Dave Foley, of the stylish architectural practice Holland and Foley , comments at Worldchanging :

[...] There's one thing that's hard to do with efficiency and renewable energy: project military power.

He's wrong: efficiency and renewable energy would make America's fun new imperialism more sustainable.
Militaries depend on supply lines and logistical trains, and far from being an exception the modern American military has quite a high tail:teeth ratio, around 10:1 as I recall.  A lot of this is just moving oil around.  You'd keep the rocket fuel for the big bangs, but the less dramatic parts of the military have efficiency gains galore.  

If, for instance, plug-in hybrid electric humvees, recharged from in the field solar panels, were available, it would extend supply lines, reduce needed support personell, and make the military power who controlled them even more potent.   Indeed Wired has reported on this in the past , and a tank is just a chunky car with a big gun.  The long Pacific supply lines of the USN would also see pretty useful benefits from efficiency or distributed generation - imagine if the airstrip on an aircraft carrier could also be a solar array.  And I haven't even started talking about my Mongol hordes riding super-efficient solar-charged light-aircraft scenario yet.

Armed force isn't going away in a hurry, but if they could kill/liberate people without bringing Sydney Harbour into Pitt Street, I'd appreciate it.
Cam Riley: South Sea Republic. Freedom, liberty, equity and an Australian Republic.

Comments
  • cam . # .
    It is estimated that the Abrams Tank: with its gas turbine engine gets about 3 gallons to the mile (not miles per gallon). By contrast the 350 V8 in my Corvette does 30 mpg on the highway. The reason the turbine is used is for its acceleration which has combat efficiency benefits.

    The cost of ensuring oil supply from the Middle East for the US economy is the US military. So a gallon of gas in the US (about $2.30 USD atm) could probably have a fraction of the 650 billion spent in 2005 for the US military tacked on to it.

    Supposedly the US consumes 146 billion gallons a year. If gasoline prices included a US military tax (user pays system) then pump prices would be $6.75 USD a gallon.

    Ouch.

    cam
  • adam . # .
    User pays: You get 90 times the fuel efficiency of an M1 Abrams tank in your Corvette?  Sheesh, I hate to think of the figures for my Mazda 121 ...

    I wonder whether a hybrid drivetrain is still viable with that gas turbine engine.  The theory is you can get better torque at the low end, while keeping the potential for acceleration at the high end.  <waves hands>

    If gasoline prices included a US military tax (user pays system) then pump prices would be $6.75 USD a gallon.

    Is that assuming the entire US military exists to extract oil from overseas?  Shouldn\'t some of it go on a microchip tax to pay for the carrier group near Taiwan, etc?
  • cam . # .
    HTMT (high tech military taxation): kind of like the GST. Oil prices at the pump will balloon if the 2 trillion figure being floated around was payed per gallon. Japan is the fourth largest spender on military equipment in the world. So Americans should pay for the trade routes user pays taxation through Japanese imported goods.

    cam
  • adam . # .
    Have you got a source?: What formula are they using to allocate the cost between the various beneficiaries of the US military?  Eg petrol users, microchip users, South Koreans (special troop harassment discount!), etc.
  • cam . # .
    A source for HTMT?: No. I made it up.

    cam
  • adam . # .
    Ah, I see how you got it now: 4.45/gallon (total cost of the US military) + current cost of oil / gallon

    Doesn\'t account for current petrol taxes though, which also go into the pool ... also sits uneasily with your (reasonable) thesis that militaries find reasons to exist, when it\'s not oil its other cops-of-the-world stuff.
  • cam . # .
    Oh I see: yeh I divided 650 billion by 146 billion (gas consumption per year in the US) and then tacked it on to the present cost per gallon of oil.

    It isnt so much they will find reasons to exist. It is more that the state of exception will be extended so the military can continue to exist in its present form. Essentially extended until the exception becomes permanent.

    cam
  • cam . # .
    Gas supply line disruption:

    From John Robb;

    A large swarm destroyed twenty out of sixty fuel tankers in an Iraqi Oil Ministry convoy built to protect tanker drivers against threatened attacks. These threats, some attributed to Ansar al-Sunna, caused a ten day walk-out of fearful tanker drivers. Operations were resumed when 40% of the refinery\'s tanker drivers reported back to work ...

    Logistical systems is becoming more and more vulnerable with the commiditisation of communications and technology.

    cam