In the May 2 issue, C&E News has an article entitled, "Clean Energy for the Military". It discusses the cooperation of the Department of Energy and the Department of Defense in reducing fossil fuel usage by the military through replacement with solar energy. The article quotes several comments from the Deputy Secretaries.
Deputy Secretary of Defense Lynn said, "With the limited supply of fossil fuels and rising costs, Defense needs cheaper and more abundant energy sources to power its global operations". He gave an example of a Marine patrol, which operated completely on solar power. Diesel fuel consumption was reduced by over 90%. Foot patrols using solar panels had power for a whole week and did not require the usual recharging of batteries every 48 hours.
Is the above laudable? I would say yes, except for the fact that I am primarily concerned about the effectiveness and safety of the patrol. Did it operate more or less efficiently with this reduction in use of Diesel fuel?
I am primarily interested in the US having the best military force and the greatest capability in the world. The fact that it consumes more energy than is used by two thirds of all nations worldwide, is not significant to me. I want the best. Not only to be effective in military operations but to protect our soldiers to the maximum degree of security.
Does this energy conservation do that? I have some doubts. The Obama Administration has previously shown its inability to concentrate on the most significant matters. It rather picks up on ancillary details which are much less important.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment