8/30/2010  DENVER — It was not too long ago when the show floor at
the annual Association of Unmanned Vehicle Systems International North America conference boasted mostly of small businesses.
Now it is dominated by the usual suspects, including large defense contractors that have snapped up smaller innovators in pursuit of a piece of the lucrative pie. After a lengthy period of trial and error, robotics is finally coming of age. Some companies are focusing their efforts on developing aircraft systems that can stay aloft for days at a time. Others are working on improving sensors and artificial intelligence so that ground vehicles can follow troops autonomously, resupply units or evacuate casualties from fire fights. Still others are writing software to make robotic systems more reliable and easier for operators to control. Unmanned systems in general, and unmanned aircraft in particular, are doing great things to support the war fighter, said Dyke Weatherington, deputy director for unmanned warfare in the office of the undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics. “Industry has demonstrated the ability to deliver quickly and efficiently. Those are attributes that will sustain this [market] in the future. The challenge is to do this in a more austere budgetary environment,” he said. Even the high-demand unmanned aircraft market, often touted as a cost-efficient way for the Defense Department to cut back on manpower, will enjoy no immunity from future Pentagon penny-pinching, he warned. “The reality today is that when we develop a new UAS, we develop a new aircraft, new sensors and we also develop the ground infrastructure to support that. For some capabilities, that’s required. But in many cases we’re duplicating capabilities we have in other systems or other domains. That area is ripe for efficiencies,” he said. Companies increasingly are focusing on producing products that would have dual use for customers. The trend is equal parts economics and the recognition that unmanned systems inevitably will be mixed into fleets of manned vehicles. Raytheon’s Robert Francois, vice president of advanced missiles and unmanned systems, told reporters that the company is making smaller and more precise weapons for unmanned aircraft. But he believes that manned aircraft also could deploy the munitions in the future. Rockwell Collins’ David Vos said that “optionally piloted” vehicles — manned platforms that can also operate autonomously — will become more commonplace as the Army and other services opt to buy them. One of the many challenges still remaining in the field is the concept of flying unmanned aircraft in tandem with traditionally piloted aircraft in unrestricted airspace. That vision will not turn into reality unless the systems prove reliable, Vos and others said. Improved flight controls is one part of the equation, Vos said, as he showed a demonstration video of a sub-scale autonomous F-A/18 aircraft having its right wing almost entirely blown off during flight. The aircraft bobbled a bit in the air but quickly compensated for the damage and was able to land on the ground in short order. The other part of the equation involves keeping the computer systems up and running with few faults, said Tyson Moler of Bellevue, Wash.-based GoAhead Software Inc. The company makes computer programs that monitor the health of a network and generates a seamless transition to a back-up system in the event of a failure. Its products reside in networks ranging from telecommunications corporations to Navy ship combat systems. The company is targeting UAS ground control stations for business, he said.  DENVER—In a clear signal to industry that robotic systems are not just a passing Pentagon fad, military officials are making long-term plans to integrate unmanned vehicles into their fleets of traditional weapon platforms. “We don’t see a future with only unmanned operations in the United States Air Force,” said Brig. Gen. H.D. “Jack” Polumbo Jr., director of plans and programs at Headquarters Air Combat Command. Remotely piloted aircraft will continue to mix in with manned aviation and team up to fight future battles. “We are very good at it right now, at bringing manned and unmanned integration together to do combat operations in Operation Enduring Freedom. But it’s not easy and it needs to be made more simple and it needs to be made more harmonious,” he said at at the Association of Unmanned Vehicle Systems International annual conference. There needs to be more planning for manned-unmanned teaming in other scenarios, such as those where the Air Force is flying in contested airspace, he said. In Iraq and Afghanistan, the service does not face off with an opposing air force or have to deal with complex surface-to-air defense systems. Polumbo introduced a concept that reverses the service’s current trend of flying drones from isolated ground control stations located halfway around the world from the war zones. In the revamped vision, robotic aircraft operators would fly the systems from operation centers where they could interact more closely with commanders in the field. The Air Force, he said, is in the middle of adjusting its training strategy for pilots, weapon systems operators, communicators and intelligence officers to make the shift to operate more collaboratively with remotely piloted aircraft in the coming years. The Navy, too, is working to realize its vision of flying robotic aircraft off of its ships. “My desire is that we have both manned and unmanned [systems] operating off of our aircraft carriers in a very, very effective way,” said Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Gary Roughead. He is pushing industry to develop a stealthy carrier-based strike and surveillance aircraft by 2018. “For me, it’s too damn slow. We’ve got to have a sense of urgency to get this stuff out,” he said. The Navy’s early deployment of the FireScout vertical take-off and landing aircraft aboard a ship gave officials insight into how the service will deploy, employ and maintain manned and unmanned systems together, he added. 8/27/2010 DENVER — Pilots flying unmanned aircraft from Air Force bases located halfway around the globe has been one of the technological wonders of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
Now the service wants to reverse that trend, and put operators closer to the fight and those they serve.
In the coming decade, the Air Force will begin shifting those operators to computer workstations in existing operation centers where they can interact directly with commanders and intelligence analysts under the same roof, an official said at the Association of Unmanned Vehicle Systems International conference.
“We have the ability to bring the cockpit into the operation centers,” said Brig. Gen. H.D. “Jake” Polumbo Jr., director of plans and programs at Headquarters Air Combat Command. “You can’t just keep building these small stand-alone [ground control stations].”
Some of these operation centers are in war theaters. Others are stateside. No matter where they are, remotely piloted aircraft operators shouldn't be cut off from their colleagues in temporary buildings, derisively referred to as "green cans."
In its vision for how unmanned aircraft will operate 10 years from now and beyond, the Air Force is embracing a concept called the “cross-functional operation center.” In these command-and-control facilities, UAS operators would fly missions surrounded by other personnel involved in the mission, including special operations forces, as well as intelligence personnel.
Incorporating remotely piloted aircraft operations into existing command-and-control facilities would give commanders and their staffs direct visibility into flights and missions. “You need to have a big, broad area where you can put supervision into the right place at the right mission,” Polumbo said.
The supervision would not necessarily have to be the commander or another UAS operator. It could be an intelligence officer who understands the subtleties of flying a reconnaissance mission. It could be an A-10 pilot who understands the rules of engagement for a close-air support mission. Or it could be a non-aviator who is monitoring the system for troubleshooting purposes as it flies to another base.
The
service in the coming years expects to be flying more autonomous
aircraft capable of staying aloft for days all around the globe. That
will also call for more efficiency.
Sustaining
MQ-9 Reaper aircraft in 24-hour combat air patrols today in the wars
sometimes takes four or five operation centers manned around the clock.
That involves too many people, Polumbo said. “If it takes three or four crews to fly that, we as a nation may not be able to afford that,” he added.
“You don’t always
have to have a 4,000-hour pilot at the controls of an unmanned aircraft
transiting between Guam and Beale [Air Force Base],” said Polumbo, whose
last flying assignment was conducting U-2 missions in Afghanistan.
“We need to do things more efficiently in 2020,” he added.
The Air Force also is looking at how to execute advanced launch-and-recovery procedures without having to deploy large teams of maintainers, logistics personnel and ground control station crews. Polumbo said.
Officials are considering a light logistics team concept that would involve a small group of airmen that could refuel the aircraft, install payloads, conduct limited maintenance work and move the vehicle into position for launching anywhere in the world.
The agency that supplies food, uniforms and fuel to troops says it can cut costs by seeking price reductions and weeding out procurement fraud.
The Defense Logistics Agency will pursue price reductions of 10 percent across the board for materials it acquires for the military, Director Vice Adm. Alan Thompson told reporters during a break at a conference with suppliers in Columbus, Ohio.
The Defense Department is looking to cut $100 billion between FY 2012 and FY 2016. Though Thompson could not yet pinpoint an exact or even approximate savings target for his $41 billion agency, he said DLA already has taken several steps toward greater efficiency.
This year, the agency formed an “operational evaluation team” that investigates vulnerabilities and ways to eliminate procurement fraud. Along the same lines, DLA, which supports 1,700 weapon systems, is updating specification documents to avoid buying counterfeit parts.
The Government Accountability Office in April reported that the Defense Department’s supply chain had been impacted by counterfeit parts, and that it had no way of determining the extent of the problem.
“We work with thousands of suppliers and the vast majority are above board,” Thompson said. “We must weed out those suppliers and individuals who knowingly supply parts that don’t meet specifications or are counterfeit.”
The DLA is talking with suppliers, mostly small businesses, about driving down prices. The agency, which processes nearly 10,000 contract actions each day, can get more bang for its buck by increasing strategic sourcing opportunities and establishing more long-term contracts, Thompson said. This may mean that small businesses find themselves in the role of subcontractors more often, he explained.
“The environment is changing,” he said. “Certainly, there is some level of concern” among DLA’s suppliers. While the agency has prided itself on being effective, the focus now needs to shift to being more efficient, Thompson said.
For example, the agency is consolidating its procurement software so supply orders for all military services are merged into one contracting tool. This will allow DLA to make larger buys and drive down costs, Thompson explained.
DLA's cost cutting mood in DLA falls in line with other Defense Department agencies. The
goal for FY 2012 alone is to find $7 billion in savings within defense
departments, military services and agencies with appropriated funds,
said Pentagon Comptroller Robert Hale, who joined Thompson on a brief
call with reporters.
“We realize we owe the American people every effort to be efficient since we’re asking for large sums of money in a period when the country is having some serious economic problems,” Hale said.
8/26/2010 DENVER — The Navy wants to deploy robotic underwater vehicles to conduct anti-submarine warfare and counter-mine missions, but its plans are being held up by power problems that limit their endurance. “While I want to transition the rather mature [unmanned underwater vehicle] technologies to the fleet, we continue to wrestle with UUV power and energy” issues, said Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Gary Roughead at the Association of Unmanned Vehicle Systems International conference. Navy officials would like the UUVs to swim for three to four weeks at a time. To sprint through the water for shorter durations and to contend with adverse undersea environments, such as fast-moving currents, the vehicles must have adequate onboard energy storage capabilities. Hybrid energy systems and even nuclear power are possible options, though the latter technology would have to conform to shipboard safety and environmental standards in order to be a viable solution. The Navy during the next five years is focusing approximately 50 percent of its research and development funds to tackle fundamental energy problems, Roughead said. Once scientists have solved the power problem and improved the endurance of undersea vehicles, the Navy’s next hurdle is to develop better information networks that “can sense, move and adjust with those vessels,” said Roughead. “I’m quite pleased with where we are in our sensor development for those UUVs and I do believe we have a handle on how we network those sensors to contribute to our information dominance,” he said. Because the underwater vehicles will cover large areas of the ocean, they will need to operate in a networked fashion. The Navy last year stopped funding the development of its mission reconfigurable UUV through Lockheed Martin Corp. “We were putting a lot of money into it and it wasn’t going anywhere,” Roughead said. “In this fiscal environment, we cannot tolerate under-performing programs if we’re serious about delivering capabilities to the force.”  During an overseas trip last week to visit some international counterparts, Roughead learned about an “intriguing” underwater robotic system. He is exchanging information about the technology and will explore acquisition options should it come to that. “I’m very open to cooperative solutions,” he said. In addition to expanding the use of unmanned systems, the Navy’s 2012 budget will enhance and restore the service’s electronic warfare dominance and develop a “first-class information work force” comprising 44,000 experts that will provide expertise in intelligence, cryptology, meteorology, oceanography and information warfare, Roughead said.  The usual suspects turned up at a recent police technology exposition — night-vision goggles, high-powered guns and bulletproof vests. Most of the devices displayed at the Police Trexpo East last week cost a pretty penny — thousands, hundreds of thousands, and millions of dollars. But in the middle of the elaborate and the high-end, there were plastic orange sticks no longer than a straw. The uncomplicated rods are meant to secure firearms during training while easing the nerves of all involved. A gun can’t fire with one inside its barrel, and the bright orange stick is clearly visible to those at the other end of the weapon. It alleviates worry and eliminates the possibility of someone getting shot. John Carlin offered his invention for free at the expo. They would’ve cost just $5 if he had charged for them. “It’s as simple as it gets,” Carlin said. In recent years, 30 police officers have been shot and killed during training exercises. This month, an officer in Montreal was shot in the leg during a drill. And Carlin, himself a firearms instructor, never cared for looking down the barrel of a gun during his own classes. A retired police officer from Minnesota, Carlin’s admittedly low-tech product attracted quite a buzz even among the SWAT vehicles, lasers and weaponry. Many technologies showcased at the expo could cross over from law enforcement to military to homeland defense efforts. Companies and organizations large and small came from all over the country to promote their products. In all, there were more than 130 exhibits at the expo, sponsored by POLICE Magazine. Here’s a taste of some of the exhibits: - From Michigan, EOTech’s holographic weapon sights maintain accuracy if covered in snow, mud or even cracked. No matter the obstruction, a target will continue to show up in the form of a star that looks like a red fireworks explosion.
- From Oklahoma, Simulator Systems International offers three kinds of robots named for snakes — the Copperhead, the Sidewinder and the Python. The latter can tow about 200 pounds, climb stairs and blast someone with a taser or pepper spray, sales representative Terrance Blacknell explained.
- From Kentucky, ARE Innovations co-owner Jim Bolen makes and sells goggles that can suddenly take away or restore one’s vision. Originally made for athletes looking to improve reaction times, they have been recast for military and law enforcement personnel. A recent experiment in Franklin, Ohio, found police officers recognizing and responding to threats three seconds quicker after using the goggles. “You see with your brain, not your eyes,” Bolen said.
- From Washington D.C., the Department of Homeland Security demonstrated a few of its inventions, including a forensic camera designed for mass transit. Last year, DHS rigged a retired transit bus with explosives and 16 of the prototype cameras. The bombs blew the bus to pieces and sent the cameras flying in all directions. All the cameras survived, and memory chips containing video leading up to the detonation also survived in 14 of the cameras. Testing will continue on cameras deployed on regular bus routes and trains. Several major U.S. cities, as well as the Transportation Security Administration, are interested in the technology, DHS officials said.
- The folks at DHS also showed off its Light Emitting Diode-Incapacitator, or LEDI. The flashlights send out a combination of wavelengths to flashblind and disorient a human target. The device’s range goes up to about 50 feet. It could be used for riot control, in prisons, by SWAT teams and against snipers or hijackers.
- From Pennsylvania, Crime Scene Clean-Up was there to promote its services to make horrific remnants disappear. The company specializes in cleaning up after murders, suicides and decompositions. In one year, the company disposed of 50 tons of hazardous and medical waste.
- Also from Pennsylvania, Mobile Concepts by Scotty had a “purpose-built” vehicle on site. The company can put everything from communication satellites and surveillance cameras to flat-screen TVs and gun racks on a truck. Mobile Concepts has provided vehicles for U.S. Customs and Border Protection for processing and detainment, the Army’s mobile command centers in Iraq and for Pennsylvania Emergency Management mobile commands.
- From New Hampshire, Insight Technology produces an array of night vision and illumination devices. Insight allowed visitors to try out its new thermal imaging binoculars, which revealed the infrared footsteps of expo attendees long after they disappeared from normal sight.
8/25/2010 DENVER—Despite the recent drawdown of combat troops in Iraq, the number of unmanned aircraft flying missions there may rise, Army officials said at the Association of Unmanned Vehicle Systems International conference.
"We haven’t seen any reduction of flight hours in Iraq even with the reduction of those combat troops,” said Col. Gregory Gonzalez, program manager for Army unmanned aircraft systems. “It’s not going to slow down any time soon.” If anything, the operational tempo is expected to increase, said Col. Robert Sova, capability manager for UAS at the Army’s Training and Doctrine Command. “One of the things that’s happening as troops draw down is that the need to surveil areas goes up,” said Tim Owings, deputy program manager for Army unmanned aircraft systems. The 50,000 U.S. forces remaining in Iraq are helping to train security forces among other missions. With fewer troops out on patrols, military commanders need eyes in the sky to keep appraised of any potential problems on the ground. They also need a way to stay connected, so they are relying more on unmanned systems to help them communicate throughout the regions. “What we’re seeing is the significant increase in the use of our communications relay package,” Sova said. The UAS program office is preparing to send to Afghanistan four of its now officially-named Grey Eagle MQ-1C aircraft as a quick-reaction capability. The first quick reaction platoon of Grey Eagles was fielded last year to Iraq. To date, the aircraft have flown more than 5,000 combat flight hours supporting operations and officials said they continue to do so effectively. “We’re learning things every day, every week as they continue to fly,” said Gonzalez. His team added new capabilities, including satellite communications and a next-generation Hellfire missile, to the aircraft in preparation for the QRC deployment to Afghanistan. Gonzalez declined to name the unit and when it will deploy, but said that the equipment has been delivered and it is “ready to go.”
The new Hellfire missiles are capable of firing behind the aircraft, Gonzalez later told bloggers in a phone interview. The missiles have scored eight direct hits in eight tests during the recent months. Six of the tests used a laser-designator mounted aboard the UAV. The other two tests required the laser-designator to mark the target from a nearby Apache. The current generation of missiles can only fire forward, which means pilots remotely flying the aircraft must sometimes circle the Grey Eagle back to line up shots.
Army officials also are planning to deploy additional Hunter aircraft to theater this fall. “We continue to receive requirements and requests for Afghanistan,” said Gonzalez, who added that those requests include contractor-operated unmanned systems. Additional reporting by Stew Magnuson.
For more on Army unmanned aircraft systems, watch for the October issue of National Defense. Coverage from AUVSI will continue daily here.  DENVER — The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency needs help on a $50 million program to develop autonomous controls for artificial arms and hands. And that help can come from just about anywhere, not just the usual academic and industry teams.
“We have robots now that can sing, that can dance, play the piano and do all kinds of things, but they can’t pick up anything” and manipulate objects without a human controlling all the motions via a joystick, said Robert Mandelbaum, manager of the autonomous robotic manipulation, or ARM, program.
DARPA
spent $350,000 to build a flesh-colored robot that will serve as a
platform and test bed for the program. Its goal to enable robots to pick up and manipulate numerous objects autonomously, he told reporters at the annual Association of Unmanned Vehicle Systems International conference. Six teams from
academia and industry have been awarded contracts to design manipulation
software to move the humanoid’s head, neck, torso and two arms and
hands. But the agency
also is making the robot available to the general public via a web
portal. “Maybe
there’s some genius 17 year old out there,” said Mandelbaum. “We want to
grab that 17 year old and get him interested in programming this
robot.” Interested parties can request a copy of the robot’s software at
thearmrobot.com. They can download the simulator onto their computer
and write control software for it. Once the code is debugged, developers
can then log into the actual robot, download their program and watch it
run the hardware over a webcam.
The hope
is that the public outreach efforts will yield solutions that
can compete with the six teams. The
robot will reside at DARPA’s offices in Arlington, Va.
Like many DARPA programs, it will be a challenge. For example, if a robot is told to dig a hole, it must know how to pick up a shovel, maneuver it into position and grip it properly to lift up dirt. “We’re not trying to make a better IED-picker upper,” he said, referring to the tele-operated ground robots that troops currently use to dismantle roadside bombs. The point of the research is to enable robots to accomplish numerous tasks, such as removing rubble during a disaster relief operation or searching through the trunk of a vehicle, on their own as effortlessly as a human might. “This is the key to it—the manipulation piece,” he said. “We think this is going to break open robotics.” Keep watching the National Defense Magazine blog this week for more news from the AUVSI conference.
8/23/2010 There are more than two sides to the U.S.-Mexican border.
A recent gathering of law enforcement officers highlighted the growing divide between the federal government and local authorities on issues of border security. Sheriffs in the southwest say that violence from the Mexican drug wars already has spilled over to the United States, despite Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano’s recent statements to the contrary.
Sheriff Arvin R. West pointed to a place on the map along the southern U.S. border where he serves in Hudspeth County, Texas. Here, he said, between Interstate 10 and the Rio Grande, a population hangs by a desperate thread.
The sheriff calls it “Almost America,” full of people who believe they’ve been left to fend for themselves in the face of encroaching violence from Mexico. Federal agents provide little protection for the swath of land running between the highway and the river, West said. This spring, he told residents there to “load your guns, strap them on, stick them in your boots.”
He told the farmers and ranchers to do whatever they could to stay alive. He would rather see them “tried by 12 than carried by six.”
His 17 deputies — just four serve on an individual shift — can't cover the county’s 5,000 square miles and protect the border without help. But that's exactly what it feels like they're doing, West said.
Nobody said that life along the U.S.-Mexican border was pretty. But local sheriffs there will say that it's downright ugly — more violent and dangerous than the federal government will admit. They have the community scars and pictures to prove it. They brought the latter to a law enforcement conference last week in suburban Washington D.C.
The sheriffs, along with a longtime Border Patrol agent and a West Coast gang expert, held nothing back as they spoke to fellow lawmen.
Mexican drug cartels have a military arsenal, and they're stocking weapons in the United States, said Zapata County Sheriff Sigifredo Gonzalez, whose jurisdiction covers 1,000 square miles near the southern most tip of Texas. A training camp for the Mexican criminal enterprise Los Zetas lies just 100 miles from his county.
“The next war we’re going to have is not Iran,” Gonzalez said. “The next war is going to hit us from the southern border.”
In June, stray bullets fired in a deadly attack in Juarez hit the City Hall building in downtown El Paso. Stray gunfire from Mexico last year hit a college campus in Brownsville, Texas.
The United States already is at war on the border, said Richard Valdemar, an expert on gangs, who is now retired from the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department.
Drug cartels have infiltrated local politics in small cities around Los Angeles, Valdemar said. Gangs offer politicians a choice between silver (bribes) and lead (bullets), he explained, adding that evidence shows a growing relationship between the cartels, street gangs and international terrorists.
These fears are compounded by revelations that certain parts of the border are not as secure as others. There are three footbridges that connect Mexico to the United States in Hudspeth County. Built more than 60 years ago as grade-control devices, these metal bridges cross the Rio Grande at some of its most narrow and shallow points. People can simply walk across the unguarded bridges, West said.
Despite the many horror stories, U.S. Customs and Border Protection has seen success in its Yuma, Ariz., sector. Fencing separates the United States from Mexico along all 126 miles of border in the sector, which stretches from the Yuma-Pima County line in Arizona to the Imperial Sand Dunes in California. The barriers, along with a steady increase in agents and strong National Guard presence, have led to a reduction in illegal border crossings, said Joe Preciado, intelligence director for the Yuma sector.
In 2005, more than 138,000 people were apprehended trying to cross the border illegally in the Yuma sector. That number dropped to 9,000 last year and may not even reach 7,000 this year, Preciado said.
Local authorities in more vulnerable parts of the southwest have formed the Southwestern Border Sheriffs Coalition, an effort aimed at getting the federal government's attention and help. Currently chaired by Gonzalez, the group includes representatives from 20 counties in Texas, five in New Mexico, four in Arizona and two in California.
“We were frustrated that our government is not helping us and is not admitting that there is a problem,” Gonzalez said. “We were tired of seeing a criminal element come into the country.”
The ripple effects of an unsecured border will continue to spread throughout the country, he said. Border Patrol agents from Detroit, Mich., listening to Gonzalez speak, said that they routinely catch Latino gang members at their checkpoints on the Canadian border.
8/19/2010 Dependence on massive fuel supplies has become a drag on military operations, and doing something about it remains a tough challenge for the Defense Department. The Pentagon has managed to reduce energy demand at U.S.-based facilities. But that is only a small part of the equation. Seventy-five percent of the Defense Department’s energy is spent on operations and transportation.
The Pentagon devours 300,000 barrels of oil daily — about 1.5 percent of total U.S. consumption of 21 million barrels a day. The military’s war-planning methods assume that energy will be plentiful and cheap. But recent conflicts have cast a spotlight on the high cost of energy, both financially and in human lives that were lost delivering fuel to troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Congress last year mandated that the president appoint a “director of operational energy plans and programs” for the Defense Department to tackle the energy conundrum.
Just confirmed by the Senate in June, DOEPP Sharon Burke faces a Dec. 21 deadline to submit to Congress a strategy for how the Defense Department will address energy efficiency.
“We are developing the strategy right now,” Burke says in an interview this week at her Pentagon office. With only one staff member so far (she expects to hire 12 more), she is relying on the military services’ energy experts to help shape the strategy, she says. Burke is not pressured by the tight deadline, she says. “Congressional mandates are for the most part pretty helpful milestones.” Having a statutory requirement is important for the Pentagon’s energy strategy to have credibility and momentum, she says.
The DOEPP also is expected to influence funding decisions. Congress specifically directed that she “review and make recommendations to the secretary of defense regarding all budgetary and financial matters relating to the operational energy strategy.”
The Pentagon’s fiscal year 2012 funding request currently is being scrubbed and Burke will have to certify that energy priorities are funded in each of the services’ budgets. Because of the short timelines, she is relying on the services to help ensure energy efficiency programs are properly resourced, she says. This energy-focused budget certification drill is new at the Pentagon, she adds. There will also be a separate budget line for operational energy programs. “That’s never been done before," says Burke.
For this year’s certification process, she says, “we are asking the services what their goals are in this area. We’ll work with them to measure their budgets against their own goals.”
Budgets will be assessed based on how the services provide “better energy solutions into the hands of deployed forces,” says Burke.
The energy strategy that is now being drafted will have to define efficiency. “There’s no question in my mind that there are gains to be made in energy efficiency,” says Burke. “In the department’s planning, programming and budgeting for the future, energy needs to be an element in that.”
The lack of metrics for how to evaluate programs means that many funding decisions will have to be based on common sense. The congressional language requires “adequate funding,” says Burke. “There’s a lot of room to define what that means.”
It is still too early to judge what areas may be underfunded. “We don’t have good metrics yet. Nobody has been measuring what operational energy is. … We can speculate, we have guesstimates but we really don’t know,” she says. “We need better data.”
In general, she says she would like to see more emphasis on big-picture thinking about energy at the Defense Department, so commanders understand the ways that energy either enhances or undermines combat capability. Before making investment and planning decisions, the question should be asked: Can we do what we need to do based on the vulnerability of our logistics?
The Pentagon historically has treated energy, whether from petroleum-based fuels or electricity, as a cheap commodity. That thinking has to change, says Burke. Force-planning processes have to take into account the problems associated with delivering fuel to U.S. forces, such as attacks on supply lines.
Burke says this strategic-level thinking is what is going to drive change, as opposed to strictly pursuing technological silver bullets. “It’s very easy on an emotional level to look for the engineered and technological solutions,” she says. “But they may or may not be the best.”
New technology is needed, but “we haven’t done a good analysis of the state of play to know exactly what the best investment is,” Burke says.
In the near term, the services will continue to acquire green technologies to reduce fuel consumption in the field, she says. The Marine Corps already has plans to deploy a unit to Afghanistan that will replace many of its gas-powered generators with solar-energy systems. The marines have received a lot of publicity for their efforts, but she says all the services are pursuing similar initiatives.
Looking farther into the future, Burke says investments will continue in biofuels. “There is a need for a DoD-wide biofuel strategy. And that’s something we’ll be working on in this office,” she says. But she downplayed expectations about the Defense Department leading the way for the commercial biofuel market. “We can do a lot as a single consumer. But we can only do so much. We can’t really create a commercial market for biofuels,” she says. “We don’t have a large enough demand to do that.”
Critics who have been disappointed that the Pentagon is not moving far enough or fast enough with biofuels are “looking in the wrong place.” But the Defense Department can be an important “catalyst” in the market because of its large research-and-development investments. “We need biofuels as an insurance policy,” says Burke.
| Edit in Browser | /_layouts/images/icxddoc.gif | /blog/_layouts/formserver.aspx?XsnLocation={ItemUrl}&OpenIn=Browser | 0x0 | 0x1 | FileType | xsn | 255 | | Edit in Browser | /_layouts/images/icxddoc.gif | /blog/_layouts/formserver.aspx?XmlLocation={ItemUrl}&OpenIn=Browser | 0x0 | 0x1 | ProgId | InfoPath.Document | 255 | | Edit in Browser | /_layouts/images/icxddoc.gif | /blog/_layouts/formserver.aspx?XmlLocation={ItemUrl}&OpenIn=Browser | 0x0 | 0x1 | ProgId | InfoPath.Document.2 | 255 | | Edit in Browser | /_layouts/images/icxddoc.gif | /blog/_layouts/formserver.aspx?XmlLocation={ItemUrl}&OpenIn=Browser | 0x0 | 0x1 | ProgId | InfoPath.Document.3 | 255 | | Edit in Browser | /_layouts/images/icxddoc.gif | /blog/_layouts/formserver.aspx?XmlLocation={ItemUrl}&OpenIn=Browser | 0x0 | 0x1 | ProgId | InfoPath.Document.4 | 255 | | View in Web Browser | /_layouts/images/ichtmxls.gif | /blog/_layouts/xlviewer.aspx?listguid={ListId}&itemid={ItemId}&DefaultItemOpen=1 | 0x0 | 0x1 | FileType | xlsx | 255 | | View in Web Browser | /_layouts/images/ichtmxls.gif | /blog/_layouts/xlviewer.aspx?listguid={ListId}&itemid={ItemId}&DefaultItemOpen=1 | 0x0 | 0x1 | FileType | xlsb | 255 | | Snapshot in Excel | /_layouts/images/ewr134.gif | /blog/_layouts/xlviewer.aspx?listguid={ListId}&itemid={ItemId}&Snapshot=1 | 0x0 | 0x1 | FileType | xlsx | 256 | | Snapshot in Excel | /_layouts/images/ewr134.gif | /blog/_layouts/xlviewer.aspx?listguid={ListId}&itemid={ItemId}&Snapshot=1 | 0x0 | 0x1 | FileType | xlsb | 256 |
|
|
|
|
| Edit in Browser | /_layouts/images/icxddoc.gif | /blog/_layouts/formserver.aspx?XsnLocation={ItemUrl}&OpenIn=Browser | 0x0 | 0x1 | FileType | xsn | 255 | | Edit in Browser | /_layouts/images/icxddoc.gif | /blog/_layouts/formserver.aspx?XmlLocation={ItemUrl}&OpenIn=Browser | 0x0 | 0x1 | ProgId | InfoPath.Document | 255 | | Edit in Browser | /_layouts/images/icxddoc.gif | /blog/_layouts/formserver.aspx?XmlLocation={ItemUrl}&OpenIn=Browser | 0x0 | 0x1 | ProgId | InfoPath.Document.2 | 255 | | Edit in Browser | /_layouts/images/icxddoc.gif | /blog/_layouts/formserver.aspx?XmlLocation={ItemUrl}&OpenIn=Browser | 0x0 | 0x1 | ProgId | InfoPath.Document.3 | 255 | | Edit in Browser | /_layouts/images/icxddoc.gif | /blog/_layouts/formserver.aspx?XmlLocation={ItemUrl}&OpenIn=Browser | 0x0 | 0x1 | ProgId | InfoPath.Document.4 | 255 | | View in Web Browser | /_layouts/images/ichtmxls.gif | /blog/_layouts/xlviewer.aspx?listguid={ListId}&itemid={ItemId}&DefaultItemOpen=1 | 0x0 | 0x1 | FileType | xlsx | 255 | | View in Web Browser | /_layouts/images/ichtmxls.gif | /blog/_layouts/xlviewer.aspx?listguid={ListId}&itemid={ItemId}&DefaultItemOpen=1 | 0x0 | 0x1 | FileType | xlsb | 255 | | Snapshot in Excel | /_layouts/images/ewr134.gif | /blog/_layouts/xlviewer.aspx?listguid={ListId}&itemid={ItemId}&Snapshot=1 | 0x0 | 0x1 | FileType | xlsx | 256 | | Snapshot in Excel | /_layouts/images/ewr134.gif | /blog/_layouts/xlviewer.aspx?listguid={ListId}&itemid={ItemId}&Snapshot=1 | 0x0 | 0x1 | FileType | xlsb | 256 |
|
|
|