Navy ID's Trouble with Grid Reliance

A recent Navy IG report on facilities energy security took a surprising twist ... surprising to the IG, that is:

The report was commissioned to recommend a privatization strategy that would allow the U.S. Navy to “get out of the energy business” by selling its substantial network of power-generation facilities to firms in the private sector.  Ironically, the principal conclusion the IG reached was that privatization would be a disaster and that the whole policy supporting privatization erroneously presumed that the private sector’s management of the power sector was superior to the public sector. 

Readers of this blog should be less surprised.

Journal of Energy Security's Anti-Piracy Drill Down

While I noted the adverse energy security impacts of the recent bout of piracy in a February post here, this article from the Journal of Energy Security, on the same subject, got my attention for its high level of scholarship and analysis. The overview of the different anti-pirate technologies being considered, especially the different laser varieties and the unmanned surface vessels (USVs), is particularly interesting.

Until recently, large scale piracy on the high seas (vs. piracy in the digital world) seemed highly improbable. And yet its occurrence is having a big impact on shipping companies, their customers, and many of the world's navies. Piracy hit close to home for me when a friend in the NATO bureau at US State Department headquarters was recently reassigned to focus full time on coordinating anti-piracy procedures and policies with our allies.

Map: Wikimedia Commons

Fuel Maker Start-Up Making Strides

Re: my depressing previous post on the DOD's as yet unsuccessful attempt to make a fuels market via vehicle and aircraft certification, here's a local company (local to my home town of Boston, that is) that's making some early but significant progress towards becoming a future fuel provider.

GreatPoint Energy is taking a run at turning the coal-to-fuel gasification process into a real business. This CNET article by clean tech reporter Martin LaMonica provides a good overview. Note: the end product GreatPoint is shooting for here is natural gas, not jet fuel or diesel. But they still provide a good example of some of the challenges, as well as the potential rewards, that await companies that pursue similar paths.

Military Making Fuels Markets - No Takers So Far

As this recent National Defense article describes, you can lead a nascent industry to a fleet of ready vehicles, but you cannot make it make their fuel. This is DOD's experience to date with both land based vehicles as well as aircraft. The Army has tens of thousands of vehicles ready to run on flex fuels, and the Air Force recently completed synth fuel (natural gas/JP-8 blend) certification activities across its entire inventory. Yet today less than half of the Army's ready vehicles and non of the USAF planes have ready suppliers for alternative fuels.

Next up for USAF is the selection of one or two leading bio fuels candidates and the resumption of inventory certification processes. If someone's going to respond with scalable offerings, now might be a good time to let DOD know. Otherwise, there are a few more important energy security objectives it can pursue.

Nextgen Generators Needed ... Stat !!!

Another great article from NDIA's National Defense Magazine, which seems to have more and better energy coverage than ever before. This one describes the enormous challenge of delivering tons of fuel overland to the remote, mountainous regions of Afghanistan, and the scarcity of generators to consume it, and the great gains we'd make if only we could field some more tough, efficient generators. Nat Defense's Sandra Irwin:

The gargantuan demand for generators is straining the military’s already overburdened logistics support system, said officials. Transporting fuel on dangerous mine-infested roads also creates additional hazards for troops and contractors.

Soldiers in the field are suffering from senior DOD leadership's lack of operational energy vision and strategy. According to the GAO:

The Defense Department “still lacks an effective approach to fuel demand at forward-deployed locations.” The U.S. military currently operates several hundred bases in Iraq and Afghanistan. In 2008, the Defense Department supplied more than 68 million gallons of fuel each month on average to support those installations. “Fuel demands for these operations is higher than for any war in history."

Calling anyone in industry or academia who could help ... even a little. More energy efficient generators, while not as glamorous a technology as say, solar, wind or fuel cells, would have immediate, life saving consequences for our troops in Afghanistan.

Photo: Wikimedia Commons

A Web 2.0 Primer for DOD Energy Workers

From NDU social media guru (and practitioner) Mark Drapeau, and former Principal Deputy Assistant SECDEF, Linton Wells, comes an outstanding new report titled Social Software and National Security that may have you saying, "I see the DOD connection, but what the heck does this have to do with energy?"

I'll tell you what. I come from a info security background. The last ten years of my working life have involved thinking about how to keep certain info in the hands of certain people ... and out of the hands of others. Today's WSJ note on a recent F-35 breach reminds us: this is a tough job. And as the parodies (see Apple's ad on Vista's security controls ) and realities of working in secure environments show, the speed of communications and collaboration definitely takes a hit. Progress on DOD energy needs to move quickly.

If a boxer spends all 15 rounds covering up, he's never going to learn about his opponent's strategy, let alone be able to go on the offensive and land some blows of his own. My point is that the job of bringing heightened awareness and activity on energy issues across DOD is not something that can happen in secret or in tribal cloisters. Unlike the development of sensitive weapons systems, improvements to energy management and efficiency are something we can (and need to) hasten through better communications. And if a bad guy happens upon what we're up to, it's no big deal.

The different chambers of OSD, the four service branches, the Joint Forces, the intel community,  DLA and the loggies in the field, the war gamers and acquisition folks, and many more in DOD, not to mention like-minded colleagues in DOE, academia and industry need to start sharing ideas and cooperating like never before.

If you're not inclined to try this stuff, no worries. But if you're curious and haven't yet immersed yourself in the Web 2.0 deep end yet, check out the NDU report and start blogging, Youtubing, Twittering, GovLooping, Flickring and soon you'll be fully Linked-In to the an incredible hub of energy team work.

Energy Technology Fail: Space Based Solar

Every once in a while it's good to go Star Trekking and imagine the world a few years, if not centuries, down the road. (Think: QDR.) The question about the future isn't whether it's coming, but when. However, not all futures are created equal, and some future science will likely remain fiction.

As nifty as this idea sounds, all the indicators that could give confidence only give pause:

• Company (Solaren Corp.) funded mainly by founder
  
• Company based in founder's house
• Non-functioning one page web site
  

A 2007 DOD National Security Space Office report paints a rosy picture of Space Based Solar Power (SBSP) and calls it "interesting." I agree it's interesting ... very interesting, in fact. The report even references the fully burdened cost of fuel (FBCF) as part of its economics argument (kudos). And talk about a technology for reducing fuel convoy traffic to Forward Operating Bases (FOBs) ...

But my guess is that, collisions with space junk notwithstanding, SBSP from Solaren isn't coming to a theater near you anytime soon. And in the meantime, we've got a lot of other, more proximate, DOD energy fish to fry.

Photo: Wikimedia Commons