National Defense > Blog > Posts > The Pentagon’s Love-Hate Relationship With Clean Energy
The Pentagon’s Love-Hate Relationship With Clean Energy
The Defense Department expects to remain quite busy fighting the nation’s wars. At home, it also plans to be hard at work feuding against a pesky enemy: Environmental encroachment.

Encroachment is catchall term used by the Pentagon to describe any activity that takes place near military bases and is regarded as intrusive or threatening to activities such as training or testing.

Over the past two decades, encroachers have included suburban sprawl, environmental regulations and, of late, clean-energy projects.

A recent flap involves Defense Department efforts to block construction in Oregon of what could be the largest wind farm in the United States because turbines interfere with air-traffic control radar.

The Air Force operates the radar in Fossil, Ore., which is 70 miles from the proposed wind farm. The Federal Aviation Administration also opposes the project.

Clean-energy projects of the sort are expected to grow in the United States, and the Defense Department is worried about a possible onslaught of encroachment. The Pentagon is the nation’s largest landowner, with more than 500 military bases. It is also the single largest consumer of energy in the United States.

Officials predict that encroachment is only going to get worse as more wind and solar farms, or even offshore drilling, get under way.

“This is huge issue for us in the Defense Department,” said Maureen Sullivan, director of environmental management at the office of the secretary of defense. By contrast, in years past, energy encroachment disputes have been relatively minor, she said at a forum in Washington, D.C., hosted by Global Green USA.

Given the anticipated expansion of renewable energy projects in the United States, the Defense Department is struggling with how to deal with what could be increasingly more complex challenges, Sullivan said.

Legal wrangles over the use of land, air or water where the U.S. military operates or trains will put the Defense Department in the uncomfortable position of having to rebuff green projects at a time when the Pentagon is promoting its own efforts to generate and use renewable energy.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates set a goal of producing or procuring 25 percent of the department’s electric energy needs from renewable sources by 2025. That is an ambitious objective considering that only 5 percent of the military’s electricity today comes from renewable sources.

The services are pursuing a number of green programs. The Navy is developing a "green" carrier strike group to run completely on alternative fuels by 2016. The Army is building a 500-megawatt solar power generation plant in Fort Irwin, Calif. The Air Force has a goal of meeting 25 percent of base energy needs with renewable energy sources by 2025. The Marine Corps has launched a campaign aimed at reducing energy intensity, water consumption and increasing the use of renewable electric energy. The Environmental Protection Agency even named the Air Force, as one of its “Green Power” partners and the top renewable energy purchaser in the country in 2006, noted Schuyler Null, a research assistant at Global Green USA.

“The U.S. military is clearly working to address the twin threats of energy dependence and climate change,” said a study by the Pew Project on National Security, Energy and Climate, titled, "Reenergizing America's Defense.”

The dilemma for the Pentagon will be how to reconcile its environmental stewardship posture with its “not in my back yard” attitude toward any programs that come too close to its property.

Sullivan said her office is gearing up to deal with future encroachment resulting from renewable energy efforts such as the wind farm in Oregon. “We’re struggling [to figure out] what is the process” for tackling these issues, she said. “How do we make decisions? Who gets involved?” Sullivan asked. “The processes we had in place were based on a small amount of work.” If energy projects boom, “The processes we designed are not right for the volume of work,” she said. “There are lots of questions to answer.”

Comments

There are no comments yet for this post.
Items on this list require content approval. Your submission will not appear in public views until approved by someone with proper rights. More information on content approval.

Name: *

eMail *

Comment *

Title

Attachments

Name: *


eMail *


Comment *


 

Refresh
Please enter the text displayed in the image.
The picture contains 6 characters.

Characters *

  

Legal Notice *

NDIA is not responsible for screening, policing, editing, or monitoring your or another user's postings and encourages all of its users to use reasonable discretion and caution in evaluating or reviewing any posting. Moreover, and except as provided below with respect to NDIA's right and ability to delete or remove a posting (or any part thereof), NDIA does not endorse, oppose, or edit any opinion or information provided by you or another user and does not make any representation with respect to, nor does it endorse the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or reliability of any advice, opinion, statement, or other material displayed, uploaded, or distributed by you or any other user. Nevertheless, NDIA reserves the right to delete or take other action with respect to postings (or parts thereof) that NDIA believes in good faith violate this Legal Notice and/or are potentially harmful or unlawful. If you violate this Legal Notice, NDIA may, in its sole discretion, delete the unacceptable content from your posting, remove or delete the posting in its entirety, issue you a warning, and/or terminate your use of the NDIA site. Moreover, it is a policy of NDIA to take appropriate actions under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and other applicable intellectual property laws. If you become aware of postings that violate these rules regarding acceptable behavior or content, you may contact NDIA at 703.522.1820.

 

 

Bookmark and Share