Vets Who Served Overseas Seek Higher Fuel Standards

By Keith Griffin on Thu, 01/19/2012 – 17:05
Auto News
Some of the people who have made the greatest sacrifices for our country are pushing for higher CAFE standards so our fighting forces are no longer compelled to fight for our dependence on fossil fuel.

That’s the message that came out of the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) hearings in Philadelphia today and earlier this week in Detroit. An additional hearing is set for next week in San Francisco. Members of Operation Free, a nationwide coalition of veterans, spoke in support of strong fuel economy standards for US cars and trucks.

John Gensler, former Captain, US Army, testified, “My experiences in war have made me understand and care deeply about our national security, as countless friends are still fighting overseas, and not all of them have made it home safely. The longer the U.S. remains dependent on fossil fuel, the more the U.S. will have to engage in tough wars just to protect our energy supplies, putting American lives at risk.”

He added, “This isn’t just an academic or economic threat to veterans like me; it is a deeply and profoundly personal threat. In December of 2007, I helped lay to rest West Point classmate Captain Ben Tiffner, who was killed in Iraq by an advanced roadside bomb. That bomb was designed, built, and financed by the Iranian government propped up by global oil revenues. “Not two months later, nearly four years ago to the day, I was burying another friend and football teammate, Captain Torre Mallard, at West Point. He was killed in a similar incident, by a similar weapon, again funded by black-stained petrodollars. How many more of our bravest young Americans will we lose while we continue to debate and prolong action?”

Gensler served as an officer in the United States Army as a tank and infantry mortar platoon leader, and previously worked for the Dept of Energy’s Advanced Research Projects Agency – Energy (ARPA-E). He now works as a Project Developer for Borrego Solar Systems, helping develop solar energy projects for the Department of Defense and other federal agencies. Gensler is a graduate of United States Military Academy at West Point, MIT’s Sloan School of Management, and Harvard’s JFK School of Government.

Brendan Flynn, US Coast Guard Academy graduate and Operation Free organizer, testified, “It is very clear to me that America’s oil dependence makes us vulnerable. A number of my good friends from the Coast Guard have served in-theater guarding oil platforms just off the coast of Iraq from waterborne suicide boat attacks. U.S. forces recently turned over oil platform security duties to the Iraqis, but oil infrastructure continues to be a target for attack both overseas and here at home.

“This is why I believe that we must adopt the 54.5 mpg standard. Nearly half of the oil we use goes towards fueling our cars and trucks, meaning building cars that use less gas will help break our addiction to oil. This standard is good for our economy, as it will spur new investments in energy-efficient engines. It is good for our national security – as the less reliant we are on one source of energy, the less vulnerable we are to a major disruption of supply. Frankly, the only people that this standard is bad for are the insurgents and terrorists fighting against our troops and plotting to attack our nation.”

The members of Operation Free are facing strong opposition from organized groups like the National Automobile Dealers Association, which wants nothing to do with the new standards. The NADA’s government relations chairman, Don Chalmers, a New Mexico-based Ford Motor Co. dealer, was quoted in the Wall Street Journal as saying, “I want to sell very efficient cars. But if the customer can’t get the financing for that car, than it makes no difference. Finance sources do not look at how much you are going to save in fuel economy.” He added that the NADA plans to release a study next month that will estimate that technology costs would add up to $5,000 to the price of a vehicle.

Luke Tonachel a senior analyst in the Energy and Transportation program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, backed the Operation Free arguments in testimony in Detroit. In his testimony Tonachel portrayed the stakes as being very high. The higher CAFE standards would save the American economy “a half trillion dollars over the next 20 years,” according to an article posted by TorqueNews correspondent David Herron.

To Read More: http://www.torquenews.com/108/vets-who-served-overseas-seek-higher-fuel-standards

Alex Cornell Du Houx, a Marine and Iraq War veteran, said the Department of Defense was the nation’s single-largest purchaser of gasoline and is attempting to reduce carbon emissions by 20 percent within the next eight years. The Air Force, he said, will use as much as 50 percent biofuels by 2016.

“This is the single best step we can take right now to curb our dangerous addiction to oil,” said Du Houx. “This will have a tremendous impact, and make us less vulnerable to unfriendly and unstable regimes.

First hearing on 54.5 mpg proposal reveals widespread support

They came from as close as the General Motors headquarters across the street and as far away as Santa Fe, New Mexico.

They represented groups as diverse as automakers and the military, steel manufacturers and religious organizations.

And nearly all of the 90 or so people who testified on a proposal to raise the nation’s fuel economy standard to 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025 offered support for the plan before a joint government panel in downtown Detroit.

Noting that the Obama administration’s proposal had won the diverse support of auto industry insiders, labor unions, consumer watchdogs and environmental groups, Congressman John Dingell said, “this is an event that ranks with the loaves and fishes.”

Tuesday’s hearing, held by the Environmental Protection Agency and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, was the first of three that will give members of the public opportunity to comment on the joint-proposed Corporate Average Fuel Economy rules. Further hearings are set for Thursday in Philadelphia and Tuesday, January 24, in San Francisco.

But it was in downtown Detroit, the heart of the nation’s auto industry, that government leaders were offered widespread support for the 54.5 mpg standard Tuesday. Proponents said the U.S. would benefit in the form of increased automotive jobs, consumer savings and enhanced national security.

“The auto industry is coming back strong, and one of the reasons we are so confident about the industry’s future is green technology,” said UAW president Bob King. “The drive to bring fuel efficient cars to the market is transforming existing jobs and creating new ones. … These are the automotive jobs of the future.”

The EPA estimates the 54.5 mpg standard will save more than 4 billion barrels of oil between 2017 and 2025 and cut carbon emissions by more than 2 billion metric tons. Based on an average fuel price of $3.53 per gallon, it estimates consumers will save a net of $4,400, even with a higher upfront sticker price for new models.

While stating that they supported the proposal, that was the top source of reluctance among automakers and dealers.

More than worrying about meeting what they saw as aggressive deadlines, executives representing U.S. domestic automakers were more concerned with whether enough mainstream customers had the desire and financial means to purchase new cars.

Even as carmakers unveiled more than a dozen new electric vehicles and hybrids at the North American International Auto Show taking place down the street at the Cobo Center, they feared trying to peer at consumer purchasing trends more than a decade into the future left too much leeway for error.

“We must not lose sight of the most important question, and that is, ‘Are they buying the product,’” said Jay Wilton, Chrysler’s vice president of engineering and regulatory compliance. “Measuring even next year is challenging. Speculating 13 years into the future brings risk.”

Because of that, the U.S. automakers said their support for the 54.5-mpg proposal was contingent upon the EPA and NHTSA agreeing to a midterm review that would assess whether early estimates on government figures were accurate, whether they could develop fuel-saving technology in time and, primarily, whether customers were buying fuel-efficient cars.

A November survey conducted by Consumer Reports revealed 80 percent of consumers said they supported the 54.5-mpg target and that 83 percent said they would be willing to pay more for a car that offered better fuel economy.

That may not necessarily mean they can afford a more fuel-efficient car. While several car dealers testified Tuesday they supported the CAFE proposal outright, other dealers were concerned about the costs fuel technologies would add to new vehicles.

Don Chalmers, speaking on behalf of the National Automobile Dealers Association, said the new standards would limit financing options for some customers, potentially decreasing new car sales and shifting borderline customers into used cars instead.

Although the EPA estimated that fuel savings of $6,600 over a decade would pay for the $2,200 increase in upfront vehicle cost, he said that financing departments would not factor the long-term savings into a customer’s loan application.

“I can’t quite get around the affordability from a finance standpoint and whether you can get qualified for a loan in the first place,” said Chalmers, who said he would have lost several sales this fall had the proposal been in place.

“The bankers don’t get a chart and compare fuel savings. They’re looking at payments versus disposable income, and that’s the reality of vehicle financing today.”

Chalmers was the most tepid of supporters in Detroit. Overall, the increased regulation enjoyed wide support. In the afternoon, a group of women broke out in song while supporting the new rule. Nurses hoped the new standard would decrease asthma and NCAAP officials said it would create jobs for black workers.

And if the CAFE proposal brought together groups more disparate than auto industry insiders and environmentalists, it was pacifists and Marines nodding in agreement.

Alex Cornell Du Houx, a Marine and Iraq War veteran, said the Department of Defense was the nation’s single-largest purchaser of gasoline and is attempting to reduce carbon emissions by 20 percent within the next eight years. The Air Force, he said, will use as much as 50 percent biofuels by 2016.

“This is the single best step we can take right now to curb our dangerous addiction to oil,” said Du Houx. “This will have a tremendous impact, and make us less vulnerable to unfriendly and unstable regimes.

The Rev. Peggy Garrigues, a pastor from Clawson United Methodist Church in suburban Detroit, agreed.

“War is incompatible with Christian teaching,” she said. “The less we depend on foreign oil, the less incentive we have to go to war. These proposed standards will help people of faith live out their values and create a better world for God’s children.”

For more: http://green.autoblog.com/2012/01/18/first-hearing-on-54-5-mpg-proposal-reveals-widespread-support/

THURSDAY, JANUARY 19, 2012
Want better mileage? You can have your say today

Would you like your car to get better gas mileage?

Federal officials will be in Philadelphia today to take testimony on proposed fuel efficiency standards that would require cars to get 54.5 miles a gallon — a “fleet” average — by 2025.

Today’s average? About 27 mpg. By one estimate, the new standards could save consumers $4,000 in fuel costs over the life of an average vehicle.

At a similar hearing Tuesday in Detroit, home of the American automobile, about 90 people testified — mostly in favor.

“Writing new regulations that will require cars and trucks to have significantly higher fuel economy by 2025 prompted years of fighting among automakers, environmentalists, regulators and consumer groups. But now that the standards have been proposed, nearly everyone involved in the process is on board with the results,” write Nick Bunkley in the New York Times.

“There appears to be no significant opposition amongst responsible persons,” said U.S. Rep. John D. Dingell, a Michigan Democrat who had fought earlier attempts to boost fuel economy.

“These standards will cut our oil use by more than we get from Persian Gulf, Venezuela and Russia combined,” said Larry Schweiger of the National Wildlife Federation.

Six veterans testified as well, pointing out that our need for imported oil threatens national security — and American lives.

Today’s hearing begins at 10 a.m. at the Crowne Plaza Philadelphia Downtown, 1800 Market Street. It is being held by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration.

If you can’t get there but would like to listen in, you can do so by by calling 866-299-3188 and then using conference code 734 214 4423#.

Also, the Sierra Club is tweeting from the hearing. Search for @SierraClubLive. I’ll retweet when I can.

Among those expected to testify today: the Clean Air Council, various medical groups, the National Automobile Dealers Association, the Pew Clean Energy Program, Greater Philadelphia Taxi Association, the director of Philadelphia’s Air Management Program, the Union of Concerned Scientists, several veterans, and officials from Hyundai, Ford and Toyota.

A fact sheet about the proposed standard is available on EPA’s Website http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/documents/420f11038.pdf.

Read more: http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/greenliving/Want-better-mileage-You-can-have-your-say-today.html

EPA Detroit Hearing: Less Oil Means a More Secure America
Posted: 1/18/12 01:35 PM ET

The EPA held hearings on clean car standards yesterday and I had the opportunity to testify in support of the new standards that will help move us off our dependence on oil.

When I served in Iraq in and around Fallujah, I came across a line of cars, trucks, and tractors that stretched as far as I could see. We decided to investigate and finally reached the end of the line to find they had been waiting all day in 100-degree heat for gas and diesel. It struck me how dependent this nation was on a single source of energy and how crippled it made them. They were so desperate for this single source of energy that when the curfew set in they essentially rioted against us. It also made me pause and think about how the United States was dependent on this single source of energy as well, and how we are essentially forced to line up to countries like Iran and Venezuela for our fuel.

This is one of the reasons I joined Operation Free, a coalition of veterans and national security organizations to ensure that we have an energy future that makes us more secure, boosts our economy, and keeps our environment healthy.

Our military leaders have taken note, and the Department of Defense, the nation’s largest energy consumer, has a goal to reduce their carbon pollution 20 percent by 2020. The Quadrennial Defense Review stated, “While climate change alone does not cause conflict, it may act as an accelerant of instability or conflict, placing a burden to respond on civilian institutions and militaries around the world.” The CIA has also opened a center on climate change.

The Army has one of the largest electric vehicle fleets in the world — 4000 vehicles in three years. The Air Force will have 50 percent of its aviation fuel from biofuel blends by 2016. The Marines are aiming for a 30 percent energy reduction by 2015. The Navy is launching the Great Green Fleet by 2016, which includes hybrid destroyers and F18s that run off of biofuels. The Navy also aims to reduce petroleum use in commercial fleet by 50 percent by 2015.

When in Iraq, I saw that our dependency on oil was a constant threat to our security and independence. Our dependence on oil makes us vulnerable to unstable and unfriendly regimes. The Department of Defense has set ambitious goals to reduce our dependence on oil and improve fuel standards because they understand the threat it poses to our nation.

This is not just a lesson for our military. Not only does cutting our dependence on oil make us more secure, it invests hard earned American money back in to our economy. Every day, we are sending a billion dollars overseas to pay for oil, money that could be staying in this country and supporting our own economy. Nearly half of the oil is used is by our cars and trucks. Increasing fuel efficiency will have a huge effect on our national expenditures on oil.

A 54.5 mile-per-gallon standard for cars and light trucks by 2025 is the single biggest step we can take right now to curb this dangerous addiction to oil. It would help my community and countless others around the country improve their economic security. It will keep America competitive with foreign auto manufacturers, many of whom are already operating under higher standards than our own. And it would strengthen our national security, making us independent and keeping billions of our dollars out of the hands of people who don’t have America’s interests in mind.

By implementing these standards, we will be taking control of our energy future and creating a more secure America.

Follow Alex Cornell du Houx on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Alex_Cornell

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alex-cornell-du-houx/epa-detroit-hearing-less-_b_1210902.html

New Gas Economy Rules Generate Wide Support
By NICK BUNKLEY
Published: January 17, 2012

DETROIT — Writing new regulations that will require cars and trucks to have significantly higher fuel economy by 2025 prompted years of fighting among automakers, environmentalists, regulators and consumer groups.

But now that the standards have been proposed, nearly everyone involved in the process is on board with the results, as a public hearing held Tuesday in Detroit showed.

More than 90 people who spoke throughout the day asserted that the stricter fuel economy requirements would create jobs, reduce oil consumption, create cleaner air and save drivers money, all while helping automakers increase their profits.

“We’re celebrating something that has taken a long time to reach,” said Representative John D. Dingell, a Michigan Democrat who helped quash previous efforts to impose higher mileage standards. “There appears to be no significant opposition amongst responsible persons.”

The National Automobile Dealers Association, however, did speak out against the idea of setting requirements for vehicles made more than a decade from now until more is known about the strength of consumer demand for more fuel-efficient vehicles.

Don Chalmers, a Ford dealer in New Mexico and the group’s government relations chairman, said he worried that vehicles would become too expensive for some consumers to afford. “Before rushing headlong into a set of new mandates aimed at doubling today’s fleet fuel economy, we need to understand better the potential ramifications,” Mr. Chalmers said. “If our customers do not purchase these products, we all lose.”

The proposed new standards call for automakers to increase the average, unadjusted fuel-economy rating of their vehicles to 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025, up from about 27 miles per gallon today. Because of the way testing is done, the 2025 requirement correlates to a window-sticker rating of about 36 miles per gallon, according to the automotive information Web site Edmunds.com, or roughly what Toyota’s tiny new Scion iQ car achieves today.

Additional hearings on the standards will take place Thursday in Philadelphia and Jan. 24 in San Francisco. The Obama administration this month extended the public comment period for the proposal by two weeks, to Feb. 13, and expects to finalize the regulations this summer.

The administration says the higher standards will cause vehicle prices to increase about $2,000 but that owners will save an average of $6,600 over the life of the vehicle by using less fuel. The rules also will create 484,000 jobs and cut oil consumption in the United States by 1.5 million barrels a day by 2030, according to the Go60mpg coalition, an association of environmental advocacy groups that support the proposal.

Mr. Chalmers said the government’s analysis greatly underestimates how much the rules will cause vehicle prices to rise. He said the actual increase could be up to $5,000, causing an average buyer’s monthly payments to go up by $60 or $70 and potentially locking out shoppers who would not be able to obtain financing for the higher price, regardless of their fuel savings later on.

Some individual dealers disagreed, though, and said they welcomed the new requirements.

“Our customers strongly desire more fuel-efficient vehicles,” said Doug Fox, who has five dealerships in Ann Arbor, Mich., selling Nissan, Hyundai and other brands. “Everyone seems to win on this deal.”

Michael Robinson, vice president for sustainability and regulatory affairs at General Motors, said the company probably would submit recommendations for some technical changes and clarifications to the rules, noting that the proposal is 1,000 pages long. But G.M. is “over all, very satisfied” with the standards, he told reporters.

“We are on a good path toward meeting the early requirements that this proposal will create,” Mr. Robinson said during the hearing. “But we will need further breakthroughs in technology and good customer acceptance of the additional vehicle changes, technologies and costs that will be associated with providing the vehicles needed in future years to allow us continued success in meeting the aggressive requirements down the road.”

G.M., the Ford Motor Company, Chrysler, and other automakers agreed last summer to support the framework of the higher standards.

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, a trade group, said all of its members supported the standards through 2016, when they would be required to achieve 36 miles per gallon. The German carmakers Volkswagen and Daimler have not endorsed the requirements past that point.

The president of the United Automobile Workers union, Bob King, said he supported increasing the fuel economy of vehicles because it would create jobs and better protect the jobs of current workers by helping the industry thrive.

“The proposed rules are sensible, achievable and needed,” Mr. King said. “They are good for the auto industry and its workers, good for the broader economy, good for the environment and good for our national security.”

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/18/business/energy-environment/new-fuel-economy-rules-win-broad-support.html?_r=2&smid=tw-nytenvironment&seid=auto

Guest commentary: Detroit automakers have the technology, creativity for 54.5 mpg
On Tuesday, Washington will come to Detroit to talk about how many miles per gallon American drivers will soon be getting.

Officials from the National Highway Transportation Administration and the EPA will hold a hearing on a proposal — announced last year by President Obama, flanked by leaders of the major car companies in a show of support — to require a fleet average of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025.
Since that announcement, voices of doubt have grown louder, even from those who might benefit from it like the National Auto Dealers Association. Some are fearful that the new mileage goals will hurt Detroit’s signature industry. And especially in tough times like these, that’s the last thing anybody wants.

But as I will testify at Tuesday’s hearing, the truth is that higher fuel economy standards will boost the bottom line for American automakers. In fact, I believe the Detroit Three need exactly this sort of ambitious but doable national mileage goal to help keep them from repeating mistakes that have proved so costly in the past.

Research shows that when automakers boost fuel efficiency, their profits actually rise. They sell more cars and trucks. And they create more jobs across the board — from manufacturing and marketing, to developing new and cleaner technologies that make their vehicles more competitive on the world stage. Add it all up, and economic models predict that the 54.5-mpg mileage standard now being considered would boost auto industry profits by billions of dollars per year.

On the other hand, we in Michigan know only too well what can happen when automakers ignore driver demand for more fuel-efficient cars. A few years back, Detroit stayed focused on SUVs and gas-guzzlers even as oil prices rose. By 2009, two of the Detroit three had declared bankruptcy. Government bailouts cost taxpayers billions. Here in Michigan, our friends, families and our neighbors lost their livelihoods. From 2000-2010, we were the only state in the country to lose population.

Now gasoline prices are rising again. In 2011, the price of gasoline (all grades and formulations) averaged $3.58 per gallon, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. That is 74 cents per gallon higher than in 2010, and 28 cents per gallon higher than in the crisis year of 2008.

Against this backdrop, vehicle manufacturers are deciding on the mix of vehicles they will be offering for sale; some highly fuel-efficient, some very inefficient. A strong national mileage standard will help ensure vehicle manufacturers make better choices this time around, while giving American drivers what they want: cars, SUVs and light trucks that go farther on a gallon of gasoline.
Consumers have confirmed their preference for more efficient vehicles in poll after poll. A recent Opinion Research poll commissioned by the Consumer Federation of America shows that 75% of Americans believe it is important to increase fuel-economy standards. And in a recent Mellman Group poll of likely voters here in Michigan, 76 percent said a national 60-mpg standard would encourage American carmakers to innovate, boosting sales and protecting US jobs.

Sixty miles per gallon is not on the table, but 54.5 mpg by 2025 is. Michigan’s automakers can do it. They have the technology and the creativity. They can give American drivers what they want. Along the way, they can make more money, sell more cars, and rebuild one of America’s great industries.
Economist Walter McManus is research professor of decision and information sciences at Oakland University. He is the former director of automotive analysis at the University of Michigan’s Transportation Research Institute, and spent nine years working in the automotive industry, focusing on forecasting, marketing analysis and new product development.

Read more: http://www.freep.com/comments/article/20120116/OPINION05/120116049/Guest-commentary-Detroit-automakers-have-the-technology-creativity-for-54-5-mpg

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

November 16, 2011

CONTACT
Benjamin Lowe, (202) 656-9723,
ben@trumanproject.org

Vets Group: Strong Car Mileage Rules Make U.S. Safer

Washington, DC – In response to today’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking from the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration to strengthen fuel economy standards to 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025, Operation Free spokesperson Benjamin Lowe released the following statement:

“The new fuel efficiency and emissions standards announced today are a critical win for America’s security and prosperity.

“The US spend nearly a billion dollars a day importing oil. Our dangerous dependence on oil forces us to cut deals with countries that don’t share our values or have our best interests in mind. Our oil use weakens our international leverage, entangles America with hostile regimes, and, by indirectly funding our enemies, puts our troops at risk.

“Most of the oil we use goes toward providing gas for our cars and trucks. The more efficient our vehicles are, the less dependent on oil we’ll be, and the more money stays in our economy. A fuel economy standard of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025 is a big step toward reducing our dependence on oil from unfriendly nations, and insulating the American economy from the volatile swings of the oil market.”

Operation Free is an advocacy campaign of the Truman National Security Project. Learn more at www.OperationFree.net.

###

Operation Free also sent an educational mailer on the connection between the 54.5 mpg standard and our national security to over 10,000 households in the San Diego area.

To learn more about the importance of the 54.5 standard view our clean cars page at www.operationfree.net/cleancars

We have received great feedback so far and we thank everyone who signed up online!

“The question is if we don’t do it now then when are we? We know that oil is a finite resource and we know while we’re using it we continue to give money to countries that don’t have American interest at heart,” he said.

The new announcement adds to Maine’s strong history of supporting the environment:

“The group is calling for an initiative that would require electric utilities to invest in energy efficiency to cut down on costs. A standard would also be set: 20% of Maine’s power to come from new renewable energy sources by 2020.”

To read the full article, please visit: http://www.wabi.tv/news/24690/maine-citizens-for-clean-energy-unveils-new-initiative-promises-jobs

The Military and Clean Tech: The Importance of Speed When Fighting for Energy Reform

By Jon Gensler

Huffington Post

October 20, 2011

In the military, you can find examples everywhere of the importance of speed in battle. Whether it’s an anti-tank SABOT round leaving the main gun of an M1A1 Abrams Main Battle Tank at nearly a mile a second, or the F-22 Raptor, which easily exceeds the speed of sound on its missions for the U.S. Air Force, these tools give American service-members the speed needed for unquestionable dominance in combat.

I experienced this first-hand as I led first my 16 soldier tank platoon in Kuwait, and then a 30 soldier mortar infantry platoon in Iraq. In modern warfare, speed and accuracy on the battlefield are everything.

The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) must embrace this concept as it takes on a different but equally important mission — the cleaning up of its energy supply and deployment of renewables into its energy portfolio, operationally and here at home. The Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus has done a great job explaining why the military is doing this. But how, exactly, the military will do this remains unclear. To actually get this done, they will need to undertake and innovate around a new type of speed, one that we in the private sector understand as “project velocity.”

Project velocity defines the speed at which you can push, pull, or coerce a large scale project through contracting, design, negotiations, procurement and the various other hurdles that underpin any large scale opportunity. When dealing with the federal government, one might think more of swimming in molasses rather than a fighter jet breaking the sound barrier, but procurement and operation managers must find a way to move and work quickly when pursuing, evaluating and deploying clean technologies. The Army is falling well behind its mandates and goals to be at 25 percent renewables for its electricity needs by 2025. This year it will be lucky if it hits three percent, when it should be tracking at more than twice that.

So how can the military speed up the process of fitting out its millions of acres of land with renewable energy generation, while not impacting its mission to train and prepare for the world’s next fight?

As a solar developer with experience in federal markets such as the military, I can say there are a few key factors at a granular level that can help projects move quickly and effectively. Although technology is easily the least of the challenges facing the DoD in this mission, as much of the technology has already been proven, it seems to consume the media storm surrounding clean energy. The truth is that traditional solar photovoltaics have proven their reliability through decades of successful field data. But certainly PV will not fit the whole bill. Given the scope of what is needed, a broad range of technologies will be likely implemented, chosen based on each site’s available resources and needs.

Instead of focusing on technology, the military should focus on the following key hurdles to project completion:

·         Site procurement — Anyone who has worked in the federal space for long understands the challenges facing a developer when building on federal land. Each branch of the service has a different legal opinion on the Federal Acquisition Regulation and Real Estate law, and at a granular level, each installation seems to interpret it on their own as well. In order to overcome the plethora of programs that result from such complexity, from UESCs to ESPCs to EULs to everything else, at a high level we require more standardization. In its current state, the process isn’t straightforward enough to entice the level of commitment from the private sector that is needed.

·         Decision makers — The military is among the most respected institutions in our nation, and produces some of the most capable and inspiring leaders in our country. And in this mission as well, we are beginning to see real leaders emerge at the highest levels, and even at some bases. But this must become more systematic — each service (or indeed the DoD itself) needs to clarify the roles of the utility providers, real estate property managers, energy managers, and base commanders in this process, provide them with standard tools that have been proven to work at other bases, and empower them to act.

·         Financing — The Army estimates that it will require over $7B of private capital to finance its mandated goal of 2.1 Million MWh of annual renewable electricity generation, and this is where the biggest challenges of all arise. In order to do this effectively, the military must embrace, on a large scale, the financial innovations that have enabled broad deployment in the commercial and residential sectors. Primarily, I mean use of the privately financed Power Purchase Agreement (PPA). There are boundaries to be negotiated upon, and the final value of each deal will be different, but the structure itself is sound, and allows for significant up-front savings on the part of the government. Not only does the developer pay for the system costs up front, but the private sector experts also maintain the operational risk of the systems throughout the life of the contract, which is no small value in itself.

On a more macro level, the military is certainly taking a much needed step by setting up a task force to create and implement a plan. This is the impetus behind its newly launched Energy Initiatives Task Force. Though announced months ago, the effectiveness and ultimate success of this task force remains to be seen. Is it nimble and quick enough to get the job done?

This enormous undertaking will make for a huge market, but also a huge challenge, that will require creativity, scale, and focus not seen since WWII.

I have no doubt that our industry can rise to the occasion — the question is: who will show up from the DoD? The high-speed, mission driven infantryman, or the molasses lap swimmer in the basement of the Pentagon? As the EITF’s outreach director Jon Powers likes to say, ‘we’ve got the land and the demand”, but my question is — Do they have the speed?

Additional information on EI Task Force can be found at: www.armyeio.com

ARGOS — The cars filled the small parking lot of the Argos Municipal Building, overflowing onto the grass and gravel lots surrounding the area. It was 11 a.m. Saturday morning, and residents of Marshall and Fulton counties packed into a small room for an energy security forum presented by Operation Free—a coalition of veterans and national security organizations promoting clean energy.

It was clear that each person was present because they had a strong opinion about the proposed wind farm in Marshall and Fulton counties. Tensions were high, but questions and comments were reserved for the end of the meeting.

It was said early in the meeting that the forum was not intended to be focused on Next Era energy (and no Next Era representatives were present) but rather the purpose of the meeting was to look at how the use of wind and other alternative energy sources would benefit the United States military as well as the country as a whole.

Speakers were Major General George Buskirk, retired from the U.S. Army, Dan Martin, Navy veteran, and Lincoln Capstick, Army veteran. Many military veterans were in attendance.

Introducing the speakers were Jennifer Laurent, director of Marshall County Economic Development, and Terry Lee, director of Fulton County Economic Development.

“We feel (wind energy) is a very important avenue to consider,” said Laurent, adding later: “The areas under consideration will affect us all.”

Lee mentioned that further community discussions would be held in the coming months to sort out some of the specific questions residents seem to have about the Next Era project. He said that Next Era may potentially be looking at getting permits for the wind farm in fall of 2012.

“Let’s spend the next several months, or the better part of a year, working together, educating ourselves…so the decision we make is the best one,” said Lee.

The first speaker, Major General Buskirk, spoke about the military’s involvement in looking at alternative energy sources like wind and solar power.

“Renewable energy makes a lot of sense for the military in terms of oil price volatility,” said Buskirk.

Out of 190,000 vehicles in the U.S. Army, he continued, many could be made more energy efficient, reducing the county’s dependence on overseas oil.

He mentioned both the Air Force and the Navy’s intentions in the coming years to focus on using alternative forms of energy. He assured the audience that the U.S. military is behind conserving energy costs and is actively moving toward using wind and solar power.

“This is a technology that is here to stay for the foreseeable future,” said Buskirk. “What does that mean for Marshall and Fulton counties? That’s not for me to say—it’s above my pay grade, as we say in the Army. That’s up to you to decide.”

Martin, the next speaker, gave a brief overview of the financial side of the wind debate.

“By looking for alternative energy (sources) we reduce what goes in (Middle East oil vendors’) pockets,” said Martin, adding that foreign oil sellers could be using the money from high oil prices to purchase weaponry to use against American soldiers.

Martin said that he personally thinks that wind farms are a good idea, because wind is free.

The third and final speaker was Lincoln Capstick, Army veteran, who used most of his speaking time to rely an emotional story of the death of an Army counterpart. The young man passed away after a fuel tank that he was on exploded. Many soldiers, including his friend, die each year on fuel convoy missions, said Capstick.

“This dependency on fossil fuels kills Americans, from a military perspective,” said Capstick. “Can you look at these costs and not take some form of actions?”

With that, the forum begin to accept questions and comments from the listening audience. The usual concerns with wind turbines were raised, such as the impact on citizen’s health and the potential decline of property value. Several people expressed disappointment that their specific questions about the proposed wind farm in Marshall and Fulton counties were not answered by the presentation, and questioned aloud what the military had to do with the local wind farm debate.

To this Buskirk responded, “Our main purpose here is to bring you the overall picture. Your counties are part of the overall picture—you are Americans.”

Questioning went on for the better part of an hour as residents spoke passionately either for or against wind energy. Laurent and Lee reminded those present that additional meetings will be held beginning in January 2012 to specifically address Next Era’s proposed wind farm.

Read more here.

Maine state Rep. Alex Cornell du Houx, also an Operation Free member, was there to help promote the report.

To read the full article on Maine’s Public Broadcasting Network, please visit: http://www.mpbn.net/News/MPBNNews/tabid/1159/ctl/ViewItem/mid/3762/ItemId/18476/Default.aspx

Or visit this article by the Bangor Daily News:

http://bangordailynews.com/2011/10/13/energy/group-unveils-plan-to-reduce-maine-oil-use-urges-caution-on-lepage%E2%80%99s-natural-gas-goals/

By Joshua Stewart
The Navy Times

If you’re an officer, saving energy may earn you a promotion or your command a Battle “E.”

Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, who has spent the past two years trying to wean the service off of fossil fuels, said promotion boards will consider an officer’s energy management when deciding whether to move him up. Furthermore, Battle E commendations will be based, in small part, on a command’s ability to sip fuel instead of guzzle.

Those are two of the ways Mabus and senior Navy officers are trying to cut the amount of fossil fuels ships and aircraft burn and resources spent while ashore. It’s part of a comprehensive campaign that turns energy efficiency into as much of a combat necessity as ammunition. It includes the basics of energy management, steps like turning off lights and using more efficient appliances ashore. But it also means that ships may sometimes steam at slower, more fuel-efficient speeds, aviators will spend more time in simulators than in the sky, and sailors on the ground will carry solar panels on missions.

Speaking at the National Defense Industrial Association’s Naval Energy Forum in Washington, D.C., Mabus said increasing energy independence reduces the sea services’ dependence on oil from adversaries while reducing the need to refuel, which takes ships out of combat while making them vulnerable to attacks.

“Energy is a gap. It’s a vulnerability. We’re doing this for one thing: To be better war fighters,” Mabus said in his Oct. 13 address before military and defense industry officials.

It requires changes across the service. Some, like replacing fossil fuels with a blend of vegetable-based fuels, won’t be noticeable if all goes as planned. Others, like using routes that take advantage of favorable currents, may have a more obvious impact.

“A dollar spent on wasted energy is a dollar you’re not spending on war fighting,” said Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jon Greenert.

People attached to ships will notice some changes. For one, some training exercises may occur while still tied to the pier, allowing sailors to train without burning fuel, said Adm. John Harvey, head of Fleet Forces Command.

“Some things have to be done at sea, but with high-fidelity simulation, a great deal of very, very effective training can still be done while tied up pierside,” Harvey said.

Hulls and propellers will be painted with special coatings to increase efficiency, and hybrid drives like the one on the amphibious assault ship Makin Island will become more common, he said.

Part of the success, Harvey said, is convincing sailors that energy efficiency is important. He doesn’t expect it to be much of a problem because young enlisted and officers come from a generation that’s more concerned about fuel efficiency than his own. It will make them more receptive to the Navy’s initiatives.

“Our audience, I think, gets it,” he said.

Inside the ships, sailors can expect a few new things, said Rear Adm. Ann Phillips, deputy director of the Surface Warfare Division.

A $23 million contract was just awarded to install solid-state lighting in some ships to reduce energy use and maintenance. And stern flaps are being added to amphibs. So far the Makin Island, Kearsarge and dock landing ship Whidbey Island have been retrofitted with stern flaps, making them around 3.5 percent more energy efficient.

“These ships burn large amounts of fuel every year. So even a small savings will add up to a considerable amount over time,” Phillips said. Ships will be equipped with programs that consider tides, energy and weather to plan efficient routes, she said.

While the surface warfare community will drill more in port, aviators will spend more time in simulators. Aviation fuel accounts for about two-thirds of the Navy’s energy costs, and each time the price of petroleum fuels goes up, it strains flying hours. But simulation training saves gasoline and maintenance costs while reducing wear on aircraft, said Vice Adm. David Architzel, commander of Naval Air Systems Command.

The Navy is researching ways to insulate itself from hiccups in the global energy market. For one, it’s trying to power more vehicles with biofuel blends, fuels that use a mix of processed vegetable oil and traditional fuel. In late September, an MQ-B Fire Scout flew on biofuel, completing a series of demonstrations in which every airframe in the Navy went airborne on the alternative fuel.

“We usually have small challenges, as always, in testing, but I tell you quite frankly that there have been no anomalies,” Architzel said.

Even SEALs will cut their energy use. Mabus said a SEAL team will soon deploy with equipment that will make them entirely energy self-sufficient. They’ll carry flexible solar panels, their own water treatment equipment, and their own battery chargers. In effect, they’ll do their mission off the grid.

“We hear a lot about our special operators, and they are special,” Mabus said. “Allowing them to not have to be resupplied with fuel and water will make them even better at what they do.”

This article appeared on page 19 of the October 24th print edition of The Navy Times.

“Renewable energy makes a lot of sense for the military in terms of oil price volatility,” said Buskirk.
Out of 190,000 vehicles in the U.S. Army, he continued, many could be made more energy efficient, reducing the county’s dependence on overseas oil.
He mentioned both the Air Force and the Navy’s intentions in the coming years to focus on using alternative forms of energy. He assured the audience that the U.S. military is behind conserving energy costs and is actively moving toward using wind and solar power.
“This is a technology that is here to stay for the foreseeable future,” said Buskirk. “What does that mean for Marshall and Fulton counties? That’s not for me to say—it’s above my pay grade, as we say in the Army. That’s up to you to decide.”

Discussion on the proposed wind farm in Marshall and Fulton Counties will continue into next year before New Era Energy, the leader of the wind farm project, applies for official permits.

To read the full article in the Pilot News, please visit: http://www.thepilotnews.com/content/meeting-addresses-military-side-wind-energy-debate

7 p.m. — Veterans group Operation Free hosts an energy security roundtable, advancing the idea that the U.S.’s ongoing dependence on foreign oil is both funding its enemies and leaving it vulnerable to energy-related strife. Speakers to include former Army Capt. and Vice President of the Truman National Security Project Michael Breen. The roundtable takes place at George Mason University’s Arlington Founders Hall.

For Politico Morning Energy on the Web please visit this link: http://www.politico.com/morningenergy/

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 7, 2011

CONTACT
Benjamin Lowe, (202) 656-9723, ben@trumanproject.org

Vets, NH electeds: RGGI strengthens American security
New veterans radio ad commends successful regional clean energy program

CONCORD, NH – Today, at the State Capitol, military veterans joined New Hampshire state elected representatives at a press event supporting the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), a successful clean energy program. Rear Admiral Larry Baucom (US Navy, ret.), State Senator Gary Lambert (R-Nashua), State Representative Steve Shurtleff (D-Concord), and New Hampshire resident Mike Rodriguez (USMC, ret.), all veterans, commended the  continued participation by New Hampshire in the program. RGGI protects American security by reducing American dependence on oil and attacking the causes of climate change. (Speaker bios below.)

Rodriguez also announced a mail and radio campaign run by veterans group Operation Free urging New Hampshire to continue to be a clean energy leader by staying in RGGI. (Click here to view the mail piece. Click here to listen to the radio ad.)

“Energy use is a significant concern to the military,” said Admiral Baucom. “When I commanded the [aircraft carrier USS] Carl Vinson, conserving jet fuel and minimizing waste was critical. The more efficient we could be, the more combat-ready we were when we called upon to respond to a crisis. It’s that simple.”

“Those lessons transfer to the civilian world as well,” Admiral Baucom continued. “The less oil we use, the less money we send overseas to hostile regimes, and the more money stays in our economy. And by cutting carbon emissions, we reduce contribution to one of the possible causes of climate change, the effects of which may foster regional instability and potential conflict. Policies that reduce carbon emissions, invest in clean energy and help reduce our use of foreign oil are essential for national security.”

RGGI and other similar cap and trade programs have long enjoyed bipartisan support in New England and elsewhere. Republican Governors Mitt Romney of Massachusetts and Jodi Rell of Connecticut, as well as Democrats Andrew Cuomo of New York and Governor Lynch of New Hampshire, to name but a few, all supported their respective states’ participation in RGGI.

Operation Free is an advocacy campaign of the Truman National Security Project which highlights the connection between America’s energy policies and national security.  More at www.OperationFree.net.

# # #

Speaker biographies

Sen. Gary Lambert

Senator Gary Lambert is currently serving his first term as a representative of Nashua, the state’s second largest city. Lambert serves as a member of the Health and Human Services, Energy & Natural Resources and Internal Affairs Committees.  Senator Lambert is a strong leader on energy security and clean energy development.

Sen. Lambert served in the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve for over 30 years. Promoted to Colonel in 2003, Sen. Lambert was mobilized during Operations Desert Shield/Storm, Noble Eagle, Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom. From June 2004 to January 2005, he served as Deputy Legal Counsel and Acting Chief Legal Counsel to the Commanding General of the Multi-National Force – Iraq in Baghdad, Iraq, during which he was awarded the Bronze Star.

Representative Steve Shurtleff

Representative Shurtleff was born in Concord, NH in 1947. He enlisted in the US Army in 1966 for three years, honorably discharged in 1969 at the rank of Sergeant. After leaving the military, Shurtlefff joined the US Marshal’s Service, serving for 31 years and retiring in 2000 as a Supervisory Deputy US Marshal.

In 2004 Steve was elected to the NH House of Representatives where he currently serve as the Assistant Democratic Leader. In 2007 he was elected to the Concord City Council as a councilor at large. Steve also serves on the board of directors of four non-profit organizations including the NH Assoc. for the Blind.

Rear Admiral Larry Baucom

Larry Baucom graduated from the US Naval Academy in 1970. He holds Masters Degrees from the University of Southern California in Systems Management and from the Naval War College in National Security and Strategic Studies. His 31 year career in Naval Aviation included achieving over 4000 hours and 900 carrier landings in Navy fighter aircraft including the F-4 Phantom II and the F-14 Tomcat, and commanded the nuclear powered aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson.

He currently serves as a senior advisor and consultant supporting the Navy’s aircraft carrier readiness program and the Naval Aviation Enterprise. He was elected President of the World Affairs Council of Greater Hampton Roads in June 2010.

Mike Rodriguez

In 2003 Michael Rodriguez entered the United States Marine Corps, serving as a Rifleman with the 1st Battalion 8th Marine Regiment Bravo Company. In 2004, his unit was deployed to Iraq, where they spearheaded the November surge of Fallujah Iraq, as part of Operation Phantom Fury. During that surge, Michael Rodriguez received a Purple Heart and Navy Achievement Medal.

In 2005 he retired from the United States Marine Corps and attended Colby-Sawyer College, where he received the 2009 Senior Thesis-Capstone award for his research in hydro-security and water policy. For the past two years he has been working with Operation Free and the Truman National Security Project, advocating for reducing oil imports, and renewable energy solutions. He is currently a Summer Veteran Organizer with the Truman Project and will be attending Dartmouth College this fall, where he will begin courses in Globalization Studies.

Vets: Clean Fuel Standard Good for National Security

Standard would reduce dangerous US oil dependence, save Americans billions at the pump

WASHINGTON, DC—Today, in response to the release of the draft NESCAUM economic analysis of a Clean Fuel Standard, Michael Breen, an Iraq and Afghanistan War veteran and Vice President of the Truman National Security Project, made the following statement on behalf of Operation Free:

“America’s addiction to oil is a clear threat to our security. We send more than a billion dollars a day overseas for oil, and a dangerous amount of that money ends up in the hands of hostile regimes that don’t have our best interests in mind. We need to do all we can to end our risky oil dependence, and a Clean Fuel Standard will help do exactly that. The analysis released this week makes it clear: a Clean Fuel Standard will reduce our dangerous oil dependence.”

Clean fuel standards create jobs, reduce carbon emissions and help address the US addiction to oil. Extremists and hostile regimes get a great deal of funding from the sale of oil, the price of which is driven up by American demand. A Clean Fuel Standard will also reduce carbon emissions, the root cause of climate change. The Department of Defense, State Department, and CIA all recognize climate change as a direct threat to American security.

Operation Free is a coalition of veterans and national security organizations dedicated to securing America with clean energy. Operation Free sponsored the Veterans for American Power National Tour, a 29 state tour by Iraq and Afghanistan veterans making the connection between energy policy and national security. Operation Free is an advocacy campaign of the Truman National Security Project.

###