance benchmarks and custom recommendations.

We all know that the numbers of DOD buildings and the square feet they contain boggle the imagination and dwarf Walmart. Now here's what appears to be an ultra-low touch method for rapidly assessing energy performance and identifying the lowest hanging fruit improvements in each across the entire fleet.

You can read a little more on this at online tech-zine Xconomy, one of the best technology news sources you've never heard of. Hmmm, and while they're at it, maybe DOD can test your house (and mine)! Andy Bochman

In Certain Scenarios, DOD Would be Better Fueled by Fuel Cells

DOD needn't wait to start benefitting from new fuel cell capabilities, and three use cases in particular are the most promising for existing commercial fuel cell tech, according to a report just out from LMI:

1. Distributed power generation - as in for base load power, as well as heating and cooling needs, can  be provided by fuel cell systems. This gets you energy efficiency gains and reduced: operating costs, building energy intensity, and emissions
2. Backup power - here the benefits are improved reliability, lower maintenance, longer life, lighter weight, and lower emissions
3. Unmanned vehicles - aerial and otherwise. Improved capabilities like extended range, reduced maintenance, and more are are possible

Of course, all of these benefits add up to improved energy security: bases less dependent on their local grids and operational forces that can more readily power themselves without waiting for the next convoy to come over the pass.

It's not DOD's mission to develop or incubate new technologies.  Far from it. But arguably, by showing how young technologies can solve its specialized problems, it paves the way for broader applications, within and external to the military.

Click HERE to read the LMI report: Beyond Demonstration: The Role of Fuel Cells in DoD's Energy Strategy. Andy Bochman

Return of The Thing That Wouldn't Leave

There's an old SNL skit in which a character played by John Belushi (RIP) is spending a pleasant evening in the modest home of Bill Murray and Jane Curtin. As the evening winds down, though, the Belushi guy doesn't know when it's time to leave and keeps rummaging through the couple's apartment in search of more and more snacks and beverages, even while Jane Curtin's character starts doing big-time Hitchcockian screams.

That skit, called "The Thing that Wouldn't Leave" reminds me of me and the DOD Energy Blog (we call it DEB for short). After starting another blog and running it for nearly 3 years, I'm returning to work on what any right-minded person who's come here over the last year would consider The House that Nolan Built.

Well, Dan and I have talked, and he's going to continue to deliver his incredible analysis and insight about how DOD's myriad energy initiatives are and are not working. Some might call him pushy, but I like to think of him as persistent, and depending on where you sit, I bet you're glad he is the way he is. Pretty darn funny too, for an Army guy.

My new role, which hopefully will leave you more often informed and enlightened versus screaming in disbelief, will be to focus on the emerging technologies that may help DOD get where it needs to go.

Along these lines you'll see my first posts on fuel cells and smarter buildings. Renewable energy and energy efficiency aren't new concepts any more ... the novelty has worn off.  Now it's time to drill down and get pragmatic (vs. idealistic) on what solutions provide the biggest energy security bangs for our increasingly limited bucks.

Hope you enjoy the new format ... I have a feeling it's going to quite nutritious. And say, do you know if there are any Fritos left?  Andy Bochman

Photo credit: SNL Archives

2011 Energy Security Book List

There are two new books out in the last few months I want you to know about. Whether you have time to read them, even if I am successful in getting you worked up about them, well, that's another story. So again, it's only two books, which is probably one or two more than you'll be able to get to given your current workload. But here's why you should give them a shot.

The first one is by former Austin Energy CIO Andres Carvallo, called The Advanced Smart Grid: Edge Power Driving Sustainability. Co-authored with frequent technology writer John Cooper, this book is relatively short at ~200 well illustrated pages, and is a pleasure to read. I'm going to re-use some of the laudatory words I recently posted in an Amazon review.

Before they invite you to travel with them into the future, Carvallo and Cooper do a solid job of orienting the reader with concise summaries of where the grid came from, how it's evolved over time, and as accurately as possible, how it's doing in its current state. For the many immigrants who've recently moved to energy from other sectors (like me), this is a great grounding.

The authors then look past the current climate of activity, much of it initially fueled with government grants, to a phase where business drivers alone dictate what gets deployed next. Ultimately, they begin to unveil for us a blurry but emerging vision of "the advanced Smart Grid", that's predicated on pervasive IP networking, tons and tons of data, microgrids, EVs, virtual power plants, new business models and more. For me, it was well worth the time, and depending on your background and/or day job, it might be for you too.

Book number two is from one of the (if not, THE) true giants of global energy thinking over the past decades, Daniel Yergin. Best known (to me, anyway) for his biblical telling of the history and future of the oil industry in The Prize, his new book, The Quest: Energy, Security, and the Remaking of the Modern World, expands in scope to consider all energy sources. Recently reviewed in the NYT, this excerpt seems apropos:

When it comes to assessing the world’s energy future Mr. Yergin is a Churchillian. He argues that we should consider all possible energy sources, the way Winston Churchill considered oil when he spoke to the British Parliament  in 1913. “On no one quality, on no one process, on no one country, on no one route, and on no one field must we be dependent,” Churchill said. “Safety and security in oil lie in variety and variety alone.”

... and one more thing, for which the a smarter grid is the essential precursor:

One of Mr. Yergin’s closing arguments focuses on the importance of thinking seriously about one energy source that “has the potential to have the biggest impact of all.” That source is efficiency. It’s a simple idea, he points out, but one that is oddly “the hardest to wrap one’s mind around.” More efficient buildings, cars, airplanes, computers and other products have the potential to change our world.

Sounds great, right? Well, the bad news for you travelers is that, from a weight perspective, is that it tops 800 pages, though if you get the ebook version it's as light as can be. Now reading it, or the majority of it, that's another story. If it's too much for you to consider, maybe you can wait and hope for a movie version. But I wouldn't count on it.

Happy reading!

Photo credit: Miamism on Flickr.com
(Cross-posted from the Smart Grid Security Blog)

GovEnergy 2011 Day 1: A River of Information

GovEnergy 2011 kicked off in Cincinnati this Monday with government, industry and academia in attendance. The morning pep rally featured senior folks from GSA, DOE, EPA and DOD. The theme was “A River of Solutions” and each speaker talked about the challenges facing their organizations. In every case the challenge was energy security and finding the business case that allowed the organization to justify investment in it. A gentleman from the City of Cincinnati explained that it is difficult to make the business case for renewables when the utility rate in his city is about 5 cents a kilowatt/hour. Damn that cheap, abundant coal, water and land!

One bit of good news up front. Dr. Robyn, the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installations and Environment announced that she had been given the authority to approve long term contracts (up to 30 years) for power purchase agreements for all electrical energy sources (not just geothermal). Previously this authority had rested with the Secretary of Defense. We commented on this authority earlier.

There were no less than fifteen educational tracks running simultaneously. My head was spinning but I decided to follow the energy security track and the first session was déjà vu all over again. Billed as being anchored by MG Dana Pittard, CG, Fort Bliss, it was nearly the exact same panel that formed for the Army/Air Force Energy conference two weeks before. Messieurs Geiss, Kidd and Cotton (GE) brought good things to life. Geiss and Kidd were standing in for their respective General Officers who had been otherwise detained. 

A much appreciated addition to the panel was C.A. “Skip” Cofield from the Southern Company. The Southern Company owns four of the largest utilities in the southeast and if you are talking about reducing energy use or building renewables, you MUST engage the utilities early and often. Mr. Cofield gave a great adverting pitch for the Southern Company and their demonstrated ability to recover from disasters (Katrina, Alabama tornadoes, etc.), and also added a word to my meager vocabulary: Isochronous. In power generation, isochronous means that the frequency of the electricity generated is "flat" or constant. The term was used in reference to Warner Robbins AFB and their ability to continue operations when the commercial grid goes down. Warner Robbins has a Georgia Power-owned and operated facility on base that facilitates the transition, and WR can operate isochronously. I like the word, and what it signifies re: energy security capabilities.

Mr. Kidd of the Army noted that there does not exists a mutually agreed upon definition of Energy Security. One bright, enterprising employee of the U. S. Corps of Engineers rose during the Q&A to ask Mr. Kidd if we might, please, have a definition so that all the uncertainty about what is expected of the USACE and energy security could be removed. Mr. Kidd assured her that he would get right on it….by tasking the USACE for the definition. No good deed goes unpunished. Let me offer my own humble definition:

Energy Security is the assured access to mission critical energy at acceptable financial and environmental costs in an isochronous manner.

If you want levels of energy security, you can call them mission critical, mission essential and mission supportive. Assured access is about whose hand is on the lever allowing isochronous access to electricity. If it is the utility, it is not necessarily assured. If it is the commander, then it is. And acceptable financial and environmental costs will be determined on a case by case basis.

The military is a doctrine driven institution. Doctrine provides a common language, as is the case in other professions. If we are to have energy security, we must have a common understanding of what that means.

Mr. Kidd also announced (drum roll, please) that the largest energy security information effort ever launched, was, er, launched. Fort Bliss, Texas, in support of their Net Zero energy, water and waste effort, has released nine Requests for Information for multiple technologies. Bliss wants to know about waste to energy, wind (large and small), solar, geothermal, microgrids and more. 

Industry now has until early October to provide information to Fort Bliss. An army of evaluators is even now examining the documents to decide if their companies should take the next steps. Once the RFI responses are delivered, Team Bliss will use the information gathered to craft their Requests for Proposal. So, industry: dust off the responses sent into the Air Force Civil Engineering Agency for their RFIs, paint them green and send them west (or east for you Left Coasties). Also take a look at what the USACE has requested in their Sources Sought for Power Purchase Agreements. They should be mutually supporting.

Defining energy security and attaining it will be a long slog. The processes the Services are following are lengthy, but legitimate. As Jon Power of the Army likes to say, “We’ve got the Land, We’ve got the Demand”. The river of solutions flows through industry and the Department must be a good partner if we are to attain definable, demonstrable energy security for our installations and our nation. That means transparency, consistency and the ability to maintain the course. We are all in this for the long haul and we are all in it together. Dan Nolan

Conference Alert: 90 Minutes of Energy Innovation

On 31 March 2011 from 9:00 A.M. to 10:30 A.M at the Rayburn House Office Building, The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation will host a conference sponsored by the Information Technology Industry Council and Digital Energy Solutions Campaign, entitled "Operation Energy Innovation: A Stronger, Smarter Fighting Force". The intent for the program is to examine how "DOD can play a prime role in accelerating cleantech development". At this event we will get to hear from the Ven diagram of Operational and Installation Energy. Dr. Dorothy Robyn, DUSD, Installations and Environment and Ms. Sharon Burke, ASD, Operational Energy Plans and Programs will share the rostrum with Congressmen J. Randy Forbes and Adam Smith and a bevy of info tech industry mavins. The program is open to all comers and you can register for free at the link above. We will also get to hear from Tim Solms, the General Manager for the Microsoft DOD business, so Power Point Rangers, bring your questions! See you there. Dan Nolan

Army Modernization Features Energy

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.

Can Solar be Tuff Enuff for Tactical?

To demonstrate progress and compliance with Federal clean energy mandates, DOD's got solar sprouting all over its facilities. But the operational side of the house, where we need to reduce fuel use for a bunch of core mission related reasons, has yet to benefit from this technology in any significant way.

Well, Wired's Danger Room folks report DARPA aims to change that, by investing in the University of Delaware's Low-Cost Lightweight Portable Photovoltaics (PoP) initiative:

DARPA wants the PoP program to yield solar cells that are more than just light and flexible — they should also be able to withstand dirt, rough handling and punctures, and be manufactured inexpensively.

The team is lead by Dr. Robert Birkmire, who, according to Wired ...

... is quick to point out, the cells DARPA's after will require some lofty innovation. Thin-film, flexible solar cells are a major priority for the military, because they can be applied onto almost everything — from tents to uniforms — and would minimize the number of generators and portable battery packs needed by troops in battle.

The full article is here. Here's hoping these guys make some serious progress ... and soon.

Song credit: soundtrack for this post provided by the Fabulous Thunderbirds - audio on Youtube.

Technology Focus: Storage Storage Storage

If this was the DOD IT Blog, the title might be referring to next gen holographic optical storage capable of storing 100 Terabytes of data in a device as big as a red blood cell. But it's not.

Of course the title refers to energy storage, considered by many to be the key enabling technology for grid-scale intermittent renewables like wind and solar. But storage also has important roles to play in smaller form factors, namely vehicles and man-portables.

To wit, here are three recent nuggets, culled from this week's traffic, for your consideration:

1. Energy Storage Challenge - "Energy storage is a particular concern for defence departments around the world for their bases, vehicles, vessels and soldiers in the field. So while we might all be able to benefit from the hard work of innovators working in this space, we note that the defence sector has traditionally been an early adopter of breakthrough technologies due to its unique needs and ability to explore emerging innovations, even if they are not cost competitive yet." We are happy to announce that ONR and ONRG of the US Navy have agreed to sponsor the winning prize for the winner of this 1st challenge with a $250K grant award. We thank ONR and ONRG for their vision and commitment to spur innovation in the energy storage field." Web site is still under construction but for more info contact "Simon Schneider at: schneider@energystoragechallenge.com
2. Lithium Ion batteries for DOD platforms - " Li-ion battery technology for non-hybrid vehicles for engine starting, lighting, ignition and silent-watch applications." Full article here
3. Fuel cell for mobile gadget charging - In new tech, sometimes the military leads, sometimes it follows, but most often it adopts stuff from the commercial sector and adapts accordingly. Such may be the case with new products such as this.

You may also be interested in this recent post on the fully burdened cost of batteries (FBCF).

Photo credit: Dean Johnson on Flickr

Lovins addresses New Nuclear Power for DOD (Q&A 2 of 3)

This post asks Amory Lovins to respond more specifically to new technologies related to 3rd and particularly 4th generation reactors.

Question 2: Some make the case that recently popular, small, modular design reactors solve many of the challenges of the large, capital intensive, centralized predecessors. These are still just concepts at this time. Do you feel they're worth pursuing ... why or why not?

ABL: No. My paper "'New Nuclear Reactors, Same Old Story" summarizes why not. Again, the fundamental issue is economics. The systems needed to confine radiation and to manage and capture heat from any sort of reactor do not scale down well. The argument that offsetting and indeed greater economies can be obtained from mass production fails to note that the main competitors (efficiency and micropower) not only scale down well but are also decades ahead in capturing their own economies of mass production, so nuclear can never catch up. This conclusion does not depend on the specific technology proposed (Hyperion, NuScale, Toshiba 4S, etc.); it depends only on nuclear engineering basics and on the observed status and trajectory of competitors.

Another way of saying it is that simpler, more efficient approaches are readily available and so we shouldn't distract ourselves with nuclear. In the linked article, Lovins comes out swinging and never relents:

Novel [new] designs claimed to solve LWRsʼ problems of economics, proliferation, and waste .... But on closer examination, the two kinds most often promoted—Integral Fast Reactors (IFRs) and thorium reactors—reveal no economic, environmental, or security rationale, and the [business case] is unsound for any nuclear reactor.

My interpretation is that Lovins' case does not rely on fear or emotional appeal. It's not Three Mile Island. It's not Chernobyl. It's dollars and cents and other types of sense. In case you're joining late, opening round Question 1 was answered previously here. Stay tuned for the third and final question that asks Lovins to focus his nuclear thinking in particular on DOD applications. Anyone want to argue back?

Army Thinks Big re: Vehicular Energy Management

Apr 16 Update: remembered LTG Vane presented  great deck at MORS Power & Energy workshop and just found it.  Called "The Operational Energy Challenge; you can download it here.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

This ain't your grandpa's Jeep. A recent article in AviationWeek titled "Watt-Rich Vehicles Will Boost Capability" highlights some clear thinking by an Army energy leader I got to hear speak at a great MORS conference on DOD energy issues late 2009. We're well past more speculation on what might be; LTG Michael Vane and others in uniform and in industry are clearly moving out on tactical energy capabilities. I especially like the objective of using the vehicle's electrical capabilities to lighten the battery burden on the individual soldier as well as reduce the generator-hauling burdens on loggies:

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.

Smaller Nuclear Power Plants may help US Achieve a More Resilient Energy Future

We touched on small nukes for DOD applications in late 2009 (see: here and here). Well, if anything, the pace has quickened. There's lots of talk inside and outside the Pentagon, the Department of Energy, and of course the NRC, on the development of new generations of advanced design reactors as well as the Bill Gates-fueled buzz surrounding their tiny cousins known as mini or "pocket nukes". IMHO, large, capital intensive nuclear power generation isn't going to get us where we need to go. But I like distributed energy gen, and the new, smaller, less expensive reactors could certainly be sited where needed, placing fewer demands on T&D infrastructure. Recently invigorated by a refresher talk last week via the MIT Energy Club on the current and future state of nuclear power in the US, I have the good fortune of introducing this new and comprehensive overview by the US Army’s Paul Roege on the nuclear power topic de jour: mini nukes.

Americans are just beginning to understand our energy vulnerabilities and their potential impacts to the military, especially with the help of people like Congressman Roscoe Bartlett (MD). Could this popular awareness create opportunities – not only to mitigate security concerns, but to rebuild US industrial capabilities and resilience?

The Department of Defense has been working on critical infrastructure protection (CIP) for several years, with a clear need to balance those efforts with the resource demands and necessary focus on operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Congress is encouraging DOD to step up the pace on domestic CIP; for example Section 335 of the 2010 National Defense Authorization Act calls for a comprehensive assessment of DOD critical infrastructure vulnerability to disrupted power supply, and a mitigation plan.

The best way to ensure resilience of critical functions is through diversity of energy systems and supply sources and resilient designs. DOD has been pursuing diversity through various non-nuclear alternative energy technologies. Although the Army, especially, had experience in nuclear energy during the 1960s and 70s, it abandoned those efforts due to the relative convenience and low cost of fossil fuels. Since then, nuclear energy has been essentially off the table in terms of military energy options. Alternative energy goals explicitly excluded the nuclear option, and any mention of nuclear energy has met with immediate skepticism due to perceived negative public attitudes.

However, with broadening public awareness of grid vulnerability, climate change and now military operational energy challenges, many have proposed a re-look at military nuclear energy. It’s not a simple question; such an effort would require resources and leadership support to proceed. Recognizing this problem, Congressman Jim Marshall (GA) introduced legislation last summer to address this question. His efforts are visible in Section 2845 of NDAA 2010 which requires DOD to conduct a feasibility study of this option, reporting to Congress by 1 June 2010.

The timing could be fortuitous for the country if DOD can catalyze advancements in energy concepts and technologies, given the Department’s (as well as the nation’s) recognized need for secure energy. In the case of nuclear technology, engineers have been working on a new generation of reactors over the past three decades that would provide more affordable, safe and scalable alternatives to the large light water reactor designs that, today, provide the lowest cost source of power to the US grid, but which were built on obsolete assumptions about economies of scale, demand growth and power grid taxonomy.

These “next generation reactors” languished over the three decades lull in nuclear power construction. Now, these advanced concepts could be left behind in the “nuclear renaissance”, as the US energy industry, regulated by the extremely risk adverse Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), scrambles to build dozens of reactors – choosing instead from incremental designs that can be licensed and built quickly to meet new demand and replace aging capacity.

Experts recognize the advantages that small reactors – sometimes called “grid appropriate reactors” - could bring to more resilient energy grid. The Department of Energy has established a small reactor program, and industry groups have held workshops on the topic. Foreign entities have embraced the idea; Toshiba has been marketing their “4S” reactor for a number of years.

While US utilities have mainly pursued fossil fuel generation options, which require less capital investment, the balance of nuclear expertise has shifted overseas. European nuclear generating capacity has been growing quietly and advances in Asia have been dramatic. Korea and China, in particular, have been building new plants, not only at home, but for exports throughout the developing world. US capabilities in nuclear power design, fabrication and construction have dwindled over recent decades, with the remnants of once-powerful US nuclear engineering companies, such as Westinghouse (Toshiba) and GE (Hitachi) being sold to foreign companies.

Venture capitalists are the latest entrant in the energy market. Bill Gates has announced his support for a “traveling wave” reactor concept, which would require much smaller quantities of enriched uranium and could potentially burn natural uranium or even more plentiful thorium. Gates recently spoke on TED video, making a compelling case that we need nuclear energy to address climate change. Google has also hosted discussions on advanced nuclear technologies including thorium and breeder reactors – discussion forums are abuzz with such possibilities.

This is an exciting time for those who recognize the fundamental role of reliable, resilient, affordable energy in social stability and national security. No longer is energy the sole realm of utilities – everyone is getting into the game. Americans have the opportunity to resume their historical leadership role in the energy industry, which was fundamental to helping us achieve our unprecedented level of stability and economic strength.

Scale Image Credit: Hyperion Power

The View from Early 2010: Massive Energy Changes on the Way

When you watch something closely day to day it's difficult to discern difference. But as anyone who occasionally visits a young niece or nephew knows, those kids are changing rapidly. For some reason, after years of tracking the slow and steady evolution of various energy technologies, I've gotten the feeling over the last few weeks that our relatively static energy sector is in for a major growth spurt.

And for all the great work the DOD Energy community has done trying to help the Department be more proactive with how it manages its energy issues, policy progress will ultimately pale in comparison with the seismic shifts about to hit DOD and the rest of society. You may think this is hyperbole, but ...

I don't think so. While each of these technologies has a boat-load of attendant risk, and that risk comes in multiple flavors (e.g., technological, regulatory, business), all are setting an impressive baseline that's only going to improve and likely accelerate over time.

On top of continuing steady incremental technological improvements in solar, wind, Smart Grid and storage, each of these three categories of systems could dramatically change the energy landscape on its own. Combined, they'd totally remake our approaches to generating, transporting, consuming, and making money from energy:

1. Home power generation (see the Bloom Box)

2. City (and base-sized) power generation (see small nukes)

3. Electric Cars and V2G (see everywhere, including here)

Though we still have a long way to go figuring out how to power aircraft and most tactical vehicles in ways other than JP-8, the implications for rest of DOD are huge. This could be the beginning of the end for the brittle grid problem facing CONUS bases. Also consider the potential for expeditionary energy. Will be tracking it all right here. As we always say, stay tuned!

It's More than Academic: Expeditionary Fuel Savings = a Better US Military

Guess what officers are researching these days as part of their graduate work? That's right, operational energy. Here are the two of the more recent ones I've seen:

• "NPS Graduate Thesis: Cost Benefit Analysis of Integrated COTS energy-related technologies for Army's Force Provider Module" by LCDR Allen Rivera, SC, USN (Sep 2009). PDF here
• "Reducing Battlefield Fuel Demand:. Mitigating a Marine Corp Critical Vulnerability" by Major William B. Fenwick, USMC (Mar 2009). PDF here

Rivera's paper documents some extensive work done in conjunction with the Soldier Systems unit at Natick, MA testing the value propositions of improved lighting and insulation tech. Guess which category offers the bigger energy bang for the buck?

Fenwick's strategy paper focuses on the disconnect between expeditionary missions and the sobering limitations of current energy logistics.

Photo Credit: CarbonNYC / David Goehring @ Flickr