Mailing Lists

This is also outside my area of expertise and I do not tackle the
question of how this is accomplished but I'll share the following
thoughts:

The SECNAV should be applauded for developing an energy policy dealing
with the strategic and operational aspects of our reliance on oil.
However, there is one aspect of SECNAV's energy targets that has me
perplexed and that is the desire to create a biofuel thrust.  

If one's intent is to reduce foreign oil imports, one needs to address
the extent and source of the energy required to produce the biofuel.
Research by scientists such as Pimentel, Patzek and Crutzen have
concluded that more energy is expended in the generation of ethanol and
biodiesel than can be derived from the end product.  For example,
research shows it may take 20% to 50% more energy to convert corn to
ethanol than realized.  This figure can be improved with  other crops
but the net energy gain is still negative to minimal.  There are other
scientists who take issues with the assumptions and calculations of
Pimentel, etal. thus they believe a slightly positive energy factor can
be obtained. 

Strategically it may be acceptable that there be an energy deficit
associated with the conversion and use of the biofuels IF the energy
used to generate the biofuels is not based on burning oil.  Pimentel and
Patzek argue that part of the cost is oil based due to the equipment
utilized in the growth and harvesting of the biomass.  Considerable
processing costs, primarily removing water, may be based on coal or
nuclear fueled electricity generation but then again may not.  So even
if one believes there is a slightly positive factor in the conversion of
corn and switchgrass to ethanol or soy and sunflower to biodiesel, does
the difference in oil consumption strategically matter?

It would be interesting to know if the military has conducted a study,
bounded by the bookend of values provided by dissenting scientists, to
determine the true strategic value of conversion to biofuels.

Another aspect of biofuel utilization is cost.  There is cost at the
pump and cost delivered in the field.  The energy density of ethanol is
lower than the energy density of gasoline; biodiesel is less than
diesel. A greater quantity of ethanol and biodiesel need be purchased to
achieve equivalent results.  At the price difference between the two,
what have I saved? Is there a cost/barrel of oil breakpoint where this
calculus changes?  

Part of the answer is cost to whom.  It is my understanding the U.S.
government is spending about $6B/year to subsidize corn ethanol.  $6B
buys a lot of fuel.  An optimistic view would be that the military might
be saving some costs in its accounts but has the taxpayer really gotten
a better deal? 

Does it cost less to transport a barrel of biofuel?  I doubt it. If the
fuel is less efficient I need to transport more barrels with even higher
transportation costs. Biofuels such as ethanol have a higher density and
the additional weight carries a transportation cost.   

I don't raise these questions as an opponent of biofuels.  I raise them
from a concern that a true analytical study of the strategic and/or
operational value may not exist.  I wonder if the biofuel vector in the
Navy energy policy is warranted.  Any lack of an analytical study
reduces the Navy to establishing policy based solely on green politics. 

Bob Manke
Strategic Assessment
Naval Undersea Warfare Center 


-----Original Message-----
From: nwc_onlinediscussion-bounces at osiris.usnwc.edu
[mailto:nwc_onlinediscussion-bounces at osiris.usnwc.edu] On Behalf Of
Garofano, John F., CIV, NAVWARCOL
Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 4:58 PM
To: nwc_onlinediscussion at osiris.usnwc.edu
Subject: [NWC_OnlineDiscussion] SECNAV Navy Energy Forum

Attached is the October 14 Navy Energy Forum or "Green Policy Speech" by
Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus.  Secretary Mabus lays out a number of
significant energy policy goals for the Navy and Marine Corps, including
a Green Strike Group composed of nuclear and biofuel vessels, cutting
petroleum use by 50% by 2015, and producing half our total energy
consumption for ships, aircraft, tanks, vehicles and shore installations
from alternative energy sources by 2020.

How do we accomplish this in the current fiscal environment?

Dr. John F Garofano
Dean of Academic Affairs
U.S. Naval War College

_______________________________________________
NWC_OnlineDiscussion mailing list
NWC_OnlineDiscussion at osiris.usnwc.edu
http://osiris.usnwc.edu/mailman/listinfo/nwc_onlinediscussion