Army Energy Website is Up

The Army has created a page with all the latest news on energy. You can read about how BRAC saves energy, hear GEN Petraeus address to the Army/Air Force Energy Conference and catch up on new programs like the test base camp and old projects like the Advanced Medium Mobile Power Sources that were finally green lighted for full rate production on 20 July. Well done page and very informative.

From the Ashes to the Edge: Army OE Capability Resurrected

In a previous post, I lamented the lack of an execution arm for operational energy for everyone but the Marines who have the Expeditionary Energy Office. In 2006 -2008, the Army had the Power Surety Task Force (PSTF), embedded in the Rapid Equipping Force (REF) that served that function. The REF finds technology solutions to commanders’ immediate battlefield needs and brought the Joint Force robots, visible laser designators, anti-sniper technologies and enhanced armor.

The adventure in operational energy that was the PSTF brought about, HiPower, tactical garbage to energy, the Net Zero Plus Joint Technology Demonstration and the Net Zero Forward Operating Base at the National Training Center. Unfortunately, it was a bit avant garde for the timorous REF Director at that time and he had it transferred to the Director of Defense Research and Engineering (DDRE). DDRE was also running the Energy Security Task Force, the ad hoc predecessor to the Office of Operational Energy Plans and Policy (OOEPP). When OOEPP got up and running, they inherited the PSTF, but decided that their office would just do plans and policy and not do execution. The PSTF was allowed to die a proper contractual death. But the Phoneix arises!

Yesterday, at storied Fort Belvoir, VA the REF announced that “The U.S. Army's Rapid Equipping Force has partnered with the Defense Technical Information Center's (DTIC) Weapon Systems Technology Information Analysis Center (WSTIAC) to procure, deploy and assess hybrid alternative and renewable energy systems in an effort called "Energy to the Edge". Selected renewable and alternative energy solutions include Solar Stick 360 3kW hybrid energy system, ZeroBase H-Series 5kW Regenerator, Skybuilt's Skycase portable power system, Iris Technologies Personal Power System (SPACES) and Qinetiq's 1kW JP-8 generator.” As soon as the REF posts a link to the release, will get it to you.

How this will be accomplished is unclear. Whether a sub-organization will be reconstituted or this will simply be added to the plates of folks already there, is not known. What is known is that their number one customer, U.S. Forces - Afghanistan, is straining at the bit for this capability. Before he departed, GEN Petraeus submitted a memo to the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics listing four operational energy requirements. GEN Mattis, Commander, U.S. Central Command endorsed the request and added one of his own. CENTCOM wants a team of energy experts from the Services and Industry to visit Afghanistan to conduct "a baseline study to reduce fuel consumption at our forward operating bases". Having done a couple of these, I recommend that CENTCOM send a General Officer to lead this team and ensure they get access to the information often closely guarded by support contractors.

The REF is the un-acquisition outfit that gets it done. It is the perfect place to put the requirement. I caution the leadership to gird their loins against the folks that will tell them it is not their job. The REF mission is to, “rapidly provides urgent capabilities to U.S. Army forces employed globally by harnessing current and emerging technologies in order to improve operational effectiveness”. Operational energy is just such an “urgent capability”. Dan Nolan, PSTF 2006-2008

INSS Comes to Defense of DOD Energy Plan: "Next Piece Won't be Vague"

This just in.....DOD publishes DOD Energy Strategy. National Defense University declares that criticism is unjust. They are hopeful.

"Hopefully the implementation plan will address the criticisms voiced about the vagueness of the strategy”, says Dr. Richard Andres.

The Institute for National Strategic Studies lauds the ASD, OEPP for getting a “first piece in the overall energy plan” published just two years after being directed to form by Congress in 2009. Of course the speed with which DOD was able to place a nominee before Congress should have given a clue in that the confirmation hearing did not occur until early 2010.

Not sure what Dr. Andres feels is unjust. The Energy Security Strategic Plan published by the DOD Energy Security Task Force in 2008 was a comprehensive and directive document. Many of its authors work in the office of the ASD/OEPP. I guess my lack of patience is that most of the work had been done; the challenge should have just been in re-coordinating. 

But the fact is, the Services hold all the cards. The only one that Ms. Burke holds is the ability to certify the energy budget for Services against the DOD plan. The longer we wait for the plan, the less time the Services have to ensure their budgets are compliant. Of course, I am not sure what happens if a budget is not certified. Maybe they get another 90 days and a do over. Dan Nolan

Breach or By-Pass: Overcoming Obstacles to DOD Energy Goals

In DOD energy, the vision is clear and the strategic goals are well articulated. What is missing is direction to those who will execute the strategy at the operational and tactical levels. If you ask a Director of Public Works at an Army Post (and I have) what their responsibilities are regarding achieving 25% renewable energy by 2025, they will look at you as if you have an even number of heads.

A recent article in National Defense Magazine questioned DOD’s ability “to turn glossy rhetoric into ironclad policies”. This observation came as results of remarks by former Vice Chief of Naval Operations, ADM (R) John Nathman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). Nathman attributes this in part to a lack of an overall National Energy Policy. I would agree that we do not have a new energy policy, but there are plenty of existing laws and executive orders still in effect.

The current energy policy is expressed in two laws (EPAct 2005 and EISA 2007) and two executive orders, (13423 and 13514). They provide sufficient guidance for DOD to create strategy, operational direction and tactical instruction. The following is what is required of DOD:

Biofuels Target Purchases by 2022 (at market price):

• Cellulosic ethanol 16 Billion Gallons
• Biomass Based diesel 5 Billion Gallons
• Other Biofuels 15 Billion Gallons

Renewable Energy Goals (at “acceptable rates):

• 2010 5%
• 2013 7.5%
• 2025 25%
• 2050 50%

Energy Efficiency Goals (relative to 2003; where economically feasible)

• 2015 30%

The lack of a new national energy policy is not a hindrance to DOD energy planning. What is missing is fixing the responsibilities. The authorities are there (ECIP, MILCON, UESC, ESPC, MATOC, PPA). Because no one is responsible, no one can be held accountable. As one comment I received stated, “who cares about the OEPP plan; show me the budget!".

For operational energy, the acquisition community and contracting command should be getting the rose for figuring out the COTS, GOTs, new development solutions and/or contract modifications necessary. For biofuels, Defense Logistics Agency – Energy will be responsible for that acquisition, but at competitive prices (if Shell Aviation will allow it; how long can Shell sell at a loss?). Infrastructure energy responsibility for renewables and energy conservation will have to devolve upon the Corps of Engineers, Army’s Installation Command, Navy Facilities Command and the Air Force Civil Engineering Support Agency. From there it will pass to the tactical level at the bases and post through the installation command structure. The HOW of this must be in the much promised, forthcoming PLANs. Will every base need to reduce by 7.5% by 2013 or will it be measured as a Service?

There is no question that this is hard work. By Title 10 of the U.S. Code, the Services control the budget. Any plan at the OSD level must be coordinated with (agreed to by) the Services. How hard could that be? Dwindling resources make budgeting agreements hard to achieve. Ask the President and Speaker.

The final piece of the article talked about getting DOD to change their appreciation of the “time value” of money. A dollar spent today on energy conservation saves hundreds in five years, but the Pentagon has been famously “penny-wise and pound-foolish”. As sexy as renewable are, conservation is the best bet for DOD. The smaller the energy foot print, the easier it is to get 7.5% from RE sources. Culture change indeed! Dan Nolan

Acronyms:

• EPAct 2005 – Energy Policy Act of 2005
• EISA 2007 – Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
• ECIP – Energy Conservation Investment Program
• MILCON - Military Construction
• UESC – Utility Energy Services
• ESPC - Energy Savings Performance Contracts
• MATOC - Multiple Award Task Order Contract.
• EUL – Enhanced Use Lease
• PPA – Power Purchase Agreement
• COTS – Commercial Off the Shelf Technology
• GOTS – Government Off the Shelf Technology
• OSD – Office of the Secretary of Defense

ARPA-E, Industry and DOD Energy Leadership: Who leads, who follows?

As a follow up to the last post on the Army/Air Force Energy Forum, after Secretary Chu spoke we heard from other DOD luminaries, high ranking government officials and industry leaders. Again, the themes of “ DOD is vulnerable due to energy insecurity; DOD has a history of technology leadership; DOD helps get technology economically launched; DOD can get it done”. At one point former Senator John Warner, thumped the podium and declared, “DOD Must Lead!”.

For me the highlight of the conference was the very refreshing talk by Dr. Arun Majumdar, Director, Advance Research Projects Agency –Energy (ARPA-E). Their mission statement is much too long to quote here, but , it uses words like “freshness”, “out of the box” and “nibble and sparse” without a hint of self-consciousness. Dr. Majumdar’s presentation focused on some very cool and critically essential projects, all of which had great acronyms like BEEST, IMPACCT, GRIDS, etc. ARPA-E is assuming the mantle of pushing the technology boundaries in a very focused manner on energy. His matter of fact approach to describing things like microorganisms that convert CO2 into liquid fuels had the effect of generating excitement for bugs that crap oil! The good Doctor conceded that not all or, for that matter, many of these projects would bear fruit, but that was their mission: to go where industry might not go. Of course, where is industry going?

I won’t go into all the breakout session I attended, but will give you some general impressions. Other than the DOE discussions, the only piece of new information I gathered was that the Program Manager, Ground Soldier sent some solar panels and fuel cells along with the Iron Rangers of the 1-16th Infantry Battalion to Afghanistan. Apparently this happened back in January while I wasn’t paying attention. Why the PM, Ground Soldier planned, financed and executed this rather than PM, Mobile Electric Power was not adequately explained. Other than that, it was mostly a recitation of why energy security is important to DOD, promises that “the plan is coming” and great recruiting by the Marine Corps (excellent video, Brutus). Not much new ground was plowed.

Industry was there in force and led several moderated panels. The list is informative:

• Mr. Scott Sklar, President Stella Group, LTD
• Mr. Paul Bollinger, General Manager Government Solutions, Boeing Energy (former DASA, Energy and Privatization)
• Mr. Alex Beehler, President of Alex A. Beehler & Co., LL (former Acting Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installations & Environment)
• Mr. Mike Aimone, Battelle Memorial Institute, (former Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics, Installations and Mission Support, HQ USAF)
• Mr. Kevin Billings, Lockheed Martin, (former Acting Assistant Secretary of the United States Air Force for Installations, Environment & Logistics)
• Mr. Marc Gottschalk, Proterra

It was nice to see so many friends and members of the former DOD energy regime. Many of the listed folks all a hand in writing energy plans, policies and programs for years in DOD. They were the giants upon whose shoulders the new regime should have stood to advance “The Plan”. The clock is ticking towards achieving the goals and mandates for energy. The DOD Operational Energy Plan was published on 14 June 2011 with the promise that the Implementation Plan would follow in ninety days. 15 September 2011 is a much awaited day. Industry is standing by for action. Installation energy is still an open question. Who is responsible, what are the authorities and how will accountability be kept? If this is going to be done with public/private partnership, the public side must answer those questions. Dan Nolan

USA/USAF Energy Forum, Day 0.5: Leadership, Technology and Empty Barrels

The first day of the first bi-Service Energy Forum is in the books and it was an impressive first. That the Army and Air Force where able to coordinate schedules and allow hundreds of government, industry, academic and media bubbas to assemble, mingle and learn was a first. As Dr. Kevin Geiss , Air Force Deputy Assistant Sec for Energy pointed out, by holding a joint conference, they eliminated one set of air travel, hotel bills and conference fees (not to mention bar bills), allowing us all to stretch our budgets, reduce our travel related GHG footprint and juxtapose Service agendas. The downside was an agenda so packed with simultaneous breakout sessions that it became almost impossible to choose where to be. That being said, themes began to emerge quickly.

After opening remarks by respective Assistant Secs for installations, energy, environment, logistics and what have you , the first plenary session kicked off with the White House Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality and the Under Secs from the Air Force and Army extolling the virtues of DOD involvement in energy security. “DOD has a history of leadership, DOD helps get technology launched, DOD can get it done” was the chorus and all were singing. The first sour note began to creep in when Mr. Westphal (Army) let slip that, oh, by the way, we don’t have any big money to do this and it is going to get tougher. You could hear the collective sucking of teeth by all the industry folks. Of course this is really not news. All of the government folks have been telling us that they cannot achieve their lofty goals without third party involvement and their industry partners. Still, many of the folks who were there hoping to dig into the supposed barrels of DOD money for energy, were shocked, shocked I tell you, to discover the barrel is bare.

This was followed by the Secretary of Energy, Dr. Steven Chu. Dr. Chu is the funniest, Nobel Prize winning, experimental physicist I know. At one point, when describing the Energy Innovation Hub concept, he said that while working in a previous job a couple of years ago, he had tried to get DOE interested in the concept, with little luck. “The current administration has been more receptive to my ideas.” And then he told us, that that was the joke. We laughed. Sometimes we forget that Nobel Prize winners who have done remarkable work on cooling lasers and have the vision to predict a glucose based economy (vice carbon) are just plain folks. I am seriously in awe of this man and his ideas. I would also like to have a beer with him.

Dr. Chu went on to discuss the multitude of projects in which DOE is engaged, many in support of DOD. He reminded the audience that DOE has an extensive history in working with explosives (see Manhattan Project) and is helping DOD look at IED resistant vehicles. SecEn went on to talk about what DOD could do to its 2.2 BILLION square feet of buildings to reduce their energy impact and closed by showing where other nations ranked in developing Clean Energy for Security and Prosperity as a percentage of their GDP. For a guy with such awesome technology at his finger tips, you would have thought he could have come up with a slide format that would have allowed him to show where the U.S. ranked on that scale. Unfortunately he could only list the top sixteen countries. What do China and Brazil know that we don’t?

I will break here so that Andy Bochman doesn’t yell at me for writing another book instead of a blog, but lots more to follow on the themes of DOD leadership, technical innovation and bare bank account. Tomorrow will have observations on the first day breakout panels and the most impressive presentation of the day. Spoiler alert: it wasn’t from DOD.

For all of you who came up to me and expressed your appreciation for what Andy and I have tried to do in this space, thank you. As much as I pick at DOD on energy, it is only because I am impatient. We are the nation that electrified the world in the first half of the last century and computerized it in the second half. What should we be doing in the first half of this century? Ask Dr. Chu. He will tell you we should be developing Clean Energy for Security and Prosperity. Hear, Hear. Dan Nolan

Straight DOEPP on Bad Gas: Burke on Hi GHG Fuel

In a recent post on the White House blog (thanks, J.B.) the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Operational Energy Plans and Programs (AS DOEPP), Sharon Burke brought our attention to a rapid development program sponsored by the Army’s Tank and Automotive Research, Development, and Engineering Command in Warren, MI (TARDEC). The program, called the Fuel Efficiency Demonstrator-Alpha (FED-Alpha), produced a prototype vehicle that “has all the capability of an up-armored M1114 Humvee, but with modifications that can improve fuel economy by 70%”. I attended the industry day in September 2008 and in less than three years, the first prototype is unveiled. In the world of Acquisition, this is lightning speed. I hope that this process can be streamlined, is replicable and changes how we think about our current archaic process. But this is not the big new.

Ms. Burke goes on in the post to discuss a current move afoot in Congress to repeal the provisions of Sec 526. Essentially, Sec 526 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 says DOD can use no fuel whose production has greater carbon intensity than standard petroleum processing. Congress is considering language to repeal that provision. The ASDOEPP draws the connection between increases in greenhouse gases (GHG), climate change and security. Where previously DOD has planned for the implication of climate change, they have not directly attributed it to anthropogenic causes. In many cases they have avoided the discussion, in the words of one Navy official, “we don't want to get into a tail chase over climate change…”.

In a time when Congress’ efforts could be better spent, having an Administration official set the record straight is important and appropriate. The ideology behind the attempt to repeal Sec 526 is about denial of the causes of climate change, not about greater military flexibility. It was good to see Ms. Burke strip the camouflage from this waste of time. Dan Nolan