Green Energy Deal Tops $23 Billion in May Awards

Green Energy Deal Tops $23 Billion in May Awards

A group of companies, including a unit of the German engineering conglomerate Siemens AG, won the U.S. Defense Department’s biggest contract last month, a potential $7 billion deal for alternative energy.

The Army plans to buy the renewable energy from privately developed power plants, according to the May 7 announcement. The facilities are to be built, operated and maintained by companies under an agreement hailed by service officials as the first of its kind.

“This effort will lead to enhanced energy security and sustainability for our installations,” Col. Robert Ruch, commander of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers center in Huntsville, Ala., which is overseeing the work, said in a statement.

The award topped a list of more than 250 contracts with a combined value of more than $23 billion in May, according to a Military​.com analysis of the Pentagon’s daily contract announcements. That figure is about 22 percent higher than the value from April and doesn’t reflect what is actually spent, or obligated, because many deals are only partially funded at first.

The Army selected five companies from a total of 16 bids as part of a contract to buy energy generated from geothermal technology. The firms were Constellation NewEnergy Inc., based in Baltimore; ECC Renewables LLC, based in Burlingame, Calif.; Enel Green Power North America Inc., based in Andover, Mass.; LTC Federal LLC, based in Detroit; and Siemens Government Technologies, based in Arlington, Va.

The contract includes a three-year base period and seven one-year options, according to the Army release. It’s the first of several expected this year with a combined potential value of $7 billion, the service said.

“In our current fiscal environment, attracting third-party money to build renewable energy production facilities that will allow military installations to purchase energy at a pre-determined rate without building, owning and maintaining the facility is the right thing to do,” Ruch said.

The Defense Department wants to derive 3 gigawatts of power — enough to power about 750,000 homes — from alternative sources such as solar, wind, biomass and geothermal by 2025.

Some lawmakers oppose the military’s push into renewable energy. Rep. Randy Forbes, R-Va., has criticized the Navy’s “Great Green Fleet” initiative to power ships, aircraft and combat vehicles with biodiesel and other alternative fuels as being unnecessarily costly. Fuels derived from algae and other alternative sources remain more expensive than petroleum-based products.

In a separate but related effort, Siemens has teamed with Chicago-based Boeing Co. to upgrade the Defense Department’s energy grid to be more independent.

“The challenge they face today is, at times they are dependent on the local utilities, which work, but at certain times today and in the future there might be the need to island or cut themselves off from the grid for security reasons,“
Judy Marks, chief executive officer of Siemens Government Technologies Inc., said in a video announcing the alliance. “We have an offer that will help them do that.”

Four out of the top five awards in May were so-called multiple-award contracts. Under these kinds of arrangements, companies win seats on the contract, then compete against each other for individual orders.

Four companies, including three from Virginia, shared the second-largest contract, a Navy agreement worth as much as $1.9 billion over five years to support habitat systems on vessels and small crafts.

A group of 15 companies, including units of defense giants such as London-based BAE Systems Plc and Bethesda, Md.-based Lockheed Martin Corp., won the third-largest contract, a Navy agreement potentially valued at $900 million over five years to provide information-technology services for combat systems and intelligence collection.

A group of 30 companies, including McLean, Va.-based SAIC Inc. and Chantilly, Va.-based Engility Corp., landed seats on the fourth-largest contract, a deal worth as much as $855 million deal over five years to provide the Marine Corps with logistics support.

A unit of Northrop Grumman Corp., based in Falls Church, Va., won the fifth-largest contract, an Air Force award potentially valued at $556 million to upgrade Global Hawk drones, the biggest unmanned aircraft in the fleet. Work is expected to be performed in San Diego and finish in 2015.

Northrop last month received individual contracts with a potential combined value of $872 million — the most of any company.

Tags: , ,

Join the Conversation

This green technology craze is a boon for foreign corporations.

Can you even call biodiesel renewable? It still requires diesel and the “bio” has to be grown or harvested.

Random tidbits from the xls contract announcement.

“Bergin Fruit and Nut Co., Inc., ** St. Paul, Minn., has been awarded a maximum $6,648,184 fixed-price with economic-price-adjustment, indefinite-quantity contract to provide fresh fruit and vegetable support for non-Department of Defense customers in the Minnesota zone. Location of performance is Minnesota with a Nov. 11, 2014 performance completion date. Using service is U.S. Department of Agriculture School and tribal customers. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2013 through fiscal 2014 Defense Working Capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pa., (SPM300-13-D-S207). ”

What does this have to do with DoD?

“Lockheed Martin Corp., Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., Fort Worth, Texas, is being awarded a $20,100,000 fixed-price-incentive, firm-target, advance acquisition contract to provide long lead parts, materials and components required for the delivery for two low rate initial production Lot II F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter conventional takeoff and landing aircraft for the government of Israel. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, Texas, and is expected to be completed in May 2014. Foreign Military Sales funding in the amount of $20,100,000 are being obligated on this award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to the FAR 6.302–4. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting authority (N00019-13-C-0013). ”

Boom, Israel?

“The Boeing Co., Mesa, Ariz., is being awarded an $11,031,650 modification (P00023), to a previously awarded firm-fixed-price, foreign-military-sales (FMS) contract (W58RGZ-09-C-0147), for the procurement of Apache Block III helicopters. This FMS contract is in support of Taiwan. The cumulative total face value of this contract is $628,720,972. Fiscal 2013 Procurement funds in the amount of $4,258,436 are being obligated on this award. The Army Contracting Command, Redstone Arsenal, Ala., is the contracting activity. ”

Taiwan is getting Block III’s while the US government procurement is bottlenecked by transmission shortages for Block III? Hmm.

“The Boeing Co., Mesa, Ariz., was awarded a $14,268,958 modification (P00003), to a previously awarded firm-fixed-price, foreign military sales (FMS) contract (W58RGZ-12-C-0113), for the procurement of Apache Block III aircraft and associated parts and services. This FMS contract is in support of Saudi Arabia. The total cumulative face value of this contract is $35,158,878. Fiscal 2013 Procurement funds are being obligated on this award. The Army Contracting Command, Redstone Arsenal, Ala., is the contracting activity. ”

And the Saudis. I wonder who’s getting theirs first?

Actually, biodiesel is perhaps the only “green” energy scheme which makes any economic sense at all.

The “bio” part does not necessarily have to be grown or harvested. It can instead be derived from used cooking oils. Those are cheap and abundant and if not diverted to a productive use, constitute a difficult waste disposal problem. (The aggregate cost of sewer plumbing clogged with restaurant grease is surprisingly large.)

As for the rest of the green energy schemes? The primary function they serve is to divert public dollars into politically connected private pockets. Quite a lot of public dollars, too. Take another look at the cost figures quoted in the article.

Meanwhile, thousands of faithful and diligent servicemembers are being involuntarily turfed out of what they thought would be a long-term career in uniform, so that the Pentagon can “save money”. Money that then gets flushed down the green-energy toilet.

The military uses this green fuel, and costs about $58 a gallon, compared to “JP” fuel at about $4. Another example of giving the DOD a budget, and then, telling them how they will spend it. Everyone in Washington needs to be fire!

Who gave the Army $7 billion to spend when natural gas is $4 per million BTU, oil is $90 a barrel, and the government is $16 trillion in debt? All the money the US military has spent on alternative energy so far has not improved US energy security by one joule. The solar farms and wind turbines, besides costing more in lifecycle energy and GHG emissions than they pay back, have not even been installed with the transfer switches necessary to let them power their host installations if the municipal power grid goes down (Nellis, China Lake, Quantico, etc.). They have been installing Chinese hardware and now continue to spend money on foreign contracts. There is no US job security here either. This is all about politics and has nothing to do with national security.

My thought was that this article was about a geothermal plant, but the author started talking about biodiesel as a renewable energy source. Geothermal is heat from the earth that we’re not going to run out of. Biodiesel is a physical object that is consumed. The comparison bothered me.

I’ve seen where restaurant oils are recycled into motor oil, but I didn’t think it existed in enough quantities to fuel a ship on a regular basis.

More GANG GREEN. Spending more when the Obama Administration should be reducing spending money and especially on foreign contracts. Stick it to the American Workers says OBAMA. “the Nobel Peace Price Winner”. should be awarded a prize for World Butcher and destroyer of the American Dream.

Thanks to marketing, the following is easily glossed over with the word green. “Green” energy originally was a catch-all term that meant “anything but conventional drilling-based oil extraction, which was perceived as bad for the environment. Thus it’s a term that can be reshaped to fit whatever story you wish.

More accurately, we could call biodiesel/ethanol/synthetic hydrocarbons what they are: alternative hydrocarbon sources. Is synthetic fuels too intimidating? What does marketing division think?

“Green” energy, where the energy tastes like disruptive powerpoint paradigm shifts and costs lots of green.

Let’s not go into:

Renewable energy, where the energy is extracted from an infinite, self-renewing source in ambient environment without human provision of a fuel source (geothermal, solar, wind, etc) regardless of cost per unit of energy.

Energy independence, where the energy is extracted from our friends in Canada in tar sand or produced domestically in coal, natgas augmented by hydraulic fracture, regardless of cost per unit of energy

Instead, turning corn into ethanol is somehow “green” when they mean “independence of energy source from the Salafis”.

It may be worth adding new terms, such as growth-derived energy (when they mean fuel), to include corn-based ethanol, cellulosic ethanol, algae and umbrella term biodiesel. “Bioenergy” is probably what marketing division will stick with.

“Instead, turning corn into ethanol is somehow “green” when they mean “independence of energy source from the Salafis”.”

I love corn-based ethanol. It skyrockets the price of a major crop and creates shortages, requires a significant amount of water to grow (of which the great plains are running a deficit) and still requires oil to grow, harvest, and transport.

You come to our facilities and it looks like you are walking into a Soviet era building. No maintenance because there is no money, removing light bulbs everywhere to save a buck, etc etc, yet they shell out all this money to defence contractors and overseas. Brilliant!

Don’t mention the Ogalla, farm lobbies seem to think the thing is infinite and will go on forever. I wonder what will happen when it runs dry. The Sahara ran dry, Mesopotamia ran dry…food shortages kill countries.

And yes, it still requires fuel to prepare materials to be turned into fuel. Where the energy to turn something into energy comes from is a glossed over subject.

Problem here is that if we want green energy benefits we should just say that if its produced, we would buy it. But we won’t put a taxpayer dollar into the development and facilities. Let that “capitalist market” take the risk and reap the rewards.

The green fuel will always be available, the cheap “JP” fuel on the other hand wont always be. So would you eventually rather have a military that can actually power it’s vehicles more “expensively” (price always goes down over time) on the field. Or have a military with vehicles that run on regular fuel sitting around collecting dust?…

A lot of the discoveries we made, the technologies we use, and other inventions that were created, was the result of governments funding research that others wouldn’t touch. The benefits of Capitalism doesn’t work as well as people try to make it out to be. But of course Capitalism has long been replaced by Corporatism, so there’s also that. :)

What a total waste of money. Another liberal boondoggle, to waste our limited defebse budget.

Hydro is #1

This is how we hollow out the tax payer once again…the DoD is a conspiracy of fools.…it is operating like ENRON .….once again stealing from us taxpayers. Transferring huge sums of money to corporations now allegedly providing services to untraceable foreign entities and governments. Once again then the accountability is obscured. Which makes the whole process that much more difficult to prosecute.….I saw the unarmored humvees in Iraq. And I saw the $100,000 plus SUVs driven by DoD contractors.…the DoD is just huge trough for saic and others that steal DoD dollars through sham technology contracts.

On one of my business trips, I road next to a former ITT engineer who now works for a German firm that makes mixers that extract methane from manure. German farmers use this to heat their houses and have now attached this to their power grid. I’m not a fan of most green technology, but this seems like a cheap and practical technology that DoD could use in a lot of settings.

There will always be “JP”, if the prez would stop playing games and issue permits in this country.

From a longer-term perspective that today’s current price of oil, of course it makes sense to develop an infrastructure that does not require a foreign power’s continued good will to obtain fuel or energy. The military is not responsible for developing US energy security, only in protecting their ability to respond in their own service domains. The price of oil you mention is in response to interest in alternative energy solutions — dropped the same as in the 1970s, to prevent further exploration into alternatives that are not oil buried deep in the ground of foreign lands. The government’s debt load is a factor of the same party retaining power in both executive and legislative branches of government, and will not be changed one bit in either case regarding energy — That is a self-inflicted wound from the current administration’s spending policies.

I find this article interesting. Here at Ft Huachuca, AZ the post put up a wind turbine two years ago to supplement electrical power for the post. The big issue is that in the last two years I have only seen this turbine in use maybe 6 times. The question I would have is this a new way to waste monies???

I applaud the commitment to green energy. Costs come down when a product is purchased over time, and the Pentagon has many times used its “power of the purse” to jumpstart new industries into commercial competitiveness. A note on biodiesel — it’s greener than most people seem to think. Biodiesel is made from plants that grew by taking carbon out of the atmosphere. This same carbon is then returned to the atmosphere when the fuel is burned — it’s a net-zero cycle. Contrast that with fossil fuels like gasoline, that take carbon that was permanently (on a human scale) trapped in the earth and releases it when burned, increasing the total carbon. Carbon in the air changes the planet’s climate over time and we have to stop altering the atmosphere or we screw the whole planet over the next couple hundred years. It’s short sighted in the extreme to talk cost per gallon of fuels and lose sight of the big picture.

Do you mean that there is insufficient wind to keep the turbine going? Or that the turbine itself is not being used to generate electricity?

23 Billion Dollars for Green Energy and I am getting Furloughed!!!

Constellation NewEnergy Inc., Baltimore, Md., (W912DY-13-D-0021); ECC Renewables LLC, Burlingame, Calif., (W912DY-13-D-0022); Enel Green Power North America Inc., Andover, Mass., (W912DY-13-D-0023); LTC Federal LLC, Detroit, Mich., (W912DY-13-D-0024); and Siemens Government Technologies, Arlington, Va., (W912DY-13-D-0025); were awarded indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity, firm-fixed-price, multiple-award, task-order contract with a maximum value of $7,000,000,000 for the procurement of energy from renewable and alternative energy production facilities that are designed, financed, constructed, operated and maintained by private sector entities on private land under the jurisdiction of the Department of Defense. Work location and type of appropriation will be determined with each task order. The bid was solicited through the Internet, with 16 bids received. The Army Corps of Engineers, Huntsville, Ala., is the contracting activity.

Contract sounds a little open-ended.

Here’s a better one.

“BAE Systems, Rockville, Md. (N65236-13-D-4895); Booz Allen Hamilton, McLean, Va. (N65236-13-D-4896); CACI Inc., Federal, Chantilly, Va. (N65236-13-D-4897); CGI Federal, Inc., Fairfax, Va. (N65236-13-D-4898); Computer Sciences Corp., Falls Church, Va. (N65236-13-D-4899); Deloitte Consulting, LLP, Alexandria, Va. (N65236-13-D-4900); General Dynamics One Source, Fairfax, Va. (N65236-13-D-4901); HP Enterprise Services, LLC, Herndon, Va. (N65236-13-D-4902); Engility Corp., Mount Laurel, N.J. (N65236-13-D-4903); Lockheed Martin Information Systems &Global Solutions, Herndon, Va. (N65236-13-D-4904); MC Dean, Inc., Dulles, Va. (N65236-13-D-4905); SAIC, Inc., McLean, Va. (N65236-13-D-4906); Scientific Research Corp., Atlanta, Ga. (N65236-13-D-4907); Secure Mission Solutions, LLC, Washington D.C. (N65236-13-D-4908); and URS Federal Services, Inc., Germantown, Md. (N65236-13-D-4909) are each being awarded an indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity, cost-plus-fixed-fee, with provisions for fixed-price-incentive (firm target) and firm-fixed-price task orders, performance based contract. The contracts are for the procurement of business and force support services including the entire spectrum of non-inherently governmental services and solutions (equipment and services) associated with the full system lifecycle support including research, development, test, evaluation, production and fielding of sustainable, secure, survivable, and interoperable command, control, communication, computers, combat systems, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, information operations, enterprise information services and space capabilities. The cumulative, estimated value (ceiling) of the base year is $179,908,000. These contracts include options, which if exercised, would bring the cumulative value (ceiling) of these contracts to an estimated $899,543,000. Work will be performed worldwide. Work is expected to be completed by May 2014. If all options are exercised, work could continue until May 2018. SPAWAR Systems Center Atlantic Navy Working Capital funds in the amount of $25,000 will be obligated at the time of award as the minimum guarantee and will be split among the 15 awardees; these funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract action merely establishes a potential ceiling value and does not obligate the Navy to fund to the ceiling. Funds are obligated on individual task orders for efforts that fall within the core competency areas. The multiple award contracts were competitively procured by full and open competition via the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center e-Commerce Central website and the Federal Business Opportunities website, with 19 offers received. Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center Atlantic, Charleston, S.C., is the contracting activity. ”

What is being bought here…?!

That looks insanely vague, but those companies listed provide the bulk of our C2 and intel collection and analysis systems. Maybe FSR support for existing programs?

“entire spectrum of non-inherently governmental services and solutions (equipment and services) associated with the full system lifecycle support including research, development, test, evaluation, production and fielding of sustainable, secure, survivable, and interoperable command, control, communication, computers, combat systems, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, information operations, enterprise information services and space capabilities.”

Indeed. I’m also guessing that the contracts are lumped together to prevent someone from teasing apart which companies are involved in what.

That’s probably assuming no waste in the manufacturing process, correct?

Even if it was carbon neutral, it’s still energy to turn a product into something that can be burned for energy, with thermodynamic losses in the conversion steps and after burning.

Let’s see. Due to sequestration they are furloughing wounded warrior caregivers, grounding fighter squadrons, cancelled training to troops reducing their readiness, taken steaming hours away from the fleet, yet we have enough to spend on questionable green energy sources for bases that we can’t afford anyway? What am I missing here?

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

AdChoices | , and join us on Google+
© 2015 Military Advantage
A Monster Company.