Why those dirty Socialist bastids...
Luke Air Force Base may become a solar force
Ryan Randazzo and Rebekah L. Sanders -
Jul. 24, 2010
The Arizona Republic
A massive solar project at Luke Air Force Base is expected to provide power for a majority of the base by 2011, strengthening the U.S. Defense Department's reputation as Arizona's biggest proponent for renewable power and energy efficiency.
Military installations in the state are making aggressive strides toward saving electricity, water and fuel, as part of a federal policy plan launched in 2005 encouraging the Defense Department to get 25 percent of its energy from renewable sources.
They are ramping up renewable-energy generation from solar power, while bases elsewhere in the nation turn to wind, geothermal and biomass energy. Many are trying fuels such as biodiesel in vehicles and warplanes.
The projects reflect the push from the Pentagon to reduce the military's costly dependence on fossil fuels and combat global warming, both of which have implications for national security. Every saved kilowatt and gallon frees up funding for missions, equipment and weapons, and helps strengthen American security, military officials say.
The eco-friendly initiatives represent a major culture change for many in the military.
If it were built today, the 17-megawatt solar project planned at Luke, in the West Valley, would increase by about 50 percent the amount of solar power on the Arizona Public Service Co. grid, including rooftop solar on customers' homes.
Final details of the project have not been announced, but the price tag for a solar plant of that size would be $68 million or more, based on industry averages.
Luke's array of solar panels would be among the largest in the nation, with the capacity to run appliances in 4,250 homes at once in direct sunlight.
It would be bigger than the 14-megawatt solar array that opened in 2007 at Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada, which was the largest plant of its kind in the country at the time.
Luke officials expect to save $7 million to $10 million on electricity costs over 25 years, said Lt. Col. John Thomas, commander of the 56th Civil Engineer Squadron, which maintains and develops base facilities.
"We'll meet the entire command's energy goals in this one project," Thomas said. "Arizona is ripe for the picking for solar. It's all about the location."
Luke, which has been environmentally-conscious for some time, uses solar atop its on-base shopping center, and the base has cut electricity use for lighting in half by installing high-efficiency bulbs. It also plans to add an additional 5 to 10 megawatts of rooftop solar on other buildings.
Air-conditioning for much of the base blows cool because of 500 gallons of recycled water chilled naturally underground overnight. Other buildings are getting energy-saving air units.
The Luke golf course is irrigated with recycled sewage water. Five miles of leaky pipes is being replaced underground.
Luke officials hope a building under construction for training Navy Reserve units will receive the highest certification of sustainable building, a Platinum LEED rating from the U.S. Green Building Council.
A broad effort
To meet its renewable-energy goals, the Defense Department has 255 solar projects under way and 25 wind projects, in addition to requiring all new buildings to be energy-efficient.
Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson powers its military housing with 6 megawatts of solar panels and issued a request for proposals for another solar project that could be as big as 20 megawatts. The base is taking many initiatives similar to Luke's, especially to save on air-conditioning.
Despite the initiatives, the military always will be one of the nation's top energy consumers. In wartime or peacetime, the Defense Department always is the largest single energy user in the U.S. It spent $13.2 billion on fuel and electricity last year. It occupies 307,000 permanent buildings, plus facilities in war zones that run largely on diesel-powered generators.
It takes an average of 22 gallons of fuel per soldier in the battlefield per day to power all U.S. tanks, ships and fighter jets, according to a Deloitte LLP report.
An Abrams tank gets less than 1 mile per gallon, and fighter jets can use thousands of pounds of fuel per flight.
"Our military's heavy reliance on fossil fuels creates significant risks and costs at a tactical as well as a strategic level," Dorothy Robyn, deputy undersecretary of Defense for installations and environment, told Congress earlier this year. "They can be measured in lost dollars, in reduced mission effectiveness and in U.S. soldiers' lives."
The Defense Department addressed climate-change risks for the first time this year in its Quadrennial Defense Review but has been striving to use more alternative energy since the 1990s. In 2005, its goals were adopted officially. The Energy Policy Act that year established the goal for the Defense Department to get 25 percent of its energy from renewable sources by 2025.
"It is fossil fuels that cause the greenhouse-gas problem and cause our dependence on foreign oil, which is part of the reason we are engaged in the parts of the world we are engaged in," said Joseph Sikes, director of facilities energy for the Defense Department.
Saving money on energy costs allows more cash to go to weapons and troop support, officials said. The less fuel troops need in combat zones, the fewer risks they face guarding fuel convoys, notorious targets for attacks.
And reducing the effects of global climate change could lessen the number of costly future international disaster-aid missions for the military.
"While climate change alone does not cause conflict, it may act as an accelerant of instability or conflict, placing a burden to respond on . . . militaries around the world," the Defense Review said in February. "In addition, extreme weather events may lead to increased demands for defense support to civil authorities for humanitarian assistance or disaster response both within the United States and overseas."
Changing attitudes
The alternative-energy push at the Defense Department has required a change in attitudes among troops, officials said. Military officers and official reports now talk about being stewards of the environment and helping to clean up the Earth.
"You can build a really smart energy-efficient building, but you still better train the people working in it in an energy-efficient way," Sikes said.
Thomas put it another way.
Replacing energy-sucking lightbulbs with light-emitting diodes at Luke Air Force Base is great, he said. But if airmen leave the lights on all night, those efforts are wasted.
Executives take note
Defense Department initiatives have caught the attention of corporate executives.
Thomas ran a quarterly meeting of big-business and military officials at the Pentagon as director of transformation at the Office of the Civil Engineer before arriving at Luke a year ago. Top leaders at General Electric, ExxonMobil, IBM, Disney, Bank of America and General Motors joined Air Force officers to discuss how they are operating more efficiently.
Still, the military goals shocked the private sector, Thomas said. "Their first comment was (the military goals) were extremely aggressive compared to their goals," he said. "When you look across the board, we lead the way."
The military is adopting corporate strategies, too.
Defense installations often lack the sophisticated monitoring systems that businesses employ. For years, Luke had one water meter for the whole base. Thomas predicts that in three years the Pentagon will have completed a program to track resources at every facility.
"You'll be able to dial up and see the energy usage at 1 p.m. at Luke Air Force Base at Building 300," he said.
Read more: azcentral.com |
