To: Wharf Rat who wrote (12349 ) 6/28/2011 12:03:44 AM From: Wharf Rat Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 24229 The Hidden Cost of War: U.S. Military Spends $20 Billion a Year on Air Conditioning in Iraq and Afghanistan By Energy Interns on Jun 27, 2011 at 4:03 pm Today, NPR just filed a stunner of a story: Air conditioning in Iraq and Afghanistan costs $20.2 billion annually, when factoring in the manpower and logistics to deliver fuel. That’s more than NASA’s budget. It’s more than BP has paid so far for damage during the Gulf oil spill. It’s what the G-8 has pledged to help foster new democracies in Egypt and Tunisia. To power an air conditioner at a remote outpost in land-locked Afghanistan, a gallon of fuel has to be shipped into Karachi, Pakistan, then driven 800 miles over 18 days to Afghanistan on roads that are sometimes little more than “improved goat trails,” [retired Brigadier General Steven] Anderson says. “And you’ve got risks that are associated with moving the fuel almost every mile of the way.” In 2010, the US spent $165.1 billion in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to the Congressional Research Service. This means roughly 12.2% of expenditures were on air conditioning. Fuel is not only a budget breaker, it’s a logistical nightmare that can cost lives. Anderson, who manged operational logistics for Gen. David Patreaus in Iraq, explained the impacts of air conditioning on a commander: “He literally has to stop his combat operations for two days every two weeks so he can go back and get his fuel. And when he’s gone, the enemy knows he’s gone, and they go right back to where they were before. He has to start his counter-insurgency operations right back at square one.” The military has started to address the expensive, dangerous problem. An experimental roll-out of tents treated with polyurethane foam insulation took about 11,000 fuel trucks out of the combat zone. The tents cut energy use by up to 75% or more (especially when combined with efficient AC units). But a lot more will need to be done to save lives and money — including an acceptance of “green” technologies. In the NPR piece, Anderson says that some top commanders still haven’t embraced the needed changes. In the article, Anderson emphasized the importance of “a simple policy signed by the secretary of defense — a one- or two-page memo, saying we will no longer build anything other than energy-efficient structures in Iraq and Afghanistan.” Despite the difficulties in enacting change throughout throughout military operations, the Department of Defense has begun to tried to become a leader in developing clean energy. For instance, The DOD set a goal of reducing petroleum use by 20 percent by 2015 by increasing use of biofuels and renewable electricity. DOD is currently on track to meet this goal, and has cut fleet-wide petroleum use by 6.6 percent since 2005. Still, the military is dangerously hooked on fossil fuels. As this latest NPR story points out, that’s an extraordinarily expensive habit, both in both blood and treasure. — Tyce Herrmanthinkprogress.org