when the US military “see(s) overdependence on fossil fuel as a big liability, and renewable technologies — which have become more reliable and less expensive over the past few years — as providing a potential answer.”
Why would they arrive at such a conclusion? Simple. According to a recent NY Times article, “In Iraq and Afghanistan, one Army study found, for every 24 fuel convoys that set out, one soldier or civilian engaged in fuel transport was killed. In the past three months, six Marines have been wounded guarding fuel runs in Afghanistan.”
Service members are literally dying while transporting fossil fuels in countries that produce the fossil fuel with which we burn and pollute.
Ray Mabus, the Navy Secretary said he wants 50% of the power for the Navy and Marines to come from renewable energy sources by 2020.
My favorite line in the whole article: “While setting national energy policy requires Congressional debates, military leaders can simply order the adoption of renewable energy. And the military has the buying power to create products and markets. That, in turn, may make renewable energy more practical and affordable for everyday uses.”
If they are successful in achieving their goal, they could easily drive the renewable energy markets in a way that our Congress has proven incapable.
And to top it off…
Mabus and other experts also said that greater reliance on renewable energy improved national security, because fossil fuels often came from unstable regions and scarce supplies were a potential source of international conflict.
If that argument sounds familiar, it’s because those of us on the left have been singing this tune for years. And here we thought it was falling on deaf ears.