Guest opinion by David Archibald
“Men” said Charles Mackay in 1841,”go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.” Recovering from groupthink is a slow process, as evinced by Section 311 of the National Defense Authorisation Act for Fiscal Year 2017 which was passed on 18th May, 2016.
Section 311 on page 139 simply says:
Rule of Construction Regarding Alternative Fuel Procurement Requirement
This section would amend section 526 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (Public Law 110–140) to clarify that this section shall not be construed as a constraint on any conventional or unconventional fuel procurement necessary for military operations.
The Section 526 referred to says:
Prohibits a federal agency from entering into a contract for procurement of an alternative or synthetic fuel, including a fuel produced from nonconventional petroleum sources, for any mobility-related use (other than for research or testing), unless the contract specifies that the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions associated with the production and combustion of the fuel supplied under the contract must, on an ongoing basis, be less than or equal to such emissions from the equivalent conventional fuel produced from conventional petroleum sources.
This section was included in the 2007 bill largely to thwart the Defense Department’s intentions to acquire coal-based jet fuels. So a bill with a title that suggests it is about promoting energy independence and security was doing the opposite of that. Section 526 was the work of Congressman Henry Waxman representing California’s 30th District. Wiser heads wanted to repeal Section 526 straight away via amendments to the 2008 National Defense Authorization Bill. That didn’t happen. Efforts to repeal were ongoing and the White House noted the totemic importance of Section 526 in 2011.
Back in 2011 the oil price might have been conducive to a synthetic-fuel-from-coal effort. A cheap start might have been to convert the Great Plains synthetic natural gas plant in North Dakota to making diesel and jet fuel. Instead that plant is now being converted to make 380,000 tpa of urea. Now a synthetic liquid fuels plant will have to be built from scratch with the big capital cost items being the liquid oxygen plant and the coal gasifiers.
Nevertheless, Section 526 has been repealed after eight years of trying. A couple of other attempts in the National Defense Authorisation Act of 2017 to undo the madness of prior years did not get up. Roll call vote no. 2 (page 644) would have:
Description: Prohibits funds for executive order mandates from 2013 and 2015 related to green energy benchmarks, climate change boards, councils, and working groups and inclusion of climate change review throughout DOD operations, acquisition, logistics, and planning.
That was lost 29 to 30. Roll call vote no 3 (page 646) would have:
Description: Prohibits DOD from using FY17 funding for the construction or refurbishment of a biofuels facility, subject to a national security waiver.
That was lost 29 to 32.
The good news is that attempts to undo the damage are ongoing. This is in an environment in which President Obama has directed that commanders of naval bases be rated upon how much they promote global warming in their commands. And there are also reversals in the march of progress. In Australia the government-funded CSIRO had fired 61 climate scientists because “the science was settled” and therefore there was no use for them. The recently re-elected government has ordered the CSIRO to rehire 15 of these witchdoctors. Geopolitical events might sweep all such nonsense away before the year is out.
David Archibald is the author of Twlight of Abundance.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
http://navaltoday.com/2016/06/30/us-navy-promotes-alternative-fuel-during-worlds-largest-naval-drill/
US Navy promotes alternative fuel during “world’s largest naval drill”
“The alternative fuel that will be used during RIMPAC is derived from waste beef fat from the Midwest. Alternative fuels can be made from animal waste oil, algae, or non-food crops. The fuel must be “drop-in,” requiring no modifications to engines or procedures. Having alternative fuel in the supply chain increases operational flexibility by allowing forces to obtain fuel from more sources worldwide.”
Chicken fat makes a pretty good fuel.
To moderators: Please excuse my many links. I know multiple imbedded links cause instant moderation therefore added work on your end. I wish to thank you for all you do to make this site the leader in its field. However, the links enhance this post and I saw no way around them.
OK Mr. Griff, I’ll play along with your fantasy of an Alternate Fuels for Armed Forces future, with a slight scenario twist, albeit a twist that is surely plausible if not inevitable in today’s world. Picture the US Naval Fleet (including the Marine Corps – Semper Fi!) and the US Air Force and the US Army, idyllically plying the various waters of the world, flying supply and recon sorties, training for land conflicts in a DoD world of dwindling Congressional funding for tactical vehicles also aircraft purchase/support and overall manpower (is manpower still acceptable language? For those that just freaked out, the following underlined section of this sentence is thereby deemed your ‘safe zone’_________. You have my written permission to sit there until you can wrap your mind around what I am typing. You are welcome).
The Free World Saviors, saving the planet via Power Projection, as well via Alternate Fuel use from whichever source. The fuel supply chain has been, in my scenario and by Executive Order (neatly bypassing Congressional oversight) altered to include a large percentage of these Alternate Fuels (called so because they are Alternatives to conventional solid and liquid hydrocarbon-based fuels). All is well; ships sail; planes fly; electrical systems function; radar and satellite monitoring systems are assuring no ‘problems’ exist – in peace time.
All is well until one or many antagonists decide to alter the world stage, in my scenario many countries at once on many theaters or fronts. All-out war hits without advance warning – from the air, sea, and land (the antagonists are not important; in this make believe scenario, the following potentiality is). All of the various branches of the Armed Forces must switch – overnight – to a wartime footing.
Bringing this make-believe scenario back to the issue of a creeping requirement for armed forces to produce, ship, and utilize Alternate Fuels. War begins; the USA must accordingly shift its remaining CONUS (Continental United States) production capabilities (any OCONUS or Outside CONUS production supply lines have been severed, to include any foreign oil shipments the exception being Canadian Oil imports) to producing that which supports the war efforts via all Armed services on all fronts (the fronts include Asia; Europe; Alaska for now) should we decide to not merely concede the war fronts to the antagonists (group hug, anyone?) and actually enter into resistance conflict.
Tracking along, Mr. Griff? Good let’s continue. As of 2016, the following link shows the oil imports from OCONUS sources: https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_a2_nus_ep00_im0_mbbl_m.htm (remember in my scenario the Canadian supply still exists; the rest – kaput). The current consumption of Distillate Fuels is around 20 million barrels per day: https://www.eia.gov/forecasts/steo/report/us_oil.cfm.
The sitting POTUS immediately opens the Strategic Oil Reserve to meet the demand for Armed Forces use: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Petroleum_Reserve_(United_States). This Reserve gives the USA about 36-38 days of emergency oil flow. Canada continues to export oil, about 40% of current imports (how important is Canada???). The USA produces its own oil: https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/PET_SUM_SNDW_A_EPC0_FPF_MBBLPD_W.htm.
And that’s it. Strategic Reserves, US domestic and Canadian import. Enter refining capacity. https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pnp_cap1_dcu_nus_a.htm.
Back of the envelope numbers (I expect fact checkers to correct any errors – thanks in advance):
Wartime availability, current values
USA domestic: 8,460,000 barrels/day
Canadian Import: 1,200,000 barrels/day
Strategic Reserve: *cannot tell from available internet information the extraction and delivery capabilities in bbl/day for this oil source – help?
Refining capacity: 18,300,000 barrels/day
The question remains, how quickly can the USA get oil to the refineries and by which method? Apparently the refining capacity exists; it is the transportation from supply to refinery that may be a bottleneck (in this scenario, how vital for wartime oil delivery would the Keystone Pipeline project have been??).
So, Mr. Griff – Do you see any wartime scenario where expensive to produce, Alternate Fuels would serve the USA Power Projection Platforms (US military forces)? The shelf-life of most Alternate Fuels is very short: http://www.fuel-testers.com/expiration_of_ethanol_gas.html; even the DoD acknowledges this fact: http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/414025-m-vol3-chapter8.pdf.
So – Peacetime military Alternate Fuel production, storage, distribution, and use? Being done now, at added cost (expect Mr. Griff to throw in some verbiage regarding economies of scale or some such). And, only being done via Executive Order, to appease the fiction of CAGW scenarios that may or may not ever occur. While the potential for all-out war on many fronts is a real threat (see: world history). So, Mr. Griff – awaiting your response. Go for it. To me, when on a war footing, Alternate Fuel sources for military use are pretty much non-starters, let alone viable for the long haul.
Regards,
MCR
Darn the “patient” on my anti-gravitational machine only needs another $12,500 million in grants and you are blowing the whistle !
Under this section of the law, what happens if it is demonstrated that ethanol creates more “lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions associated with the production and combustion of the fuel” than conventional petroleum sources? It would seem that this section requires all providers of ethanol-blended gasoline to conduct such an analysis and that such analyses would be subject to FOIA requests.
I once took a course in ‘Numerical Analysis’, a branch of mathematics devoted to finding solutions to problems. One of the theorems (!) we used was to the effect that adding restrictions to the solution of a problem, or to the method of finding the solution would inevitable impair the effectiveness of the solution.
The concept generalizes readily.
If the problem is National Security, adding *any* restriction to the procurement of fuel by the military forces that provide that National Security can only impede their ability to perform the mission.
Waxman! The stupidity that keeps on giving.
As an international blog with writers from a number of english-speaking countries, it would be helpful if post like this about specific laws would please specify up front which jurisdiction you’re talking about. In this particular example, it’s not obvious until paragraph 4 that the context is the US (and even then, only because I recognized Waxman’s name). Thanks.
I am confused..
Nevertheless, Section 526 has been repealed after eight years of trying.
But what follows seems to be unsuccessful attempts at repeal.
In local news:
“PENDLETON, OR – U.S. Senator Ron Wyden and Oregon Senator Bill Hansell joined the Oregon Military Department in officially dedicating the new 150-kilowatt solar panel array at the Oregon Army National Guard’s Army Aviation Support Facility (AASF #2) at the airport in Pendleton, Oregon, August 4”
http://www.nbcrightnow.com/story/32690296/oregon-military-department-installs-multi-million-dollar-solar-array-in-pendleton
So how does solar work in eastern Oregon?
The other day I read the annual report for EnergyNorthwest. Lots of facts and figure about generation from wind and nuclear and the associated costs. They bragged about running the nuke plant 683 days without shutting down (breaker to breaker).
ENW installed a PV system some years ago. At the time you could monitor on line output from from various ENW sources but not anymore. The annual report only mentions that they have a solar demonstration project.
So what was demonstrated? They do not say. Of course not, solar does not work very well around here.
A666ottSatan may or may not have got 300 fired (it’s possible the CSIRO independently worked out these penguin counters were achieving nothing). St Malcolm of Oxford St gets 15 rehired – looks like a “progressive” hero.
I’ll take that deal every time. In every dept.
The human race has gone absolutely bonkers, Waxman is a prime candidate for a mental institution. As to Michael Roberts lengthy scenario. It would relatively simple , (if we are ever to go on war footing) to de-stabilize the North American energy supply system , a few bridges here and there, a few power, pipe, and telecommunication lines, cell tower removal and the whole “Home Defense” system would simply collapse. But we would be doing the same thing to “Them” as well. I personally think that the downfall of the West is already happening ( mass illegal immigration for example and the push everywhere for Sharia Law) and as far as I can see it will be at the internal civil levels as in riots and martial law etc. Frankly to me the attack by the left on western constitutions is a far greater threat than a war.