Pentagon Streamlines Approval for Energy Projects

WASHINGTON, July 26, 2011 — A Defense Depart­ment clear­ing­house for renew­able ener­gy projects has approved 229 of 249 projects pro­posed in 35 states and Puer­to Rico, Deputy Defense Sec­re­tary William J. Lynn III said last week.

These projects rep­re­sent 10 gigawatts of renew­able ener­gy gen­er­a­tion capac­i­ty in wind ener­gy alone,” Lynn said at an Army and Air Force ener­gy forum. 

Our action removes a major stum­bling block for devel­op­ers who are try­ing to attract financ­ing, show­ing the department’s com­mit­ment to sup­port­ing the president’s vision for ener­gy … with­out com­pro­mis­ing our nation­al secu­ri­ty,” the deputy sec­re­tary said. 

Ener­gy Sec­re­tary Steven Chu not­ed dur­ing a speech at the same forum that the Defense Depart­ment has played a cru­cial role in devel­op­ing tech­nolo­gies, includ­ing the GPS sys­tem, the Inter­net and semi­con­duc­tor electronics. 

As an ear­ly investor and adopter, [DOD] has actu­al­ly advanced those tech­nolo­gies that have become the core wealth gen­er­a­tors … of today,” he said. 

Chu likened the devel­op­ment of renew­able ener­gy tech­nol­o­gy to a sec­ond indus­tri­al rev­o­lu­tion. “We still need the ener­gy and the pow­er to pro­pel our mil­i­tary, our econ­o­my, our world — but we need to do it in a clean­er way,” he said. 

And, the Defense Depart­ment will con­tin­ue to play a sem­i­nal role in stim­u­lat­ing the clean ener­gy rev­o­lu­tion, Chu said. 

David Belote, DOD’s sit­ing clear­ing­house exec­u­tive direc­tor, said the year-old orga­ni­za­tion exists to pro­vide speedy assess­ment of renew­able ener­gy projects’ effects on mil­i­tary capabilities. 

Before the clear­ing­house was formed, the Air Force and oth­er agen­cies spent 15 months nego­ti­at­ing over a solar project that start­ed oper­at­ing in 2007 near Nel­lis Air Force Base, Nev., said Belote, who was the air base wing com­man­der there at the time. 

Where the com­pa­ny first pro­posed build­ing, it was going to have some sig­nif­i­cant elec­tro­mag­net­ic inter­fer­ence issues on test and eval­u­a­tion oper­a­tions at the Neva­da Test and Train­ing Range,” he said. 

Belote said that solar, and espe­cial­ly wind pow­er, instal­la­tions can cause elec­tro­mag­net­ic inter­fer­ence and oth­er issues for mil­i­tary elec­tron­ic sens­ing devices. Wind tur­bines can mea­sure 500 feet from base to blade tip, and “large spin­ning things” cause par­tic­u­lar issues for radar sys­tems, he said. 

Dur­ing both the Nel­lis project debate and lat­er nego­ti­a­tions over the Shep­herds Flat Wind Farm in north­ern Ore­gon, intense con­gres­sion­al pres­sure led the Air Force to con­sult MIT Lin­coln Lab­o­ra­to­ry, whose experts said, “This can be fixed,” Belote said. 

The poten­tial halt of the long-planned projects was due in part to the reg­u­la­tions the wind indus­try uses, Belote said. Fed­er­al Avi­a­tion Admin­is­tra­tion and DOD approval of large-scale ener­gy projects at the time was­n’t required until 30 days before con­struc­tion. That peri­od now is 45 days. 

The wind farm was a $2 bil­lion project that had been in the works for five or six years, Belote said. “The Sen­ate was plen­ty irri­tat­ed that the mil­i­tary, late in the game, was ask­ing to block it,” he added. 

Ulti­mate­ly, DOD agreed to field test MIT’s solu­tions and with­drew its objec­tions to both projects, Belote said. 

A third project involved the area around Travis Air Force Base, an area of “huge wind poten­tial” in Solano Coun­ty, Calif., and may be the mod­el for how to go for­ward, he said. Two major wind ener­gy cor­po­ra­tions, the Sacra­men­to Munic­i­pal Util­i­ties Dis­trict, and offi­cials at Travis Air Force Base and the Air Force’s Air Mobil­i­ty Com­mand joined efforts to ensure radar cov­er­age of flight oper­a­tions while allow­ing wind farms to be built near the air­field, the clear­ing­house exec­u­tive direc­tor said. 

They did some­thing called a mosa­ic, or tri­an­gu­la­tion, and they took two oth­er radars with­in 60 or 80 miles, and put them togeth­er so they could see behind the wind farms as they were con­struct­ed and not lose track of air­craft around the pat­tern,” Belote said. 

The clos­est tur­bine to the Travis tow­er is 4.6 miles away,” he added. 

Last sum­mer, with a grow­ing list of pro­posed renew­able ener­gy projects near mil­i­tary instal­la­tions, DOD offi­cials hired the new­ly retired Belote to lead the new sit­ing clear­ing­house and speed review of renew­able ener­gy projects. 

The three main areas his staff stud­ies, he said, are the impacts of pro­posed projects on mil­i­tary readi­ness and train­ing, test and eval­u­a­tion capa­bil­i­ties, and home­land defense: long-range radar sur­veil­lance, bor­der sur­veil­lance, coastal sur­veil­lance and crit­i­cal vul­ner­a­bil­i­ty surveillance. 

Belote said his staff took the approach of work­ing col­lab­o­ra­tive­ly with oth­er fed­er­al agen­cies, the mil­i­tary ser­vices, solar and wind indus­try asso­ci­a­tions and non­govern­men­tal envi­ron­men­tal organizations. 

By ear­ly Decem­ber, indus­try rep­re­sen­ta­tives had agreed to approach Con­gress joint­ly with clear­ing­house staff mem­bers to set review guide­lines, he said, but that plan was derailed when Pres­i­dent Barack Oba­ma signed the Nation­al Defense Autho­riza­tion Act in January. 

It was much more strin­gent than we would have hoped, and set a very high bar for DOD to assess projects and to be able to object to projects,” Belote said. The act, he added, set a 180-day time­line for DOD to com­plete pre­lim­i­nary reviews on all the ener­gy projects that had been delayed or deferred because of the department’s objections. 

We had 270 days, an addi­tion­al 90 days, to fig­ure out … a nation­wide approach to wind, solar [and] geot­her­mal in terms of high, medi­um and low mil­i­tary mis­sion impact areas,” he said. 

Belote said the act also lim­it­ed DOD’s allow­able objec­tions to renew­able ener­gy projects to “unac­cept­able risk to nation­al secu­ri­ty,” while only the sec­re­tary of defense and three oth­er top depart­ment offi­cials can file such objections. 

The clear­ing­house staff then set to work to deter­mine the size of the back­log and cat­e­go­rize projects. Projects with no sig­nif­i­cant risk of mil­i­tary mis­sion fail­ure would be rat­ed green; projects with some risk but with log­i­cal mit­i­gat­ing strate­gies would be rat­ed yel­low; and “red” projects would be those with sig­nif­i­cant risk of mis­sion fail­ure and no appar­ent mit­i­gat­ing strategies. 

We end­ed up with 249 projects in the back­log,” he said. 

Work­ing with the mil­i­tary ser­vices, the Fed­er­al Avi­a­tion Admin­is­tra­tion and the Bureau of Land Man­age­ment to review the back­log, clear­ing­house staffers had by late May com­plet­ed ini­tial assess­ment of all projects, Belote said. 

If all four of the mil­i­tary ser­vices, the North Amer­i­can Aero­space Defense Com­mand, and defense readi­ness, test, and instal­la­tions experts rat­ed a project as green, “we trust­ed them,” he said. 

The clear­ing­house reviewed all yel­low and red projects and returned them to the ser­vices with sug­ges­tions for mit­i­gat­ing risk, with a 30-day dead­line for final review. 

We end­ed up com­ing back with 229 green, and 20 yel­low or red,” Belote said. “Know­ing what we have done to get to where we are, sev­en or eight [of the 20] will prob­a­bly, after a lit­tle more work and study … go straight to green.” 

Anoth­er sev­en or eight “amber” projects will like­ly be rat­ed green if the devel­op­er agrees to some mit­i­gat­ing steps, he said. 

Move a hand­ful of tur­bines, low­er the height of some, maybe just remove a hand­ful from a project, so that we pre­serve some mil­i­tary capa­bil­i­ty,” Belote explained. 

Of the 229 projects already approved, 13 involve more than 100 wind tur­bines, five exceed 200, and two, in Michi­gan and Utah, may include more than 300, accord­ing to clear­ing­house records. 

Four or five of the 20 projects not yet approved “will prob­a­bly stay bright red, because they are close to some crit­i­cal, unique capa­bil­i­ties,” he said. 

The clear­ing­house board of direc­tors, made up of senior defense offi­cials, met on Day 180 of the review and approved the group’s results, he said. 

Belote said his staff is now review­ing new project requests and com­pil­ing guid­ance on how to stan­dard­ize rat­ings of future projects. They also are accept­ing requests from indus­try for ear­ly con­sul­ta­tion, so devel­op­ers can bet­ter fore­cast pos­si­ble issues with planned projects. 

[And] we are work­ing with [the Ener­gy Depart­ment] … to do an inter­a­gency field test and eval­u­a­tion of all the poten­tial mit­i­ga­tion solu­tions, because we’ve dis­cov­ered 80 to 90 per­cent of the issues sur­round wind tur­bines,” he said. “But the physi­cists and radar engi­neers under­stand what’s going on, so with some mon­ey and some polit­i­cal will, we can solve this.” 

Belote said he believes tech­no­log­i­cal advances and indus­try efforts will resolve inter­fer­ence issues with­in two to five years. 

There are a few places in the coun­try that we need to keep elec­tro­mag­net­i­cal­ly pris­tine,” he said. “[But] we have tak­en big steps at being able to deter­mine, in a pub­licly defen­si­ble, peer-review­able way, what we need for mil­i­tary mis­sion capability.” 

Ener­gy secu­ri­ty and ener­gy inde­pen­dence “are equal­ly facets to nation­al secu­ri­ty as are mil­i­tary readi­ness, test and oper­a­tions,” Belote said. 

U.S. Depart­ment of Defense
Office of the Assis­tant Sec­re­tary of Defense (Pub­lic Affairs) 

Team GlobDef

Seit 2001 ist im Internet unterwegs, um mit eigenen Analysen, interessanten Kooperationen und umfassenden Informationen für einen spannenden Überblick der Weltlage zu sorgen. war dabei die erste deutschsprachige Internetseite, die mit dem Schwerpunkt Sicherheitspolitik außerhalb von Hochschulen oder Instituten aufgetreten ist.

Alle Beiträge ansehen von Team GlobDef →