BETA
This is a BETA experience. You may opt-out by clicking here

More From Forbes

Edit Story

Marines Pursuing Climate Control Solutions To Reduce Battlefield Fuel Consumption

This article is more than 10 years old.

In the pre-dawn hours on July 18, an explosion ignited a fire that destroyed 22 NATO fuel tanker trucks parked overnight in Samangan province, Afghanistan. The Taliban claimed credit for planting the bomb that struck the convoy, which was carrying fuel to coalition forces in the south. The attack, the first-of-its-kind in northern Afghanistan, according to the BBC, was the latest in a years-long effort by the Taliban to cripple the fighting capability of NATO forces by targeting fuel convoys.

Writing at the Marines Blog, Sgt. Priscilla Sneden explained that the “price of addiction to liquid fuel in war” can be measured in the number of convoys at risk on the road, IED incidents, patrols diverted for force protection, operations delayed waiting for resupply, and dollars per barrel. “Ultimately,” she wrote, “it must be measured in lives risked—and lost.” During a three-month period early in 2010, she noted, six Marines were wounded hauling fuel and water to bases in Afghanistan in just 299 convoys.

The week before the Samangan province bombing, a Marine tasked with figuring out ways to reduce the need for fuel convoys, spoke to a roomful of engineers and scientists at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Major Brandon Newell might be the perfect Marine for the job.

A veteran of multiple combat deployments to Iraq, Newell is also a trained engineer. Newell earned an M.S. in Electrical Engineering from the Naval Postgraduate School, where he studied the impact of utilizing the HOMER Micropower Optimization tool for modeling Marine Corps expeditionary energy. In the summer of 2009, Newell became the first active-duty service member to intern at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. He is now the Technology Lead for the Marine Corps Expeditionary Energy Office. In short, Newell knows what it’s like to serve on the front lines in a combat zone and has the professional training necessary to design solutions that meet the Marines’ battlefield energy needs.

Newell was in Berkeley to learn and to share ideas, but also to foster collaboration between the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department of Energy (DOE). The day before, Newell had visited the Intersolar conference in San Francisco. He is the designated DOD liaison to DOE’s national labs.

“Despite the fact we have an MOU [Memorandum of Understanding] between DOD and DOE, you don’t actually see a lot of collaboration. We’re trying to make sure that collaboration happens,” he said.

The fact-finding visits to solar trade shows and the DOE labs are made in pursuit of solutions that increase the self-sufficiency of Marines in the field, and reduce the need for targeted fuel convoys, by cutting fuel demand. An energy strategy (PDF) signed by the Commandant of the Marine Corps in February 2011 states that by 2025 Marines will be 50% more fuel efficient on the battlefield.

The scale of the undertaking is staggering: 260,000 gallons of fuel carried by 54 fuel trucks per day at an average of $8.37 per gallon, according to Newell. The bill for taxpayers: $794 million. Approximately 60% of the fuel is burned to provide climate control for Marines and equipment deployed at some 300 sites across Afghanistan.

So much fuel is needed because, until very recently, all of the Marines’ stationary battlefield energy demand (climate control, laptops, and radios) was met using JP-8-fueled electrical generators. Though relatively reliable, such a system is woefully inefficient. Newell explained that Marines who handle utility services are taught to match the peak load to an 80% load on the generator – if the maximum load is 8 kilowatts, it calls for a 10 kilowatt generator. “I’m in the middle of nowhere; I can’t go without power,” he said.

The problem with a system designed to meet the peak load is straightforward – outside of winter, when demand peaks because of the heating load, the generators are not operating optimally. The median demand in the field, Newell said, is about 32% of the capacity of the generator. This leads to “wet stacking,” where unburned fuel ends up in the exhaust system. Run the generator this way for long and maintenance goes up, the life of the system goes down, and fuel is wasted.

Energy efficiency and energy storage

Newell’s unit, the Expeditionary Energy Office, has turned to energy efficiency and renewable alternatives to drive down energy demand. They recently added a thermal liner to the canvas tents that shelter Marines in Afghanistan, for instance, increasing the R-value from 1.5 to 4. When Newell deployed to Afghanistan last summer, he brought a hybrid system with him. The system performed well, he said, but because it used heavy, bulky lead-acid batteries, it won’t be the permanent solution. “We know that lead-acid could never meet our needs. When weight is a factor for me and space is a factor for me, I couldn’t even consider lead-acid,” he said.

Even this non-optimal energy storage solution proved its worth. Partner energy storage with a generator, Newell said, and “I can ensure that anytime that generator is on, it’s running at 80% to 100% load. My fuel efficiency went up, my hours went down. I have more quiet hours.” The Marines are transitioning to lithium-ion batteries. Newell noted that, for the first time, Marines had recently deployed lithium-ion batteries on the battlefield as part of a hybrid system with solar panels. “We’re very happy about where that’s at, but we’re also trying to advance it further,” he said.

Battery advances will likely be slowed owing to the nature of defense contracting – in this case, the contractors’ aversion to standardization. According to Newell, 87 different batteries are used by the Marine Corps, presenting burdensome logistical concerns. “You don’t have Radio Shack to run down to in our world,” he said.

ExFOB 2012-2: Camp Pendleton

Keen to engage the private sector, the Marine Corps created the Experimental Forward Operating Base (ExFOB) (PDF) in 2009 to identify and evaluate promising energy efficiency technologies. Managed by the Marines’ Expeditionary Energy Office, these demonstrations enable industry to showcase new technologies or solutions. The focus at ExFOB 2012-2 (PDF), to be held at Camp Pendleton, north of San Diego, from September 24 to 28, is thermal efficiency and climate control. “We’re looking for novel ways to heat and cool where the need is,” said Newell, be it for electronics, individuals, structures, or vehicles.

The Marines are interested in a comprehensive suite of solutions, among them: improvements to the energy efficiency of, or alternatives to, existing Environmental Control Units (ECUs); energy storage; small-scale ground heat pumps; evaporative cooling; direct current (DC) electrical power to reduce the generation of heat; water chilling equipment; insulating materials that rapidly dissipate heat from computers and individuals; clothing layers with special properties to provide personnel comfort in all operating climates; and technologies that facilitate cooling and/or heating of sitting and sleeping surfaces.

If a technology looks promising, Newell said, his office will typically buy one or two units, investigate how it might be integrated into battlefield operations, and then solicit user input. “All meant to increase our learning of the realm of the possible, and then defining an attainable requirement,” he said.