Comments on: Army Goes Greener

By: snyper42

snyper42 — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 10:03:16 +0000

The problem with both Solar and “Biotrash” burning is that the user pretty much has to stay connected to the source.

Thermal depolymerisation produces storable, portable, useable Grade-2 fuel oil. :P

By: Bob

Bob — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 04:39:15 +0000

The Army should be talking to the Air Force. There are giant solar collection fields on Nellis AFB at Las Vegas. Nellis has been using electric golf carts on base for years.
I wonder what the Navy is doing.

DOD needs to do something DOD wide to promote alternative energy.

By: kato outdoors

kato outdoors — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 22:49:40 +0000

Why doesn’t the Army get into the coal to oil conversion program just like an Air Force base out west is doing, once they have this system set up they will be producing nice clean fuel made from coal for $35.00 (thats dollars) per barrel and the environmentalist instigators won’t be able to stick their nose into a military base.

By: DanielStarseer

DanielStarseer — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 15:15:10 +0000

The idea of mini nuke plants on US CONUS (Continental United States) bases is actually quite sensible: in how many years and how many hours of operation has the USN ever lost a CVN, CGN, SSN, or SSBN to a reactor meltdown?

If they can develop those things that small to effective work 20 years or so without major maintenance overhaul, this is actually a good idea then.

And that’s the sell point to a public who fears nuclear accidents: ships have sailed the oceans for decades on nuclear power (how many combined hours of operation without a major mishap?),
so utilizing the same nuke tech in smallform base reactors should be plenty safe.

The only trick is getting the permits for the vehicles bringing new fuel rods across civilian roads into the bases, and in offloading the spent rods (radioactive waste).

As for wind and solar power on military bases: they have merits also, but 300–400 foot high wind turbines will hamper flight activities (especially at night), and the glare off large solar panel arrays during sunny days can blind pilots.

The mini nukes are a fine choice, and any security issues can be dismissed by putting them into the most controlled areas: every base has at least one area where only the top-most security clearance personnel can enter.

For a back up plan,
as much waste as any given US installation creates (food scrap, sewer, shredded paper, etc), cogeneration plants that can extract biodiesel then clean-burn the remaining biomass to heat steam turbines is a good alternative.

By: Jacob

Jacob — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 07:14:33 +0000

considering the armed forces steep technological advantage over the civilian world its about time the develop energy saving manners of operation. As for the first comment, This should in turn result in a large amount of information for research and development of energy saving ways of transportation. Now is transportation the only way we are wasting energy? although at first it wouldnt be cost efficient an entirely “green” running base would in turn save money in the long run Its my assumption this is the goal for the long run.

By: Garry R.Gutierrez

Garry R.Gutierrez — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 18:00:57 +0000

With all the chow halls why not use all that used cooking oil turned into biofuel most military vehicles and generators are diesel so a 50/50 mix would work and recycle used motor oil and use contamenated used aviation fuel just clean andreuse in modified on base generators.As for mini-reactors why not only problem would be some countries are anti-nuke and you would have to worry about protesters and terrorist.Put up one or more wind turbines and solar cell on barricks and buildings.

By: TB

TB — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 17:48:22 +0000

Fort Hood and the city of Killeen started building a bio/trash power plant just outside the base a few weeks ago. It is supposed to take 5 years to build. It’ll produce 50 megawatts of power cheaper than normal power, produce gasoline or diesel, and its supposed to be zero emissions. It’ll also save the base and the city a ton on dumping fees since it runs on solid waste.

By: mulehead

mulehead — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 17:41:46 +0000

Buy’em bicycles! great for weight reduction & pumanary.

By: Thunderhorse19

Thunderhorse19 — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 10:12:15 +0000

I remember back in the 70s when the military tried to save energy costs by turning down thermostats to 68 degrees in the winter and turning up the thermostats to 75 degrees in the summer for all family housing, barracks and buildings. All it did was cause military members and their families to get sick. I don’t think they saved a thing at the expense of their personnel and families.

By: Bman

Bman — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 05:31:44 +0000

The Military machine is alive and well.. Very few people actually comprehend.

Perhaps and I am only speculating .. War is money?

Bmab

By: snyper42

snyper42 — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 05:20:39 +0000

AFT !!!

Thermal depolymerization has been proven in Arkansas, and has been shown to produce Grade 2 fuel oil, which can be further refined for other things as well.

See:

http://discovermagazine.com/2006/apr/anything-oil

By: scott

scott — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 12:54:17 +0000

Why doesn’t the army(and all the military bases for that matter) invest in biodiesel stills. If all the waste grease from the chow halls were turned into biodiesel,(which costs $.90 gal to make) imagine all the savings for the army.

By: zoomdogg

zoomdogg — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 04:21:45 +0000

This sounds awesome. If the army can really pill this off it just may give a badly needed kick in the pants to industry R.& D.