How to Make a Microgrid

I've been reading about, sometimes writing about, and occasionally extolling the many virtues of microgrids for some time now.  I even remember when, shortly after starting this blog, I was at a DOD energy gathering at NDU in 2008 or 2009 I think.

This perky bald guy in the row behind me said, kind of like in the movie The Graduate: "the future is microgrids." I could be wrong, but I believe that hairless wonder was Army O-6 and future DOD Energy Blogger Dan Nolan himself.  (I'll get my fact checker on that just in case.)

Since then we've copiously covered the SPIDERS program, as well as the great secure microgrid work at Naval District Washington.

Flash forward to yesterday when I came across Stuart McCafferty's "Top 6 Things to Consider When Developing Microgrids." The title says 6 but altogether it's more like 50 or 60 questions - born of his hands-on project management experience - you need to answer before moving forward.

Out of all of them the first two resonate the strongest with me:

Mission: What is the organization’s mission? How will a Microgrid help support the mission?

If your reasons for building a microgrid aren't directly related to supporting the mission, then what the heck are you doing?  Everyone's free to build their own microgrid after work on their own dime, but if you're building one at a DOD installation, then the connection to mission support has got to be a solid and not a dotted line.

After that the rest of the questions are about everything you need to think about beforehand to do it right.  For the full article click HERE.

And by the way, here's a piece on an early stage USMC microgrid project at Miramar Air Station in San Diego, where energy assurance is the major mission driver.

Image courtesy of National Defense Magazine

You're Invited to DOD "Power Surge" Energy Security Webinar

I have a one-time special good deal for you, DEB aficionados.  You are cordially invited to a briefing announcing the research findings from:

Power Surge: How the Department of Defense Leverages Private Resources to Enhance Energy Security and Save Money on U.S. Military Bases

Date: this Thursday, January 16, 2014
Time: 11 a.m. – 12 p.m. EST
Access: Click here to log into the webinar

Event Overview:

Deployment of clean energy technologies is accelerating across military installations operated by the U.S. Department of Defense, according to The Pew Charitable Trusts. Pew’s new report, “Power Surge,” examines how the military is using private-sector capabilities and harnessing innovative financing to obtain advanced energy systems. These projects are helping the Pentagon enhance mission assurance, save money, and meet congressional and executive branch requirements. The briefing will review the military’s progress on meetings its renewable energy and efficiency goals and how it’s funding the initiatives. The report will be available online starting 16 Jan 2014 at    www.pewtrusts.org/energysecurity.

Presenters:

• Phyllis Cuttino, director, clean energy program, The Pew Charitable Trusts
• Katherine Hammack, assistant secretary for the Army, energy and installations
• Scott Provinse, director of government programs, Sun Edison
• John Warner, former U.S. senator and secretary of the U.S. Navy, and senior adviser to the Pew project on national security, energy, and climate

I'll be online, and hope you can make it too!  ab

BTW, if the direct link does not work, go to www.webex.com and enter:
Meeting Number: 636 286 510, Password: Clean123

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

Ever Consider having your Installation Whispered?

We've all seen the numbers before. The short version is goes like this: DOD dwarfs Walmart when it comes to number of square feet of buildings owned, maintained, powered, heated and cooled in the USA and elsewhere.

The amount of energy consumed by the world's largest fleet of buildings is enormous, as is the amount of energy wasted due to inefficiencies of every conceivable kind.

Well, there are folks working this challenge, such as my colleague and friend, the mighty Dave Bartlett (pictured, imposingly, above). You care read a bit more about Dave and what he and folks like him do HERE.

As you can imagine, there are cultural as well as technical barriers to work through. Especially for DOD bases that have been able to achieve some good energy savings in recent years and feel like there are no more low hanging energy efficiency fruit to pick, I like this note re: one of IBM's own facilities:

The Rochester campus had recently undergone a comprehensive energy audit resulting in double-digit energy conservation. It seemed highly unlikely to the facilities operations professionals at the campus that anything more could be done. “They (facilities operations personnel) told me that they were already doing everything that could be done to save energy,” said Bartlett. “But we achieved a 3 percent energy reduction in the first few months, and within nine months we managed to get an eight percent reduction in energy use. The work is also estimated to reduce maintenance costs for the site by 5-10 percent,” he added, “and that is real gravy on top of the energy savings.”

If this is right, there are a ton of high ROI opportunities out there for the Services to go after. Makes me want to shout! aab

Photo Credit: Association for Facilities Engineering

Emerging Idea: Energy Initiatives Office

Today, at the lunch closing GovEnergy 2011, the Secretary of the Army, John McHugh announced the formation of another office to deal with energy. The Energy Initiatives Office Task Force (EIOTF) will be formed not later than 15 September 2011 under the leadership of Ms. Katherine Hammack, the ASA, Installations, Energy and Environment. The Office/Task Force will oversee Soldier Power, Vehicle Power and Basing Power, fusing the responsibility for Facilities Energy and Operational Energy.

According to the press release, the EIOTF is focused on “on-site, large scale RE generation”. They will be able to provide the expertise that bases are supposed to lack to “identify and evaluate technologies, negotiate with utilities, and manage the construction, operations and maintenance of large scale renewable energy projects”. The Office Task Force estimates that, in order to reach the goal of 25% RE at installations by 2025, investments of over $7B over the next ten years will be required to generate the additional 2.1 million megawatt hours required.

The EIOTF plans to leverage the memorandum of agreement signed between DOE and DOD in September of last year. Presumably, in accordance with the memo, DOE will provide personnel and expertise to DOD in a fully reimbursable rate that will include Labor (including labor hours and skill mix), Materials (including any equipment), Travel, Other Direct Costs, Laboratory Directed Research and Development (if applicable), Overhead, Federal Administrative Charge (if applicable). From personal experience, this can be very expensive. While DOE can provide the technical expertise, hopefully, industry will be part of the team. Understanding business concerns is key to creating business cases.

The Residential Community Initiatives (RCI) model will be used by the EIOTF. RCI is the Army’s portion of the DOD Military Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI). The program “is a public/private program whereby private sector developers may own, operate, maintain, improve and assume responsibility for military family housing, where doing so is economically advantageous and national security is not adversely affected”. One of the important aspects of RCI is that the government begins the National Environmental Policy Act process before solicitations are issued. If this is copied by the EIOTF it will certainly expedite the process.

The composition of the Office is not yet established and its guiding document, the Army’s Renewable Energy Execution Plan is as yet unpublished. If the EIOTF lives up to its goal of “streamlining existing acquisition processes and [leveraging] industry for the execution of large scale renewable and alternative energy projects” there is goodness in the idea. There is also a need for similar efforts on the conservation side of the equation. ESPCs and UESCs need work to improve the process of reducing electricity requirements via third party financing. After speaking with dozens of industry representatives on the floor of GovEnergy for the last three days, I assure you, industry is ready. What they want to see is clear delineation of who is responsible, what authorities are available and how accountability will be held. Simply saying that Net Zero is a goal is insufficient. Unless a commander somewhere is given the responsibility, appropriate authorities (resources) and knows that he/she will be held accountable, there will be no sense of urgency. The unit does well what the boss checks. Dan Nolan

Strategies to Reduce DOD Building Energy Use by 50%

DOD manages over two billion square feet of building space. According to DOE, “Residential and commercial buildings account for almost 39 percent of total U.S. energy consumption and 38 percent of U.S. carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.” With the very aggressive goals established for energy reduction in DOD over the next several years, this sector must be considered carefully. Vince Marshall of Cherokee Energy Management & Construction took a look at a couple recent reports, one from Amory Lovin’s Rocky Mountain Institute and the other from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. It’s a good day for Colorado! Highly recommend reading for Energy Managers and Commanders responsible for making energy goals. Read on…….

Building energy consumption is a significant portion of the total energy consumed by DOD. Within the past few weeks, studies by the Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) and National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL) have focused on whole building approaches to reducing building energy use.

Rocky Mountain Institute’s- Whole Building Retrofits: A Gateway to Climate Stabilization. Is a high level approach to create significant energy savings by looking at a building as an entity and not as individual systems. Many times designers, engineers and even building owners see building systems such as space cooling, heating and domestic hot water heating as having independent functions and not how they can all work together.

It is extremely cost effective to upgrade major HVAC systems by “piggybacking” on planned capital improvements. That is to identify ageing systems and upgrade to a more efficient system when that unit reaches the end of its useful life. Often we see a “Replace in Kind” approach with whatever was there before instead of spending a small amount of capital to significantly increase efficiency. Paybacks on these marginal expenses are superb.

NREL’s Technical Support Document: Strategies for 50% Energy Savings in Large Office Buildings is a 163 page, in-depth road map to attain a 50% reduction in energy use for large commercial buildings. This is as compared to ASHRAE 90.1 2004/ 2007 editions. The report is lengthy, but easy to read and makes good sense.

The following are summaries from this document:

• Achieving 50% energy savings cost effectively requires an integrated building design—an approach that analyzes buildings as holistic systems rather than as disconnected collections of individually engineered subsystems. We analyze the complex interactions between building systems and ensure the building will operate as efficiently as possible. 
• Careful attention is paid to simulated comfort indices to ensure indoor environmental quality is not sacrificed in the interest of energy savings or costs 
• We recommend off-the-shelf technologies that are available from multiple sources, as opposed to technologies or techniques that are available only in limited quantities or from one manufacturer. 

The following energy efficiency measures played important roles in reaching the 50% energy savings target:

• The baseline hydronic VAV system was replaced with radiant heated and cooled slab ceilings with DOAS for ventilation. ( Dedicated Outside Air System) 
• The DOAS design was tailored to address climate-specific requirements as follows: sensible and latent energy recovery equipment was used in humid climates, sensible energy recovery equipment was used in marine and very cold climates, and indirect evaporative cooling (IDEC) was included in dry climates. 
• Waterside economizing was incorporated in dry climates. 
• Lighting power density was reduced to 0.63 W/ft2 in offices spaces and occupancy sensors were assumed in infrequently occupied zones. 
• Day lighting controls tuned to maintain a 27.9 fc (300 lux) set point. 
• Entrance vestibules and envelope air barriers were included to reduce infiltration. These features were important to avoid condensation on radiant cooling surfaces in humid climates. 
• High efficiency boilers (condensing, nominally 98% efficient), chillers (COP of 7), air distribution units (69% total fan efficiency), and service water heating (SWH) equipment (90% thermal efficiency) was installed. 
• Façade WWR (Window to Wall Ratio) was reduced to 20% and window properties were modified to reduce solar gain, improve overall envelope insulation, and reduce construction costs. In low-rise buildings, double pane windows with low-emissivity film and argon fill (U-0.235, SHGC-0.416, VLT-0.750) were installed; in high-rise buildings, double pane windows with low-emissivity film and tinted glass constructions (U-0.288, SHGC-0.282, VLT- 0.55) were used.
• Exterior wall insulation was added in cold climates (up to R-19.5 continuous insulation (c.i.) for the low-rise case and R-22.5 c.i. for the high-rise case). 
• Total plug loads were reduced by 23% to 0.68 W/ft2 (7.3 W/m2) by purchasing high efficiency electronic equipment and employing control strategies to eliminate plug loads when equipment was not being used. 

As we all strive to meet annual energy reduction goals, these are two really good articles filled with solid ideas and it is worth your time to read them.

----------------------
[i] U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), 2008 Buildings Energy Data Book. Prepared for the DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy by D&R International, 2008.

DOD and DOE Pledge Tighter Teaming on Energy

I've met DOE folks knowledgeable about DOD energy efforts in the past (certainly this is the case with renewables, microgrid and energy efficiency activities at Marine Corps Air Station Miramar). And conversely, know young DODers with some DOE/NREL time under their belts. Those interactions have proven fruitful, because now the two biggest players in USG energy are formalizing their intentions to work as a team on energy on multiple levels, and across the entire portfolio of energy issues:

... Signed by Deputy Secretary Poneman and U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense William Lynn, [the Memorandum of Understanding or MOU] covers efforts in the areas of energy efficiency, renewable energy, water efficiency, fossil fuels, alternative fuels, efficient transportation technologies and fueling infrastructure, grid security, smart grid, storage, waste-to-energy, basic science research, mobile/deployable power, small modular reactor nuclear energy, and related areas.

In particular, seems like the on-base nuclear notion is still going strong, especially given the fact that regulatory factors are discussed, not just technical:

Collaboration will include NRC review and licensing of nuclear power plants that are deployed for DOD purposes, and are located on or adjacent to DOD US installations.

The DOD also offers up one of its biggest assets for this effort - its CONUS bases:

The Department of Defense aims to speed innovative energy and conservation technologies from laboratories to military end users, and it uses military installations as a test bed to demonstrate and create a market for innovative energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies.

To me, the ability to use our many hundreds of bases, each a small-to-medium sized town, as energy and energy efficiency technology and process labs is a huge win. But then again, I don't live on a base anymore.

Partnership announcements in the business world are often more about marketing than substance. But we've been seeing them with uncommon frequency around energy matters in the normally tightly siloed Federal government recently (see post on USN and USDA pairing announcement, here). Let's hope the sum of the parts helps all orgs involved go further/faster than was previously possible.

Wonder Twins image courtesy of Wikipedia

Conference Alert: GovEnergy 2010, Y'all

What: the biggest conference of the year focused on the intersection of US government (with a heavy dose of DOD) and energy (particularly facilities) matters. Big enough this year, in fact, to draw Amory Lovins as a keynote.

Where: Dallas, TX at the Dallas Convention Center

When: 15-18 August (a great time to visit the Lone Star State, don't you think?)

Why: as with all conferences, the speakers are the draw, but much of the real value comes from sharing war stories, best practices and lessons learned with peers in the trenches. With GovEnergy, many of the attendees are facilities energy managers or similar. Comparing notes on renewables integration and financing issues, energy efficiency initiatives and targets, and emerging Smart Grid and Smart Grid security matters. They've got a lot on their plates as power equipment that used to be protected via isolation is now increasingly getting connected to IT networks and, as discussed here on the sister blog, is being targeted by adversaries.

How: more info here at the GovEnergy 2010 site

Photo credit: n thomas at Flickr.com

Army Installations Energy Surge

Had the privilege and pleasure of attending an Army Bloggers Roundtable today with the following Army energy leaders:

• Maj. Gen. Dana J. H. Pittard, Deputy Chief of Staff, G3, United States Army Training and Doctrine Command
• Maj. Gen. Howard Bromberg, Commanding General, Fort Bliss
• Mr. Jerry Hansen, Army Senior Energy Executive, and Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Strategic Infrastructure
• Dr. Kevin Geiss, Program Director for Army Energy Security

Mr. Hansen began with this outstanding (IMHO) opening salvo:

[The Army views] energy security as a critical mission enabler and an operational imperative, which can provide the Army with an essential tactical advantage. Our Army installations, our tactical operations, soldier training all require secure and uninterrupted access to energy. Our current dependence on fossil fuels and the vulnerable electric power grid jeopardize the security of Army installations and mission capabilities. Also, long liquid fuel logistical supply chains and convoys pose serious risk to contingency operations and increase the vulnerability of our deployed forces.

Each speaker then shared a few words, then the session was opened up for Q&A. Here are the take-aways I captured, short and sweet:

• Straddling west Texas and southrrn New Mexico and as bigger than Rhode Island, Fort Bliss is following an ambitious plan to deploy capture energy efficiency gains, deploy substantial amounts of alternative and renewable energy generation, and in-so-doing, become one of the DOD's first NetZero installations
• Intent is to be holistic at Fort Bliss, meaning, not deploy a bunch of independent, disconnected pilot projects. But rather, build out new Smart / microgrid energy infrastructure as one large, interconnected system
• Fort Irwin continues its 500 MW solar build-out in California
• Hawthorne Army Depot in Nevada will get 30 MWs of geothermal power soon - enough to supply the full "base load" of the base
• Energy security continues to be a secondary or tertiary driver for these initiatives. ROI-driven business cases, leveraging public-private partnerships, tax incentives, etc., help these projects come to fruition

Note: for related Army energy strategy info, see recent DEB post on Army Renewable Energy Rodeo, here. And click here for the full roundtable transcript.

Photo credit: Solar Feeds

New DOD Energy and Climate Report out from Pew

From the smart folks at the Pew Trust's project on National Security, Energy and Climate comes a new report titled: "Reenergizing America's Defense." It's got a bigger thrust on climate than I usually cover on this blog, but a well done piece that covers the intersection of climate and energy challenges and initiatives across the Department.

The report has a lot of helpful and current info, but as you might expect, it's going to lean towards the green side of things, including biofuels promotion. Of course, from an energy security point of view, I'm in favor of the development of every kind of new fuel and energy source we can pursue. But also want to make sure we don't trick ourselves into thinking we're killing many birds with one stone. Sometimes, we're just mitigating one problem but leaving other important ones un-addressed ... and sometimes causing new trouble along the way.

Really like this mind-sharpening summary note from the USAF's Ollie Fritz:

Fuel could be free of cost and free of emissions, and we would still have risks associated with our energy requirement. Reducing our need for energy (of any kind) is the sweet spot - [that] reduces operational risk and reduces emissions. Doesn't mean we shouldn't pursue alternative fuels, but alt fuels alone do not reduce operational risk for deployed operations.

See what I mean? You can download the PDF here and the Pew's Energy and Environment team can be found here.

Lovins on DOD Energy Opportunities in 2010

Rocky Mountain Institute founder Amory Lovins has been in this long game longer than anyone, and much of the credit for DOD's current momentum on energy can be traced directly to his decades-long leadership and perseverance. So it's great news that NDU's Joint Force Quarterly journal has just published his current assessment and recommendations for the Department's energy strategy. (Note: because it's so timely and topical, you'll find it front and center (actually, top and right) on the DOD Energy Blog for the rest of this year.)

Biggest points of emphasis in this piece are deep drill-downs on the two new new strategic vectors (or capabilities) Lovins has been championing for some time time: endurance and resilience. The business case for the first begins early in the article:

Nobody knows how much oil is in the ground: governments, which often do not know or will not transparently reveal what they have, hold about 94 percent of reserves. But DOD, like the United States, has three compelling reasons to get off oil regardless: security, climate, and cost.... DOD’s unnecessarily inefficient use of oil makes it move huge quantities of fuel from purchase to use, imposing high costs in blood, treasure, and combat effectiveness.

Endurance gets you platforms less dependent on oil logistics, freeing soldiers up for offense vs. the defense that massive fuel convoys demand. Greater weighting of resilience, on the other hand, would liberate DOD bases from their current dangerous over-dependence on commercial power in CONUS and overseas. Once broadly implemented via renewables and the smart and micro-grids, it would also reduce our little-discussed vulnerability to trees and rodents:

The US electrical grid ... is very capital-intensive, complex, technologically unforgiving, usually reliable, but inherently brittle. It is responsible for 98–99 percent of U.S. power failures, and occasionally blacking out large areas within seconds—because the grid requires exact synchrony across subcontinental areas and relies on components taking years to build in just a few factories or one (often abroad), and can be interrupted by a lightning bolt, rifle bullet,malicious computer program, untrimmed branch, or errant squirrel.

The title is "DOD's Energy Challenge as Strategic Opportunity" and I highly recommend you read the whole thing here.

QDR 2010 Directly Addresses DOD's Operational and Facilities Energy Issues

I admit it: back in June of 2009 I had my doubts. But the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) is finally out, and energy got its due - approximately one page out of one hundred twenty eight. Not bad, when you consider previous QDRs never considered the topic. Starting on page 84 of the report, I've captured and reprinted the 4 energy specific paragraphs here and will break it down, with the points I consider most important / helpful highlighted in yellow.

First, I like that they take a stab at defining energy security, and when they do it's kept short and sweet:

Energy security for the Department means having assured access to reliable supplies of energy and the ability to protect and deliver sufficient energy to meet operational needs.

There's a lot they leave out that others try to cram in. I say: good job. Re: the definition - just want to make sure we don't spend so much time and energy on the protect and deliver parts that we significantly impair our ability to prosecute war ... or whatever else it is our troops are told to accomplish. The QDR addresses that concern in the next sentence:

Energy efficiency can serve as a force multiplier, because it increases the range and endurance of forces in the field and can reduce the number of combat forces diverted to protect energy supply lines, which are vulnerable to both asymmetric and conventional attacks and disruptions.

... and points out additional benefits to fielding a leaner, meaner force. So how's this goodness going to come about? By baking better energy thinking in right up front the way it's already been told to do by congress, and the way two Defense Science Boards and the GAO have already recommended:

DoD must incorporate geostrategic and operational energy considerations into force planning, requirements development, and acquisition processes. To address these challenges, DoD will fully implement the statutory requirement for the energy efficiency Key Performance Parameter and fully burdened cost of fuel set forth in the 2009 National Defense Authorization Act.

Who's going to make this happen? Why the DOD Energy Boss, of course. The QDR language makes it sound like a fait accompli:

The Department will also investigate alternative concepts for improving operational energy use, including the creation of an innovation fund administered by the new Director of Operational Energy to enable components to compete for funding on projects that advance integrated energy solutions.

Sounds good, but I've got the feeling they're being a little too optimistic on this one. See here.

I like everything in this next two paragraphs, but I'm going to let them ride without comment and just a few highlights:

The Department is increasing its use of renewable energy supplies and reducing energy demand to improve operational effectiveness, reduce greenhouse gas emissions in support of U.S. climate change initiatives, and protect the Department from energy price fluctuations. The Military Departments have invested in noncarbon power sources such as solar, wind, geothermal, and biomass energy at domestic installations and in vehicles powered by alternative fuels, including hybrid power, electricity, hydrogen, and compressed national gas. Solving military challenges—through such innovations as more efficient generators, better batteries, lighter materials, and tactically deployed energy sources—has the potential to yield spin-off technologies that benefit the civilian community as well. DoD will partner with academia, other U.S. agencies, and international partners to research, develop, test, and evaluate new sustainable energy technologies.

Indeed, the following examples demonstrate the broad range of Service energy innovations. By 2016, the Air Force will be postured to cost-competitively acquire 50 percent of its domestic aviation fuel via an alternative fuel blend that is greener than conventional petroleum fuel. Further, Air Force testing and standard-setting in this arena paves the way for the much larger commercial aviation sector to follow. The Army is in the midst of a significant transformation of its fleet of 70,000 non-tactical vehicles (NTVs), including the current deployment of more than 500 hybrids and the acquisition of 4,000 low-speed electric vehicles at domestic installations to help cut fossil fuel usage. The Army is also exploring ways to exploit the opportunities for renewable power generation to support operational needs: for instance, the Rucksack Enhanced Portable Power System (REPPS). The Navy commissioned the USS Makin Island, its first electric-drive surface combatant, and tested an F/A-18 engine on camelina-based biofuel in 2009—two key steps toward the vision of deploying a “green” carrier strike group using biofuel and nuclear power by 2016. The Marine Corps has created an Expeditionary Energy Office to address operational energy risk, and its Energy Assessment Team has identified ways to achieve efficiencies in today’s highly energy-intensive operations in Afghanistan and Iraq in order to reduce logistics and related force protection requirements.

Finally, the last paragraph brings it all home with the intent to address the brittle grid problem.

To address energy security while simultaneously enhancing mission assurance at domestic facilities, the Department is focusing on making them more resilient. U.S. forces at home and abroad rely on support from installations in the United States. DoD will conduct a coordinated energy assessment, prioritize critical assets, and promote investments in energy efficiency to ensure that critical installations are adequately prepared for prolonged outages caused by natural disasters, accidents, or attacks. At the same time, the Department will also take steps to balance energy production and transmission with the requirement to preserve the test and training ranges and the operating areas that are needed to maintain readiness.

They covered all the bases (no pun intended) as far as I'm concerned. There's another two-hundred or more pages of detail I would have like to have seen included on energy, but if they had, given all the other challenges facing the department at this time, it wouldn't be a QDR.

I'll pursue the usual path from this point on: reminding the Department that this is what it's told itself it needs to do on energy matters, and nudging it to move faster when it looks like other challenges, or more likely, mind-numbing bureaucratic inertia, tribal squabbling and/or status quo thinking get in the way of desperately needed progress.

Photo Credit: abnskyshark / Andrew Michael Smith @ Flickr

Nuclear Comeback for DOD Bases?

Life would be so simple if we could conduct a feasibility study, find feasibility, then navigate through the regulatory processes with uncommon aplomb and install small new nuclear reactors at each of our bases. Each base would have a constant flow of electricity more than adequate for all of its own needs, including all mission systems, base housing, key services, etc. In fact, most would have power to spare should the host community ever find itself in an emergency situation where power to key facilities like hospitals would be a lifesaver.

Well, looks like DOD's going to take a run at this, thanks for a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2010 that says so. Here's an excerpt from an outstanding summary by William A. Macon, Jr., Army Reactor Program Manager:

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 includes a provision that requires the Secretary of Defense to conduct a study to assess the feasibility of developing nuclear power plants on military installations. Not later than June 1, 2010, the Secretary shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report containing the results of the study. In summary, the study shall consider: options for construction and operation; cost estimates and the potential for life cycle cost savings; potential energy security advantages; additional infrastructure costs; impact on quality of life of military personnel; regulatory, State, and local concerns; impact on operations on military installations; potential environmental liabilities; factors impacting safe co-location of nuclear power plants on military installations; and, any other factors that bear on the feasibility of developing nuclear power plants
on military installations.

Clearly, as Army Energy Security Implementation Plans (AESIPs) are developed according to the AESIS and the Secretary of Defense conducts a formal feasibility study on deploying nuclear power plants on military installations, the nuclear energy option for military power and fuel production will likely gain increased attention and may warrant consideration by senior leaders in coming years. The potential renaissance of an Army Nuclear Power Program comes at a time when the commercial nuclear power industry is actively pursuing new nuclear power plants, with 28 combined operating license applications currently under review by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).

It also comes at a time when there are compelling new designs for smaller nuke plants, my favorite being Hyperion's bathtub-sized nuke that requires very little care and feeding and generates all the energy most bases need. Hyperion was covered on the DOD blog some time ago, here in fact. But before I get too worked up, it's important to note Macon's own nagging concern that that the NDAA did not fully include the feasibility of the regulatory processes to implement reactor development on military installations, and as he says, this is not a trivial issue. Considerable regulatory development still lies ahead, even if all the technical studies come up roses.

So here's Macon's full paper, complete with the historical context you'll need to weigh the odds that nuclear powered bases will come to pass ... in our lifetime. Depending on your age, that is.

Air Force Academy Charts a Clean Tech Energy Future

I attended the Air Force's premier institution of higher learning in 1980's and remember the modernist buildings and breathtaking landscape (breathtaking in part, due to the scarcity of O2 at 7,500 feet above sea level). In between countless push ups and keeping my chin in, I remember wondering in the long winter hours how much they spend to they heat the place given all that glass.

Well, as this energy plan summarizes, senior leaders and facilities managers at USAFA have been thinking about how to turn some of their current energy liabilities into advantages by making the most of MILCON energy efficiency-related construction programs, as well as the decent solar, wind and hydro characteristics of the sprawling, front range Colorado Springs campus.

Here's how they say it:

The Air Force Academy is positioned to lead the charge in energy conservation, conversion away from fossil fuels, and research into new, innovative renewable energy technologies. We have 18,500 acres of natural resources including forests, water, solar, wind, geothermal, kinetics and biomass. Our team includes committed leadership, talented research scientists and engineers, dedicated energy management professionals and a base populace that understands the importance of energy independence.

This plan delves into the Air Force Academy’s goal to be a “Net-Zero” electricity installation and to reduce our carbon footprint from facility and transportation sources. Our broad objectives are challenging, yet achievable:

• Become a “Net-Zero” electricity installation by the end of calendar year 2015
• Meet all federal energy reduction mandates
• Play a leading role in renewable energy research
• Embody each cadet with an understanding that energy must be a consideration in all we do

Some great projects with tons of potential for cadet learning and culture change. All of which should impact the AF more broadly as the grads move out into leadership positions in the "Real Air Force". Here's the full plan for your review ... it's pretty ambitious ... looking forward to watching them pull this off.

DOD Solar Facilities Build Out Beginning in Sunny Places

Its solar wall notwithstanding, Alaska's Elmendorf AFB going to have to wait for large scale solar thermal or photovoltaics. Going well beyond current LEED sustainability standards, the Navy is pushing the envelope on net zero buildings and communities in Hawaii. Follow this DOE link to read about a significant DOD housing implementation called Forest City in Honolulu.

As for the Air Force, not one to rest on its 14 MW Nevada/Nellis AFB laurels, up next is 6 more MWs in Arizona at Davis-Monthan AFB.

Meanwhile, as you should know by now, the Army is making progress on its whopper (500 MW - 1 GW) of a solar deployment in the Mojave desert at Fort Irwin in CA.

Photo Credit: DOE EERE

More (Yes, More) Materials from the 2009 Navy Energy Conference

This is the DOD energy conference that keeps on giving. They said they would do this and now here they going doing just what they said ... I like that!

More information is now available on the new website, as well as video highlights of each day of the Naval Energy Forum. In addition to all speaker/panelist presentation materials, there are now links to download:

• All materials used for the Information Exchange
• The Task Force Energy working group fact sheets
• Breakout room summaries
• The Naval Energy Forum program
• Naval Energy: A Strategic Approach

Click here for access to any/all of the above. Thank you ONR.

DOD Beginning to See the Light

Beginning, that is, if you don't count the 14 MW installation at Nellis AFB in Nevada which has now been in place a couple of years. I'm sure there are more, but here are two press releases forwarded to me last week, announcing another ambitious solar deployment by the Air Force and a 1 GW (potential) whopper by the Army. Like the Nellis project before them, the financing is every bit as innovative as the technology. First, here's the Air Force one:

TUCSON, Ariz.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Housing developer Actus Lend Lease, SolarCity®, Tucson Electric Power (TEP), and financing parties National Bank of Arizona and U.S. Bancorp Community Development Corporation (USBCDC) are working to create one of the nation’s largest distributed, community-wide solar power systems at Soaring Heights Communities at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base. Upon completion, the community is expected to be the largest solar-powered community in the continental U.S. The solar systems are expected to produce more than 10 million kilowatt hours of electricity annually—sufficient to provide an estimated 75 percent of the residents’ energy use next year—and could eventually offset 100 percent of Soaring Heights Communities’ electricity use.

Full Air Force Press Release here. And now for the Army:

LOS ANGELES, Oct 15 (Reuters) - The U.S. military is tackling a new mission in the field of alternative energy, moving to power up a 500-megawatt solar facility at Fort Irwin's sprawling desert complex in California.The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers tapped ACCIONA Solar Power, a unit of Spain's Acciona SA (ANA.MC), and Clark Energy Group to develop the project, which launched its first phase on Thursday. The project, located at the Army's largest training range in California's Mojave Desert, could grow as large as 1 gigawatt in the future.

Full Army Press Release here. Not one to rest on its geothermal laurels (see: China Lake), I'm sure the Navy has a solar response up its sleeves. Stay tuned.

Photo Credit: Mike Baird at Flickr

Latest GAO Report Hits DOD Hard on Grid Reliance

Sometimes it seems like there's just too much on the DOD's plate:

• having to simultaneously kill people and build trust with communities
• with too many risks to track and mitigate, and 
• too many jobs to be done by too few folks ...
• in an increasingly constrained budgetary environment
• and I'm not even going to mention EMP (woops)

Now comes GAO telling Congress and DOD that the Department is asleep at the wheel when it comes to plans and preparation for extended power outages in CONUS and overseas. Here's a couple of excerpts from the summary:

DOD’s most critical assets are vulnerable to disruptions in electrical power supplies, but DOD lacks sufficient information to determine the full extent of the risks and vulnerabilities these assets face. All 34 of these most critical assets require electricity continuously to support their military missions, and 31 of them rely on commercial power grids—which the Defense Science Board Task Force on DOD Energy Strategy has characterized as increasingly fragile and vulnerable—as their primary source of electricity.

and

The 10 Defense Critical Infrastructure Program vulnerability assessments we reviewed did not explicitly consider assets’ vulnerabilities to longer-term (i.e., of up to several weeks’ duration) electrical power disruptions on a mission-specific basis, as DOD has not developed explicit Defense Critical Infrastructure Program benchmarks for assessing electrical power vulnerabilities associated with longer-term electrical power disruptions.

Sounds to me like this necessary work could piggyback nicely with efforts to prepare for and take advantage of new and emerging Smart Grid and microgrid capabilities. Somebody on that?  Hope so.

Army Corps of Engineers’ Sustainability Conference Report

Sabot 6's Dan Nolan's out there and at it again. Looks like he was within 10 miles of my home territory in Boston and didn't even let me know ... he's definitely going to get it.  But for now, you're going to get it, straight from him and his recent experiences at an Army sustainability conference. Enjoy!

DN: I had the opportunity to deliver the keynote address at the US Army Corps of Engineers’ North Atlantic Division (NAD) Sustainability Conference hosted by the New England District in scenic Concord, MA on 7 Oct 09. Traveling through the back roads under the canopy of fall splendor, I could see why this was land for which one would fight.The conference was attended by about 80 military engineers and managers, including members of the NAD HQ, folks from all six Districts (even Europe!), as well as the USACE’s Engineer Research and Development Center (Construction Engineering Research Laboratory) and U.S. Navy’s Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC). The purpose of the conference was to inform and educate military engineers about federal and DoD policy mandates (e.g., EPAct 2005, EISA 2007, the DoD Energy Security Strategic Plan, E.O. 13423 and the new Executive Order), meeting LEED (especially changes with LEED 3.0), the technologies on the market that will enable the USACE to achieve the various requirements, and case studies and best practices using those technologies. The interest and excitement was palpable in every session, and the discussion was spirited as engineers and managers compared notes and case studies between districts and Services on what the impact of the policies has been and will continue to be (especially the new Executive Order). Most importantly, the discussion demonstrated how to continue positioning the Corps to meet the new challenges of sustainable design, energy efficiency and renewable technologies. Seeing the momentum from the grass roots level of the USACE, echoing the themes presented by the CG, LTG Van Antwerp the day before at the AUSA Convention was very heartening. The guys and gals who have to make it happen are ready and the leadership is committed. I look for great things to follow from the Corps!

USN Moving Out on AMI and Smart Grid

Had a chance to speak with Bill Anderson, the Navy's Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) Project Manager who's leading a worldwide team of over fifty engineers, laying the AMI foundation towards the Navy's future Smart Grid infrastructure. For background on AMI, click here. Anderson described his project as having several phases:

• 2-4 years for building out the AMI infrastructure, then,
• 2-3 years for putting the rest of the Smart Grid components in place

He emphasized that as they seek to enable the "utility of the future," he and his team realize that they are laying the foundation for a "yet to be defined" US Navy Smart Grid. I like that this team openly acknowledges that they don't know enough yet to describe the details of the ultimate system they're building, and that some key challenges, like energy storage, remain to be solved.

On the security side, networks, comm gear and devices are all being held to the same standards the Navy uses for the rest of its IT operations, including the the DOD Information Assurance Certification and Accreditation Process (DIACAP)'s certification and accreditation processes. These standards are DoDI 8510.1 which binds DOD users to the information assurance (IA) controls defined in DoDD 8500.1 and DoDI 8500.2. It would be interesting to see how tuned in the Navy is to the Smart Grid standards work being done by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).

Stay tuned as Anderson's team completes its initial AMI pilot at Naval Base Ventura County and the Navy moves out on the program's next steps.