Look Who’s Talking — Energy Conservation Edition
by Mark Miller, FAIA | LEEDap | CEO
Lets start with a test of your I.Q.
What institution has this institutional priority?
More strategic use of energy resource…lowering risk…saving money…and allowing the department to shift more resources to other…priorities. Such efforts are critical if we are to meet our mission to prevail, today and in the future
A. State of California Board of Regents
B. US Department of Energy
C. US Green Building Council
D. University of California, San Francisco (UCSF)
E. US Department of Defense
You have a high green IQ, if you chose the US Department of Defense:
DoD’s Operational Energy Strategy will guide the Defense Department to a more strategic use of energy resources in the fight today and in plans for the future by lowering risks to our warfighters, saving money for American taxpayers, and allowing the department to shift more resources to other warfighting priorities. Such efforts are critical if we are to meet our mission to prevail, today and in the future. US Department of Defense
Energy management and more specifically significant reduction of fossil fuels, is a non-political, mission crucial objective promoted by the rather senior Secretary of the United States Navy, Ray Mabus. (Listen to NPR: Military Goes Green for an an Edge on the Battlefield to hear Secretary Mabus discuss those initiatives.)
It is more than a public relations initiative. As the Department of Defense sees it, reduced reliance on fossil fuels will increase mission effectiveness, save lives, and save money — not a bad trifecta. This rationale is driving the high level strategic planning that is reshaping the military’s approach to everything from advanced research to forward-operating bases operations. Operational Energy (OE), a report from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations, and Environment details the strategy role of energy.
An institution as large and influential as the DoD supporting clean technologies is a huge boost to emerging clean technologies and ongoing research. The military represents a large market for commercially viable (and domestic) clean technologies and offers mission-critical venues to explore emerging technologies, which accelerates their testing and potential for commercial viability.
This is not a political decision. Data-driven analysis of the impact of fossil-fuel energy patterns on military operational effectiveness validates going green. This analysis have had to overwhelmingly indicate the cost of the prior direction to overcome a red-leaning culture that has dismissed and would have been expected to continue to dismiss, energy as a relevant issue.
Nothing like a bit of solid data-driven analysis presented by a respectable institution to fundamentally change the debate.
For more on the Department of Defense strategic assessment of energy reference the following resources:
http://www.defense.gov/home/features/2011/0611_energy/
http://www.npr.org/2010/12/03/131785448/Military-Goes-Green-For-An-Edge-On-The-Battlefield
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2011/06/dod-20110614.html
http://www.cnn.com/2011/09/22/opinion/cuttino-militarygreen/index.html?iref=allsearch
http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/news/news_detail.cfm/news_id=17763
http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/23039
http://www.fiercegovernment.com/story/dod-position-incubate-clean-energy-says-pew-report/2011-09-27
Originally published at www.mkthink.com on November 1, 2011.
