In Defense of Clean Energy: Sustaining Defense Investments in Clean Energy to Enhance National Security
thomas wheat
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/06/clean_energy_defense.html
regarding discussion archived here:
Sustaining Defense Investments in Clean Energy to Enhance National
Security
Marines unload an emergency resupply helicopter in Afghanistan.
Seventy percent of convoys on the ground in Afghanistan and Iraq are
dedicated solely to transporting fuel and water.
By Bracken Hendricks, Daniel J. Weiss, Lisbeth Kaufman | June 14,
2011
PrintEmailText-size: A A A Share: Download a memo from the Center
for American Progress Action Fund detailing the Department of
Defense's efforts and policies driving energy security and innovation
(pdf)
Read the memo in your web browser
http://www.scribd.com/doc/57834436/In-Defense-of-Clean-Energy
also I think we should invest more research into this program:
http://www.usiter.org may have SDI free electron air borne laser
applications, and alternative unlimited power source for the next
century
The United States, the world’s largest consumer of energy and oil,
imports 7 billion barrels of oil a year. One out of five of these
barrels come from unfriendly countries. Unsurprisingly, our foreign
oil habit presents major energy challenges affecting our national
security and economic competitiveness. The Department of Defense under
Defense Secretary Robert Gates is particularly aware of this energy
security threat, and has begun to address it across all three branches
of the military.
Efforts to combat the hazards of oil dependency must continue under
Leon E. Panetta, the nominee to replace Gates as secretary of defense.
Panetta, current director of the Central Intelligence Agency, made
this clear in his confirmation hearing before the Senate Armed
Services Committee hearing on June 9. He noted that we must determine:
…what additional steps we can take both in the development of weapons,
and the development of technologies, how we can better use clean
energy, how we can better use some of the new forms of energy in order
to reduce fuel costs at the Pentagon, but more importantly, in order
to contribute to, hopefully, a cleaner environment.
This view reiterates the findings of the 2010 Quadrennial Defense
Review,
which identified energy security as one of four key priorities for
reforming Department of Defense operations. This is because the DOD
spends $20 billion on 135 million barrels of fuel and 30 million
megawatt-hours of electricity a year. Likewise, 70 percent of convoys
on the ground in Afghanistan and Iraq are dedicated solely to
transporting fuel and water. With more than 3,000 American soldiers
killed or wounded while transporting energy and billions of dollars
siphoned by unfriendly foreign oil producers, the DOD only stands to
gain from reforming its energy system and investing in clean energy
and energy efficiency.
The DOD has already made great strides in advancing energy security
through operational improvements to the department’s installations.
These facilities cover 29 million acres, and include 539,000 buildings
and structures valued at more than $700 billion. With so many
structures, DOD’s investment in energy efficiency and renewable
technologies can help create a market and steadily lower the cost for
advanced energy technology. DOD efforts to meet energy security
challenges are already beginning to reduce risks for military
personnel, safeguard America’s global strategic interests, and cost
effectively ensure troop readiness. DOD commitments to research,
development, and deployment of innovative energy technologies are also
critical to the growth of jobs and civilian industries.
For continued progress on this issue, the DOD must sustain its
commitment to existing programs that enable the three services to
continue their energy innovations. Congress and the administration
must ensure ongoing support for key policies that make this success
possible. When Secretary Panetta is confirmed as the head of the DOD,
he should make a concerted effort to redouble commitment to energy
security investments within the DOD in coming years, as he suggested
at his confirmation hearing. These efforts will strengthen national
security and save lives, while also building markets for clean tech
products first developed for military use. This will spur economic
development and create new jobs.
At this moment of tight budgets and tough choices, preserving
America’s commitment to energy security must remain a top priority for
our national defense and the health of our economy.
Congressional support for DOD energy security
There is a long bipartisan tradition of support for Defense-related
energy technology innovation.
President George Bush signed into law the Energy Independence Security
Act, or EISA, in 2007. Section 526 of the bill
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_bills&docid=f:h6enr.txt.pdf
encourages federal agencies—including the military—to invest in new,
cleaner alternative fuels to power vehicles and aircraft by requiring
agencies to purchase fuels that have lifecycle greenhouse gas
emissions that are “less than or equal to such emissions from the
equivalent conventional fuel produced from conventional petroleum
sources.”
This legislative requirement has spurred the DOD to focus on reduction
of oil use through the production of cleaner advanced biofuels.
Unfortunately the House-passed version of the National Defense
Authorization Act, H.R. 1540, would exempt DOD from restrictions on
using fuels dirtier than conventional ones. Enactment of this
provision could slow or halt the development of cleaner fuels, and put
the military under tremendous pressure to use dirty “coal to liquid”
and tar sands-based fuels.
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/05/dod_authorization.html
Both fuels produce more carbon dioxide pollution than conventional
petroleum-based fuels. The House of Representatives are also likely to
use the FY 2012 military construction spending bill to block
enforcement of Section 526 so that the military and other federal
agencies can purchase dirty fuels.
Recently, Sen. Mark Udall (D-CO) and the office of Rep. Gabrielle
Giffords (D-AZ) released the Department of Defense Energy Security Act
of 2011, or DODESA, which would further enhance the DOD’s ability to
systematically improve energy security. The bill sets goals and
provides funding for the reduction of military facility and fleet fuel
use, along with development of renewable energy technologies at
military installations.
DODESA enhances mission effectiveness by:
http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/57329567?access_key=key-2k2b9obvt91p3n6ywioa
■Creating a Joint Contingency Base Resource Security Pilot Project to
coordinate technology development across the services
■Studying the integration of high-efficiency propulsion systems into
tactical vehicles
■Designating a DOD executive agent for alternative fuel development
■Extending long-term contracting authority for the procurement of
alternative fuels
■Increasing the procurement of electric, hybrid, and high-efficiency
nontactical vehicles
DODESA reduces DOD’s reliance on a vulnerable electric grid by:
■Funding the Installation Energy Test Bed Initiative
■Enhancing energy-management and monitoring practices
■Creating a plan for development of renewable projects and defining
renewable electricity standards
■Robustly funding the Energy Conservation Investment Program, which
retrofits our oldest buildings with smart lighting, insulated windows,
and efficient climate control systems
■Adopting enhanced energy-efficiency standards for military buildings
■Studying the energy security of renewable development and the
societal impacts associated with enhanced energy security on military
installations
In an op-ed about the bill, Sen. Udall wrote:
http://www.gazette.com/articles/energy-118337-fuel-every.html
By decreasing energy intensity of military operations, we will save
billions of dollars and improve the effectiveness of our military
missions. The less obvious advantage of these measures is that by
reducing our military’s dependence on fossil fuels… we will reduce
U.S. oil consumption—and with it, the prospect of conflict across the
world.
Preserving EISA and passing DODESA will be hugely instrumental in
expanding the DOD’s successful clean energy reforms. Additionally,
Congress should support the next director of the DOD in furthering the
department’s investment in clean energy.
Meeting energy security objectives to support DOD’s strategic mission
Clean and efficient energy are essential to enhance troop performance
and safety. Military planners have underscored the idea that energy
efficiency is a force multiplier. It increases the range and endurance
of forces in the field while reducing the number of combat forces
diverted to operation and protection of energy supply lines. Plus, as
the Quadrennial Defense Review notes, pursuing energy security and
economic stability are inextricably linked. Reducing dependence on
oil, for example, has both profound security and economic dimensions.
DOD has outlined a number of strategic energy security objectives that
are central to the defense of the nation. These objectives and some
examples of how DOD is implementing the strategies include:
Reducing oil dependence
■The DOD set a goal of reducing petroleum use by 20 percent by 2015.
DOD is currently on track to meet this goal, and has cut fleet-wide
petroleum use by 6.6 percent since 2005.
■The Air Force plans to cost-competitively acquire 50 percent of its
domestic aviation fuel by 2016 via an alternative fuel blend that is
cleaner than conventional petroleum fuel.
■The Department of Navy has set aggressive goals to decrease fossil
fuel use by all vessels by 50 percent by 2020, and reduce petroleum
use in nontactical vehicles by 50 percent by 2015.
Improving energy efficiency
■DOD has a set a goal of reducing energy intensity by 30 percent by
2015. In 2010, the department cut energy use by 11.2 percent over 2003
levels—short of its interim 15 percent goal. Efforts must be expanded
to meet the 2015 target.
■Half of all Department of Navy installations by 2020 will be "net-
zero" energy bases producing more energy than they consume. A key
element of this effort began last year with the Navy’s advanced
metering initiative, which when complete will have placed 27,000 smart
meters on its installations worldwide. This will enable Navy
facilities to reduce electricity use via better management.
■The Army also has a net-zero energy installation goal to ensure that
facilities are able to produce as much energy as they consume. To
accomplish this goal, the Army implemented the highest building
standard in the federal government. The Army is now piloting bases
with "net-zero" energy use across the country. The Oregon Army
National Guard volunteered to go net zero—on energy, waste, and water—
across the state, as did Fort Bliss, Texas and Fort Carson, Colorado.
The Army plans to add 25 more bases in each net zero category in FY
2014.
Deploying renewable electricity and increasing grid security
■DOD set a goal of providing 26 percent of its energy from renewable
sources by 2020. It is currently using 11.3 percent renewable energy,
and is on track to meet its 26 percent goal if these efforts continue,
according to OMB.
■Half the Navy's total energy consumption ashore will come from
cleaner, alternative sources by 2020. A few examples of Navy renewable
energy projects include 270 MW of geothermal power online in China
Lake, California, 100 MW of solar power coming online this year, and
plans for 26 MW of landfill gas power. The Navy has also planned to
deploy 15 MW of wind and has enacted the nation's only grid-connected
“wave buoy” generation plant off the Hawaiian coast.
■The Army currently has 126 renewable energy projects in operation,
and hopes to leverage $7 billion in private capital to increase large-
scale renewable projects by 2020. For example, the Army is planning a
500 MW solar energy plant at Fort Irwin, California. It continues to
drill test wells for a 30 MW geothermal power plant at Hawthorne Army
Depot, Nevada, and has begun construction of a 1 MW solar system at
Fort Hunter Liggett, California, which will supply about one-third of
the base’s energy demand.
Both the Department of Defense as a whole and each of the military
branches have taken strong leadership in setting ambitious goals for
energy independence and in deploying innovative energy technology to
meet those targets. Major steps have been taken across the department
to develop and implement new energy solutions using renewable fuels,
renewable electricity, energy efficiency, energy storage, and smart
and secure microgrids for electricity. The attached memo provides
additional examples of these efforts and the policies that drive
energy security and innovation.
These strategic investments are cutting costs for the treasury,
reducing strategic vulnerability, and creating jobs in emerging
industries across the U.S. economy. These efforts should be sustained,
supported, and enhanced in coming years by the future secretary of
defense, the administration, and Congress.
Download a memo from the Center for American Progress Action Fund
detailing the Department of Defense's efforts and policies driving
energy security and innovation (pdf)
Read the memo in your web browser
Bracken Hendricks is a Senior Fellow, Daniel J. Weiss is a Senior
Fellow and the Director of Climate Strategy, and Lisbeth Kaufman is a
Special Assistant on the Energy Opportunity team at American Progress.
thomaswheat1975
Thomas Jigme Wheat
Links and archived info on Nuclear Fusion Energy research around the
world
Fusion Research in Europe:
http://fusionforenergy.europa.eu/
Initially, the main type of reaction is the fusion of four hydrogen
nuclei to form two helium nuclei, with photons, neutrinos, electrons
and positrons being mitted. To a lesser extent, the helium also starts
to fuse, forming heavier elements (beryllium, boron) and releasing
more energy
contact info for Fusion energy @ Los Alamos National Labs
http://fusionenergy.lanl.gov/Physics/Magnetized_Target_Fusion.htm
http://fusionenergy.lanl.gov/General_Information/Fusion_Energy_Office.htm
Archived Nuclear Fusion Research @ MIT
"MIT's involvement in fusion power is an outgrowth of its basic
research in the field of plasma physics as well as its work in high-
field
magnets, which are used to contain the ultra-hot clouds of randomly
moving charged particles. Other research at the Center focuses on
such diverse topics as space plasmas, free electron lasers, electron
beam
devices, and materials processing. "
http://web.archive.org/web/20040626175152/http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/tt/1990/apr11/23016.html
shortened url http://goo.gl/HDc8k
Archived Research and Development of Fusion Energy in Japan
info on the Tokamak fusion test reactor achievements:
http://www.pppl.gov/projects/pages/tftr.html
The Tokamak Fusion Test Reactor (TFTR) operated at the Princeton
Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) from 1982 to 1997. TFTR set a number
of world records, including a plasma temperature of 510 million
degrees centigrade -- the highest ever produced in a laboratory, and
well beyond the 100 million degrees required for commercial fusion. In
addition to meeting its physics objectives, TFTR achieved all of its
hardware design goals, thus making substantial contributions in many
areas of fusion technology development.
In December, 1993, TFTR became the world's first magnetic fusion
device to perform extensive experiments with plasmas composed of 50/50
deuterium/tritium -- the fuel mix required for practical fusion power
production. Consequently, in 1994, TFTR produced a world-record 10.7
million watts of controlled fusion power, enough to meet the needs of
more than 3,000 homes. These experiments also emphasized studies of
behavior of alpha particles produced in the deuterium-tritium
reactions. The extent to which the alpha particles pass their energy
to the plasma is critical to the eventual attainment of sustained
fusion.
In 1995, TFTR scientists explored a new fundamental mode of plasma
confinement -- enhanced reversed shear. This new technique involves a
magnetic-field configuration which substantially reduces plasma
turbulence
Controlled Thermonuclear Fusion
On Earth, the fusion reaction of most immediate interest is that
between the nuclei of the two heavy forms (isotopes) of hydrogen:
deuterium (D) and tritium (T)
D + T -> He + n + 17.6 MeV
Deuterium is abundant in sea water (30 g/m3) but tritium is
radioactive, with a half-life of 12.36 years and therefore does not
occur naturally. It has to be manufactured.
In a fusion reactor, neutrons (n) - which account for 80% of the
energy produced - will be absorbed in a �blanket� surrounding the
reactor core. This blanket contains lithium (Li) which is transformed
into tritium and helium :
6Li + n -> 4He + T + 4.86 MeV
7Li + n -> 4He + T + n - 2.5 MeV
Natural lithium, consisting of 7Li (92.5%) and 6Li (7.5%), is found in
large quantities (30 ppm) in the Earth's crust and in weaker
concentrations in the oceans.
The blanket must be sufficiently thick (roughly one metre) to slow
down the 14 MeV neutrons. Slowing the neutrons heats the blanket and a
coolant flowing through it transfers heataway from the power plant to
generate steam and finally, by conventional methods, electricity.
Thermonuclear fusion, as a major new source of energy, would have
certain intrinsic advantages :
the basic fuels (D, Li) are non-radioactive, plentifully available and
fairly evenly distributed throughout the Earth's crust ;
a runaway fusion reaction is intrinsically impossible. Furthermore
once its supply of fresh fuel is cut-off, the reactor can continue
operating for only a few tens of seconds ;
there are few radioactive waste problems : fusion generates no
radioactive ash, and the unburnt gases are treated on site. Structural
components of the reactor which have become radioactive through
exposure to the neutrons will have to placed in storage - but,
provided they are made of carefully-selected materials, the storage
time could be less than one hundred years.
In the reactor core, fusion reactions take place at temperatures
exceeding 100 million degrees Celsius. The confined helium heats the
fresh fuel and then, once it has cooled, is extracted from the core.
Neutrons pass through the wall and interact with the lithium in the
reactor blanket, thus breeding more tritium in situ. A coolant flowing
through the blanket removes the heat so as to generate electricity.
It is too early to give a precise assessment of the economic impact
and viability of fusion energy. The investment costs will certainly be
higher than for coal-fired or nuclear fission power stations, but fuel
costs will be very low.
Fuels other than (D-T) could be used by a second generation of fusion
power plants. Reactions involving these �advanced� fuels, which might
be possible in the long term, produce fewer high-energy neutrons (D-D)
or no neutrons at all (D-3He). They require no tritium-breeding
blanket and induce a lower level of radioactivity in mechanical
structures. However, much higher temperatures than for the (D-T) cycle
would be needed to �burn� these fuels. Moreover, although deuterium is
very abundant on Earth, 3He is found only as a trace element and would
have to be extracted from the surface of the moon.
Lake Geneva alone contains enough deuterium to supply all the primary
energy needed by our planet for several thousand years.
Non-Thermonuclear Fusion
Fusion is also possible at ambient temperature if the electrons in the
deuterium and tritium molecules are replaced by much heavier negative
particles. One such particle is the negative muon, an unstable
particle with a mass equal to 207 times that of the electron and a
life time of 2.2 ms. The physics of fusion reactions catalysed by
muons is well established, but results so far indicate that a positive
energy balance cannot be expected, for the following reasons :
- muons must be produced by particle accelerators which consume a
great deal of energy ;
- the muon becomes attached to the helium nucleus (produced by D - T
fusion) before it has had time to catalyse enough fusion reactions to
make the process worth while.
In recent years, spectacular claims have been made for another
approach, known as �cold fusion�. This involves the electrolysis of
heavy water using palladium electrodes in which deuterium nuclei are
said to concentrate at very high densities. Many experiments have been
performed to verify whether such unexplained electrochemical phenomena
can actually be produced, but none have conclusively proved that
energy is generated or that fusion reactions occur.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info on scramjet engines That's the idea behind a different propulsion
system called "scramjet," or
Supersonic Combustion Ramjet:
http://www.nasa.gov/missions/research/f_scramjets.html
ifo on ram jets and scram jets
http://www.aviation-history.com/engines/ramjet.htm
Fusion Technology Institute @ university of Wisconson
http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/fti
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Info on COLD FUSION could be bullshit
http://lenr-canr.org/
http://lenr-canr.org/Experiments.htm
paper on cold fusion, maybe bull shit:
http://guns.connect.fi/innoplaza/energy/story/Kanarev/coldfusion/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info on magnetic inertial confinement for Hot Fusion
"There are two major research and development efforts underway for
fusion. These are magnetic confinement fusion, where the hot plasma
is
held within a "magnetic bottle" at high enough temperature and
pressure for a long enough time for fusion to occur, and inertial
confinement fusion where a small amount of fusion fuel is
symmetrically heated and compressed by intense energy beams, such as
lasers, so that fusion conditions of high temperature and pressure
are
achieved for a brief instant while inertia holds the fuel together.
In
addition, FED members have interest in non-mainline fusion
approaches,
including electrostatic confinement and "cold fusion
Requirements for Experimental Approaches to Controlled Thermonuclear
Fusion
The conditions under which a fusion reactor would deliver more energy
than it consumes are expressed by the Lawson criterion. The value,
calculated in 1957 for a D - T mixture at 100 million degrees C, is :
n tE >> 1020 m-3 s
n is the ion fuel density contained in the plasma, tE is the energy
confinement time (time constant for the exponential decrease in the
temperature of a hot environment, with no external energy input).
The ultimate objective of the controlled fusion research programme is
to achieve �ignition�, i.e. combustion of the plasma by means of the
kinetic energy of the confined fusion reaction products. In a reactor
burning a D - T mixture, the reactions will be self-sustaining due to
the kinetic energy of the helium (alpha particle), which will be
sufficient to maintain the combustion temperature (no external energy
input needed). The state of ignition can be expressed as :
n Ti0 tE >> 6 x 1022 m-3 Million degree K s
where n and Ti0 (for 100 to 200 Million degrees C) are, respectively,
the density and the temperature of the D and T nuclei in the centre of
the plasma and t is the energy confinement time.
Movement of charged particles in a plasma
a) In the absence of a confining magnetic field, hot plasmas tend to
spread and fill the space available;
b) If a linear magnetic field is applied, the particles move in
helical paths, each encircling a line of force and thus remain
radially confined.
Two experimental approaches to bring about ignition are being studied:
Fusion by magnetic confinement,
in which hot plasma is confined by magnetic fields forming a �magnetic
trap� for the charged particles. In theory, a stationary burn is
possible for as long as the magnetic confinement is maintained. (In
this approach, n ~ 1020m-3 and tE ~ 1 to 5 s).
Diagram illustrating the principle of magnetic confinement in a torus
(in this case a tokamak). The plasma is ring-shaped and is kept well
away from the vessel wall.
Fusion by inertial confinement,
in which a minute fuel capsule is highly compressed (to more than one
thousand times its liquid density) until ignition occurs in the centre
and spreads outwards into the surrounding cold fuel. Ignition lasts as
long as the fuel remains confined by its own inertia. A stationary
burn is thus impossible with inertial confinement. (In this approach,
n ~ 1031m-3 and tE ~ 10-11s ; tE is the time during which the fuel
freely expands).
Diagram illustrating the illumination of a target using laser beams.
The beams compress and heat the target; after implosion, the explosion
carries the energy towards the wall.
also see my research on nuclear fusion:
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=thomaswheat+fusion&sa=N&start=10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info on MAGLEV (electromagnetic) trains: National High Speed rail
project
Maglev trains travel 300 mph!!!!!!!!!!!!
Final report on the national Maglev intiative
http://ntl.bts.gov/DOCS/TNM.html
excerpt
"High-speed magnetically levitated ground transportation
(maglev) is a new surface mode of transportation in which
vehicles glide above their guideways, suspended, guided, and
propelled by magnetic forces. Capable of traveling at speeds
of 250 to 300 miles-per-hour or higher, maglev would offer an
attractive and convenient alternative for travelers between
large urban areas for trips of up to 600 miles. It would also
help relieve current and projected air and highway congestion
by substituting for short-haul air trips, thus releasing
capacity for more efficient long-haul service at crowded
airports, and by diverting a portion of highway trips.
Strategic economic goals of job creation, technological
advancement, international competitiveness, and petroleum
conservation would be supported by the development and
building of maglev systems."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
info on full spectrum solar cells
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/solarcell-02m.html
for further research
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=thomaswheat+fusion&qt_s=Search+Groups
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bush Got advance warning about 9/11/2001 from Russia in June of 2001
http://web.archive.org/web/20050310071925/http://english.pravda.ru/main/2001/06/26/8695.html
shortened url
Second warning ignored by Bush
August 6 2001 Memo
Bin Laden Determined to Strike US
Colin Powell said There was no connection between Saddam Hussein and
Al Qaeda, Why did we waste a trillion dollars there?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3909150/
the Prescot Bush Nazi connection
shortened url of archive Boston Globe article on Bush Nazi connection
thomaswheat1975
On Jun 17, 11:23 pm, Thomas Wheat <thomaswheat1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Do you have anymore information on Nuclear Fusion, and whether if the US
> will build a nuclear fusion power plant, or will we have to buy ours from
> the europeans or the chinese?? I hope brain drain after Bush recked the
> country hasn't gotton too bad, I hope
> International Thermonuclear expiremental reactor, see if you can forward
> this to energy secretary Chu.
>
> thomaswheat1975
>
> not powered by uranium or plutonium!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> *deuterium, tritium and lithium*
>
> http://ippex.pppl.gov/fusion/fusion2.htm
>
> Advantages of *Fusion*
>
> Comparison of Coal and *Fusion* Power Plants
>
> "As a source of energy, *fusion* would have many advantages:
>
> ""Abundant Fuel Supply
> The major fuel, deuterium, may be readily extracted from ordinary
> water, which is available to all nations. The surface waters of the
> earth contain more than 10 million million tons of deuterium, an
> essentially inexhaustible supply. The tritium required would be
> produced from lithium, which is available from land deposits or from
> sea water which contains thousands of years' supply. The world-wide
> availability of these materials would thus eliminate international
> tensions caused by imbalance in fuel supply
>
> This deuterium-tritium *fusion* reaction results in an energy gain of
>
> about 450:1.
> This difference is converted to energy as described by Einstein's
> famous equation, E=mc2!
>
> Deuterium and tritium are both isotopes of hydrogen. Deuterium occurs
> naturally in nature - about one part in 6000 is found in ordinary
> water. Tritium can be produced from lithium, which is found in the
> earth's crust. The result: *fusion* energy in virtually inexhaustible!
> websites bush could'nt manage to shut down!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> http://www.iter.org
>
> http://goo.gl/sUCTY
>
> http://ippex.pppl.gov/
>
> http://goo.gl/UaTIs
>
> info on Tokamak Fusion Test Reactor
>
> http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/phy05/phy05100.htm
>
> http://nstx.pppl.gov/
>
> plasma fusion, deuterium tritium and proton - proton cycle, and magnetic
> inertial confinement
>
> No Risk of a Nuclear Accident
> ****************
> The amounts of deuterium and tritium in the *fusion* reaction zone will
> be so small that a large uncontrolled release of energy would be
> impossible. In the event of a malfunction, the *plasma* would strike the
> walls of its containment vessel and cool.
>
> No Air Pollution
> Since no fossil fuels are used, there will be no release of chemical
> combustion products because they will not be produced.
>
> No Generation of Weapons Material
> Another significant advantage is that the materials and by-products of
> *fusion* are not suitable for use in the production of nuclear weapons.
>
> No High-level Nuclear Waste
> Similarly, there will be no fission products formed to present a
> handling and disposal problem. Radioactivity will be produced by
> neutrons interacting with the reactor structure, but careful materials
> selection is expected to minimize the handling and ultimate disposal
> of activated materials.
>
> For example, 10 grams of Deuterium which can be extracted from 500
> litres of water and 15g of Tritium produced from 30g of Lithium would
> produce enough fuel for the lifetime electricity needs of an average
> person in an industrialised country.
>
> deuterium tritium salt water after being recycled has a 12.5 year half
> life!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> thomaswheat1975
On Jun 17, 4:49 pm, thomas wheat <thomasjigmewh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In Defense of Clean Energy
>
> http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/06/clean_energy_defense.html
>
> regarding discussion archived here:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.democrats.d/browse_thread...
>
> Sustaining Defense Investments in Clean Energy to Enhance National
> Security
>
> Marines unload an emergency resupply helicopter in Afghanistan.
> Seventy percent of convoys on the ground in Afghanistan and Iraq are
> dedicated solely to transporting fuel and water.
>
> By Bracken Hendricks, Daniel J. Weiss, Lisbeth Kaufman | June 14,
> 2011
>
> PrintEmailText-size: A A A Share: Download a memo from the Center
> for American Progress Action Fund detailing the Department of
> Defense's efforts and policies driving energy security and innovation
> (pdf)
>
> Read the memo in your web browser
>
> http://www.scribd.com/doc/57834436/In-Defense-of-Clean-Energy
>
> also I think we should invest more research into this program:
>
> http://www.usiter.orgmay have SDI free electron air borne laser
> applications, and alternative unlimited power source for the next
> century
>
> The United States, the world’s largest consumer of energy and oil,
> imports 7 billion barrels of oil a year. One out of five of these
> barrels come from unfriendly countries. Unsurprisingly, our foreign
> oil habit presents major energy challenges affecting our national
> security and economic competitiveness. The Department of Defense under
> Defense Secretary Robert Gates is particularly aware of this energy
> security threat, and has begun to address it across all three branches
> of the military.
>
> Efforts to combat the hazards of oil dependency must continue under
> Leon E. Panetta, the nominee to replace Gates as secretary of defense.
> Panetta, current director of the Central Intelligence Agency, made
> this clear in his confirmation hearing before the Senate Armed
> Services Committee hearing on June 9. He noted that we must determine:
>
> http://www.c-span.org/Events/Panetta-Faces-Questions-on-Situation-in-...
> http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_bi...
> http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/57329567?access_key=key-2k2b9obvt91p...
Thomas Jigme Wheat
Conditions for Fusion
Since nuclei carry positive charges, they normally repel one another.
The higher the temperature, the faster the atoms or nuclei move. When
they collide at these high speeds, they overcome the force of
repulsion of the positive charges, and the nuclei fuse. In such
collisions, energy is released. The difficulty in producing fusion
energy has been to develop a device which can heat the deuterium-
tritium fuel to a sufficiently high temperature and then confine it
for a long enough time so that more energy is released through fusion
reactions than is used for heating.
Temperature
In order to release energy at a level of practical use for production
of electricity, the gaseous deuterium-tritium fuel must be heated to
about 100 million degrees Celsius. This temperature is more than six
times hotter than the interior of the sun, which is estimated to be 15
million degrees Celsius.
Confinement
The required temperatures have been attained. The problem is how to
confine the deuterium and tritium under such extreme conditions. A
part of the solution to this problem lies in the fact that, at the
high temperatures required, all the electrons of light atoms become
separated from the nuclei. This process of separation is called
ionization, and the positively charged nuclei are referred to as ions.
The hot gas containing negatively charged free electrons and
positively charged ions is known as a plasma.
Plasma Confinement
Because of the electric charges carried by electrons and ions, a
plasma can be confined by a magnetic field. In the absence of a
magnetic field, the charged particles in a plasma move in straight
lines and random directions. Since nothing restricts their motion the
charged particles can strike the walls of a containing vessel, thereby
cooling the plasma and inhibiting fusion reactions. But in a magnetic
field, the particles are forced to follow spiral paths about the field
lines. Consequently, the charged particles in the high-temperature
plasma are confined by the magnetic field and prevented from striking
the vessel walls.
Many different plasma configurations have been studied. Presently, the
advanced tokamak, the spherical torus, and the compact stellarator are
of particular interest.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PPPL is funded by the U.S. Department of Energy and managed by
Princeton University.
About PPPL || How to Contact PPPL || News at PPPL || Fusion Basics
Research Projects || Technology Transfer || Education Programs
Publications || Meetings and Colloquia || PPPL Home Page
Updated: 15 November 2004
Send questions or comments to:
Anthony R. DeMeo at ade...@pppl.gov
thomaswheat1975
On Jun 18, 9:27 am, Thomas Jigme Wheat <thomaswheat1...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> The World needs Hot Fusion
>
> Links and archived info on Nuclear Fusion Energy research around the
> world
>
> Fusion Research in Europe:
>
> http://fusionforenergy.europa.eu/
>
> Initially, the main type of reaction is the fusion of four hydrogen
> nuclei to form two helium nuclei, with photons, neutrinos, electrons
> and positrons being mitted. To a lesser extent, the helium also starts
> to fuse, forming heavier elements (beryllium, boron) and releasing
> more energy
>
> contact info for Fusion energy @ Los Alamos National Labs
>
> http://fusionenergy.lanl.gov/
>
> http://fusionenergy.lanl.gov/Physics/Magnetized_Target_Fusion.htm
>
> http://fusionenergy.lanl.gov/General_Information/Fusion_Energy_Office...
>
> Archived Nuclear Fusion Research @ MIT
>
> "MIT's involvement in fusion power is an outgrowth of its basic
> research in the field of plasma physics as well as its work in high-
> field
> magnets, which are used to contain the ultra-hot clouds of randomly
> moving charged particles. Other research at the Center focuses on
> such diverse topics as space plasmas, free electron lasers, electron
> beam
> devices, and materials processing. "
>
> http://web.archive.org/web/20040626175152/http://web.mit.edu/newsoffi...
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> info on scramjet engines That's the idea behind a different propulsion
> system called "scramjet," or
> Supersonic Combustion Ramjet:
>
> http://www.nasa.gov/missions/research/f_scramjets.html
> ifo on ram jets and scram jetshttp://www.aviation-history.com/engines/ramjet.htm
>
> Fusion Technology Institute @ university of Wisconson
>
> http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/fti
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Info on COLD FUSION could be bullshit
>
> http://lenr-canr.org/http://lenr-canr.org/Experiments.htm
>
> paper on cold fusion, maybe bull shit:http://guns.connect.fi/innoplaza/energy/story/Kanarev/coldfusion/
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> input needed). The ...
>
> read more »
Tom Jigme Wheat
acceptance that Global Warming and Climate Change present a national
security threat to the US, along with target goals set by DOD in
implementing alternative fuel sources for non tactical vehicles.
exerpts also reflect US overall military strategy of multilateral
engagement, and identifying procurement redundancies, and national
security supply threats among its contractors.
thomaswheat1975
excerpts from 2011 QDR also see Nuclear Posture Review And Ballistic
Missile Defense Review below
http://www.defense.gov/qdr/images/QDR_as_of_12Feb10_1000.pdf
"
Crafting a strategic approach to climate and energy: Climate change
and energy will play significant roles in the future security
environment. The Department is developing policies and plans to manage
the effects of climate change on its operating environment, missions,
and facilities. The Department already performs environmental
stewardship at hundreds of DoD installations throughout the United
States, working to meet resource efficiency and sustainability goals.
We must continue incorporating geostrategic and operational energy
considerations into force planning, requirements development, and
acquisition processes."
(pg xv, Executive summary section)
"This QDR benefited from extensive engagement with key stakeholders.
As the QDR generated insights and interim findings, these were shared
with and reviewed by a wide range of experts, both within DoD and
beyond. Over the course of the review, QDR staff consulted with and
briefed congressional staff as well as representatives of allied and
other governments. DoD officials also engaged with their counterparts
elsewhere in the U.S. government to further the kind of integrated
security approaches long advocated by the President, Secretary of
Defense, and Secretary of State. For example, Defense leaders and
staff worked closely with the Departments of State and Homeland
Security, as well as the Intelligence Community, as they undertook
their Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review, Quadrennial
Homeland Security Review, and Quadrennial Intelligence Community
Review respectively, sharing insights regarding analysis, key
missions, capabilities, and plans in overlapping issue areas." (pg.
3 )
"The distribution of global political, economic, and military power is
shifting and becoming more diffuse. The rise of China, the world’s
most populous country, and India, the world’s largest democracy, will
continue to reshape the international system. While the United States
will remain the most powerful actor, it must increasingly cooperate
with key allies and partners to build and sustain peace and security.
Whether and how rising powers fully integrate into the global system
will be among this century’s defining questions, and are thus central
to America’s interests." (pg 7)
"The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) continues to
undermine global security, complicating efforts to sustain peace and
prevent harmful arms races. Even as the United States and Russia make
progress in reducing the number of deployed strategic nuclear weapons,
other nations are pursuing nuclear weapons programs.1 Moreover, Al
Qaeda and other terrorist networks have demonstrated an interest in
WMD. Perhaps most troubling would be the instability or collapse of a
WMD-armed state. This could lead to rapid proliferation of WMD
material, weapons, and technology, and could quickly become a global
crisis posing a direct physical threat to the United States and all
other nations.
A series of powerful cross-cutting trends, made more complex by the
ongoing economic crisis, threatens to complicate international
relations and make the exercise of U.S. statecraft more difficult. The
rising demand for resources, rapid urbanization of littoral regions,
the effects of climate change, the emergence of new strains of
disease, and profound cultural and demographic tensions in several
regions are just some of the trends whose complex interplay may spark
or exacerbate future conflicts." (pg 7)
A series of recent trends highlight growing challenges to stability
throughout the global commons—from cyberspace attacks abroad and
network intrusions here at home, to increased piracy, to anti-
satellite weapons tests and the growth in the number of space-faring
nations, to the investments some nations are making in systems
designed to threaten our primary means of projecting power: our bases,
our sea and air assets, and the networks that support them. Prudence
demands that the Department prepare for possible future adversaries
likely to possess and employ some degree of anti-access capability—the
ability to blunt or deny U.S. power projection—across all domains.
Given the proliferation of sophisticated weapons and technology,
smaller states and some non-state actors may be able to acquire and
employ longer-range and more precise weapons. Future adversaries will
likely possess sophisticated capabilities designed to contest or deny
command of the air, sea, space, and cyberspace domains.
Finally, the changing international environment will continue to put
pressure on the modern state system, likely increasing the frequency
and severity of the challenges associated with chronically fragile
states. These states are often catalysts for the growth of radicalism
and extremism. In some cases they are nuclear-armed or are critically
important to enduring American interests. Over the course of the next
several decades, conflicts are at least as likely to result from state
weakness as from state strength."(9)
"Despite those who disregard the rules of the international system,
the United States must remain a standard-bearer in the conduct of war.
The United States will maintain and support international norms by
upholding the Geneva Conventions and by providing detainees and
prisoners of war the rights and protections afforded to them under
international law."(10)
"Further drawdown activity will occur in accordance with the U.S.-Iraq
Security Agreement to redeploy all U.S. forces by December 31, 2011.
The pace of the drawdown will be commensurate with Iraq's improving
security while providing U.S. commanders sufficient flexibility to
assist the Iraqis with emerging challenges. Even as U.S. forces are
redeployed, the United States will continue to pursue sustained
political engagement and regional diplomacy." (pg. 12)
"To reinforce U.S. commitments to our allies and partners, we will
consult closely with them on new, tailored, regional deterrence
architectures that combine our forward presence, relevant conventional
capabilities (including missile defenses), and continued commitment to
extend our nuclear deterrent. These regional architectures and new
capabilities, as detailed in the Ballistic Missile Defense Review and
the forthcoming Nuclear Posture Review, make possible a reduced role
for nuclear weapons in our national security strategy." (pg 14)
"Field faster, more flexible consequence management response forces.
The Department has gained important experience and learned valuable
lessons from its efforts to field specialized consequence management
response forces for chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and
high-yield explosives events (CBRNE). Given the potential for surprise
attacks within the United States, the Department will begin
reorganizing these forces to enhance their lifesaving capabilities,
maximize their flexibility, and reduce their response times. First,
the Department will begin restructuring the original CBRNE Consequence
Management Response Force (CCMRF), to increase its ability to respond
more rapidly to an event here at home. To address the potential for
multiple, simultaneous disasters, the second and third CCMRFs will be
replaced with smaller units focused on providing command and control
and communications capabilities for Title 10 follow-on forces.
Complementing the evolution of the first CCMRF, the Department also
will draw on existing National Guard forces to build a Homeland
Response Force (HRF) in each of the ten Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) regions. These ten HRFs will provide a regional response
capability; focus on planning, training and exercising; and forge
strong links between the federal level and state and local
authorities." (pg. 19)
"The wars we are fighting today and assessments of the future security
environment together demand that the United States retain and enhance
a whole-of-government capability to succeed in large-scale
counterinsurgency (COIN), stability, and counterterrorism (CT)
operations in environments ranging from densely populated urban areas
and mega-cities, to remote mountains, deserts, jungles, and littoral
regions. In some cases, it may be in the U.S. interest to help
strengthen weak states, including those facing homegrown insurgencies
and transnational terrorist and criminal networks or those that have
been weakened by humanitarian disasters. Moreover, there are few cases
in which the U.S. Armed Forces would engage in sustained largescale
combat operations without the associated need to assist in the
transition to just and stable governance." (pg 20)
"Stability operations, largescale counterinsurgency, and
counterterrorism operations are not niche challenges or the
responsibility of a single Military Department, but rather require a
portfolio of capabilities as well as sufficient capacity from across
America’s Armed Forces and other departments and agencies. Nor are
these types of operations a transitory or anomalous phenomenon in the
security landscape. On the contrary, we must expect that for the
indefinite future, violent extremist groups, with or without state
sponsorship, will continue to foment instability and challenge U.S.
and allied interests." (20)
"Expand and modernize the AC-130 fleet. AC-130 gunships have been
invaluable in supporting operations against insurgent and terrorist
groups in Iraq and Afghanistan. These units have therefore been in
heavy demand even as a portion of the fleet approached the end of its
service life. Beginning in FY 2012 the Air Force will convert 16 new
C-130J aircraft to the gunship configuration; older model AC-130s will
be retired. These changes will simultaneously modernize the fleet and
enlarge it from 25 to a total of 33 aircraft."
(23)
"Our assessment of security trends points clearly to the conclusion
that the future of missions facing U.S. forces will call for greater
flexibility and agility to operate among diverse populations, with a
wide range of partners, and in a variety of operating environments. By
FY 2013 the Army will convert a heavy brigade combat team (BCT) to the
Stryker configuration. As resources become available and future global
demands become clearer, the Department may convert several more BCTs.
Our assessment of the future operating environment also suggests that
increasing capacity for maritime operations in coastal and riverine
environments will be appropriate. Therefore, beginning in FY 2011, the
Navy will add a fourth riverine squadron to its force structure and
will invest in service life extension programs for its coastal patrol
craft." (24)
"North Korea and Iran, as part of their defiance of international
norms, are actively testing and fielding new ballistic missile
systems. Many of these systems are more accurate and have greater
ranges than the Scud-class missiles used by Iraq in the 1991 Gulf War.
As the inventories and capabilities of such systems continue to grow,
U.S. forces deployed forward will no longer enjoy the relative
sanctuary that they have had in conflicts since the end of the Cold
War. Air bases, ports of debarkation, logistics hubs, command centers,
and other assets essential to high-tempo military operations could be
at risk." (31)
As part of its long-term, comprehensive military modernization, China
is developing and fielding large numbers of advanced medium-range
ballistic and cruise missiles, new attack submarines equipped with
advanced weapons, increasingly capable long-range air defense systems,
electronic warfare and computer network attack capabilities, advanced
fighter aircraft, and counter-space systems. China has shared only
limited information about the pace, scope, and ultimate aims of its
military modernization programs, raising a number of legitimate
questions regarding its longterm intentions." (31)
U.S. power projection forces also confront growing threats in other
domains. In recent years, a number of states have acquired
sophisticated anti-ship cruise missiles, quiet submarines, advanced
mines, and other systems that threaten naval operations. In addition
to these weapons, Iran has fielded large numbers of small, fast attack
craft designed to support “swarming” tactics that seek to overwhelm
the layers of defenses deployed by U.S. and other nations’ naval
vessels. U.S. air forces in future conflicts will encounter integrated
air defenses of far greater sophistication and lethality than those
fielded by adversaries of the 1990s. Proliferation ofmodern surface-to-
air missile systems by Russia and others will pose growing challenges
for U.S. military operations worldwide. Several states have the
capability to disrupt or destroy satellites that provide surveillance,
communications, positioning, and other functions important to military
operations. And non-state actors such as Hezbollah have acquired
unmanned aerial vehicles and man-portable air defense systems from
Iran.(32)
Expand future long-range strike capabilities. Enhanced long-range
strike capabilities are one means of countering growing threats to
forward-deployed forces and bases and ensuring U.S. power projection
capabilities. Building on insights developed during the QDR, the
Secretary of Defense has ordered a follow-on study to determine
what...
3 ..The Nuclear, Space, and Ballistic Missile Defense reviews have
developed additional initiatives to enhance capabilities relevant to
meeting these challenges. Those initiatives are described in these
respective reports. The Missile Defense Agency is examining the
utility of airborne infrared sensors mounted on unmanned aerial
vehicles to detect and track ballistic missiles."(32)
...combination of joint persistent surveillance, electronic warfare,
and precision-attack capabilities, including both penetrating
platforms and stand-off weapons, will best support U.S. power
projection operations over the next two to three decades. Findings
from that study will inform decisions that shape the FY 2012-17
defense program. A number of related efforts are underway. The Navy is
investigating options for expanding the capacity of future Virginia-
class attack submarines for long-range strike. It is also slated to
conduct field experiments with prototype versions of a naval unmanned
combat aerial system (N-UCAS). The N-UCAS offers the potential to
greatly increase the range of ISR and strike operations from the
Navy’s carrier fleet. The Air Force is reviewing options for fielding
survivable, long-range surveillance and strike aircraft as part of a
comprehensive, phased plan to modernize the bomber force. The Navy and
the Air Force are cooperatively assessing alternatives for a new joint
cruise missile. The Department also plans to experiment with
conventional prompt global strike prototypes."(33)
"Assure access to space and the use of space assets. The Department,
through the
implementation of priorities from the Space Posture Review, will
explore opportunities to leverage growing international and commercial
expertise to enhance U.S. capabilities and reduce the vulnerability of
space systems and their supporting ground infrastructure. The
Department will broaden and deepen relationships with other nations
and private firms to create mutually beneficial partnerships to share
capabilities, systems, technology, and personnel, while ensuring that
we also protect sensitive sources and methods."(33) see 2008 Space
Protection strategy
"Establish a standing Joint Task Force Elimination Headquarters. In
order to better plan, train, and execute WMD-elimination operations,
the Department is establishing a standing Joint Task Force Elimination
Headquarters with increased nuclear disablement, exploitation,
intelligence, and coordination capabilities. Research countermeasures
and defenses to non-traditional agents. The globalization of the
world’s chemical industry, coupled with scientific breakthroughs,
increases the possibility of non-traditional chemical agents being
used against U.S. and allied forces. The Department, with interagency
partners, is increasing the resources for research and development of
technologies to meet and defeat these emerging threats" (36)
Cyber threat "This is no small task. DoD currently operates more than
15,000 different computer networks across 4,000 military installations
around the world. On any given day, there are as many as seven million
DoD computers and telecommunications tools in use in 88 countries
using thousands of warfighting and support applications. The number of
potential vulnerabilities, therefore, is staggering. Moreover, the
speed of cyber attacks and the anonymity of cyberspace greatly favor
the offense. This advantage is growing as hacker tools become cheaper
and easier to employ by adversaries whose skills are growing in
sophistication." (37)
"Centralize command of cyberspace operations. In an effort to organize
and standardize cyber practices and operations more effectively, the
Department is standing up U.S. Cyber Command (USCYBERCOM), a
subunified command under U.S. Strategic Command, to lead, integrate
and better coordinate the day-to-day defense, protection, and
operation of DoD networks. USCYBERCOM will direct the operation and
defense of DoD’s information networks, and will prepare to, and when
directed, conduct full spectrum cyberspace military operations. An
operational USCYBERCOM will also play a leading role in helping to
integrate cyber operations into operational and contingency
planning." (38)
cancelled the F-22 raptor
"In particular, DoD will strengthen its cooperation with DHS, which
leads the national effort to protect federal information systems."(39)
"Largely for this reason, past defense reviews have called for the
nation’s armed forces to be able to fight and win two major regional
conflicts in overlapping time frames. These have been characterized as
conflicts against state adversaries, typically employing conventional
military forces. This QDR likewise assumes the need for a robust force
capable of protecting U.S. interests against a multiplicity of
threats, including two capable nation-state aggressors. It breaks from
the past, however, in its insistence that the U.S. Armed Forces must
be capable of conducting a wide range of operations, from homeland
defense and defense support to civil authorities, to deterrence and
preparedness missions, to the conflicts we are in and the wars we may
someday face." (42)
"The United States is committed to the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization, the cornerstone of transatlantic security since the
beginning of the Cold War. NATO is critical to ensuring the security
and stability of Europe by addressing a broad range of security issues
both inside and..outside NATO’s treaty area. We will work to ensure a
strong NATO that provides a credible Article 5 security commitment,
deters threats to Alliance security, has access to U.S. capabilities
such as the phased, adaptive approach to European missile defense to
address the proliferation of ballistic missiles, and takes on new
threats such as cyberspace attacks. The U.S. relationship with the
European Union, together with the NATO-EU relationship, has become
even more important in recent years in projecting the full force of
transatlantic power. The need for NATO to develop its own
comprehensive civil-military approach, as well as greater cooperation
with the EU and other international organizations, is especially
evident in Afghanistan, where every NATO ally and the EU are
contributing to the international effort—including personnel
contributions to the International Security Assistance Force—to
disrupt, dismantle, and defeat Al Qaeda and eliminate its safe
havens."(57-58)
China section
"China’s growing presence and influence in regional and global
economic and security affairs is one of the most consequential aspects
of the evolving strategic landscape in the Asia-Pacific region and
globally. In particular, China’s military has begun to develop new
roles, missions, and capabilities in support of its growing regional
and global interests, which could enable it to play a more substantial
and constructive role in international affairs. The United States
welcomes a strong, prosperous, and successful China that plays a
greater global role. The United States welcomes the positive benefits
that can accrue from greater cooperation. However, lack of
transparency and the nature of China’s military development and
decision-making processes raise legitimate questions about its future
conduct and intentions within Asia and beyond. Our relationship with
China must therefore be multidimensional and undergirded by a process
of enhancing confidence and reducing mistrust in a manner that
reinforces mutual interests. The United States and China should
sustain open channels of communication to discuss disagreements in
order to manage and ultimately reduce the risks of conflict that are
inherent in any relationship as broad and complex as that shared by
these two nations." (60)
India & Pakistan follow after this quote
"As its military capabilities grow, India will contribute to Asia as a
net provider of security in the Indian Ocean and beyond."(60)
"The United States has a substantial interest in the stability of the
Indian Ocean region as a whole, which will play an ever more important
role in the global economy. The Indian Ocean provides vital sea lines
of communication that are essential to global commerce, international
energy security, and regional stability. Ensuring open access to the
Indian Ocean will require a more integrated approach to the region
across military and civilian organizations. An assessment that
includes U.S. national interests, objectives, and posture implications
would provide a useful guide for future defense planning."(61)
Middle east section follows after last quote
Regional Posture Perspectives
"The United States will emphasize the following priorities in adapting
and developing its global defense posture over the next five years:
? Reaffirm our commitment to Europe and NATO, including through the
development of European missile defense capabilities;
? Work with allies and key partners to ensure a peaceful and secure
Asia-Pacific region;
? Balance ongoing operations, crisis response, and prevent-and-deter
activities in the development of a strategic defense posture in the
broader Middle East, Africa, and Central and South Asia; and Support
partnership capacity-building efforts in key regions and states."(64)
"With Japan, we will continue to implement the bilateral Realignment
Roadmap agreement that will ensure a long-term presence of U.S. forces
in Japan and transform Guam, the westernmost sovereign territory of
the United States, into a hub for security activities in the
region."(66)
"The United States will develop a more adaptive and flexible U.S. and
combined force posture on the Korean Peninsula to strengthen the
alliance’s deterrent and defense capabilities and long-term capacity
for regional and global defense cooperation. Doing so includes
continuing to advance the ROK’s lead role in the combined defense of
its territory, together with the transition of wartime operational
control to the ROK military in 2012."(66)
"Our defense posture in the Western Hemisphere will support
interagency capabilities to address critical issues including control
of illicit trafficking, detection and interdiction of weapons of mass
destruction, border and coastal security, and humanitarian assistance
and disaster relief. In North America, the United States will maintain
the defense posture required for mission assurance, consequence
management, support for civil authorities, strategic dispersal, and
homeland defense."(68)
"America’s civilian instruments of statecraft were allowed to atrophy
in the post–Cold War era, and the lack of adequate civilian capacity
has made prevailing in current conflicts significantly more
challenging. Unfortunately, despite a growing awareness of the need
and real efforts throughout the government to address it, adequate
civilian capacity will take time and resources to develop and is
unlikely to materialize in the near term. The Department will
therefore continue to work with the leadership of civilian agencies to
support the agencies’ growth and their operations in the field, so
that the appropriate military and civilian resources are put forth to
meet the demands of current contingencies.
The Department will continue to build on the lessons learned from
examples such as the Provincial Reconstruction Teams in Afghanistan
and Iraq, and work toward improving a whole-of-government
approach." (70)
"The United States has developed some important tools to meet many of
its most pressing needs, and is taking steps to lay the groundwork for
additional reforms. In 2009, the Administration worked with Congress
to create the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Fund and extend Section 1206
“Global Train-and-Equip” authority to support coalition operations—
facilitating increased contributions to Afghanistan. The Department is
also pursuing efforts to build the ministerial capacity of partners in
order to sustain their operational investments." (74)
Second, the Pentagon’s acquisition workforce has been allowed to
atrophy, exacerbating a decline in the critical skills necessary for
effective oversight. For example, over the past ten years, the
Department’s contractual obligations have nearly tripled while our
acquisition workforce fell by more than 10 percent. The Department
also has great difficulty hiring qualified senior acquisition
officials. Over the past eight years the Department has operated with
vacancies in key acquisition positions averaging from 13 percent in
the Army to 43 percent in the Air Force. There remains an urgent need
for technically trained personnel—cost estimators, systems engineers,
and acquisition managers—to conduct effective oversight."(76)
To help in overcoming these challenges and to institutionalize ongoing
innovations, President Obama signed the Weapon Systems Acquisition
Reform Act (WSARA) into law on May 22, 2009. The goal of this
important new statute is to improve acquisition outcomes in the
Department, with specific emphasis on major defense acquisition
programs (MDAPs) and major automated information systems (MAISs). In
signing the act, the President stated that the legislation is designed
to “limit cost overruns before they spiral out of control. It will
strengthen oversight and accountability by appointing officials who
will be charged with closely monitoring the weapons systems that we’re
purchasing to ensure that costs are controlled.” (77)
"Strengthening the Industrial Base
In order for the Department of Defense to develop, field, and maintain
high-quality equipment, it must rely on a robust and capable defense
industry. Indeed, America’s industrial capacity and capability made
victory in World War II possible, maintained the technological edge
against the Soviet Union, and today helps ensure that our military
personnel in harm’s way have the world’s best equipment and are
supported by modern logistics and information systems; thus our
technological advantage must be closely monitored and nurtured.
Unfortunately, the federal government as a whole and the Pentagon in
particular have not adequately addressed the changes both within the
industry and in the Department’s needs in the current strategic
environment. The result has been that America’s defense industry has
consolidated and contracted around 20th-century platforms rather than
developing the broad and flexible portfolio of systems that today’s
security environment demands." (81)
"Moreover, the financial community has an important, and often
overlooked, role to play in maintaining the health of our industrial
base. From the small technology start-ups that seek venture funding to
pursue new products and systems, to the debt markets that provide
capital support as programs mature and evolve, the Department must
ensure that we do not take this access to capital for granted and must
work to form a more transparent view of our requirements and long-term
investment plans." (82)
"Today’s export control system is a relic of the Cold War and must be
adapted to address current threats. The current system impedes
cooperation, technology sharing, and interoperability with allies and
partners. It does not allow for adequate enforcement mechanisms to
detect export violations, or penalties to deter such abuses. Moreover,
our overly complicated system results in significant interagency
delays that hinder U.S. industrial competitiveness and cooperation
with allies.
The United States has made continuous incremental improvements to its
export control system, particularly in adding controls against the
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their means of
delivery. The United States has also been a leader in international
export controls, creating and improving the multilateral regimes made
up of U.S. allies and trading partners that control what is exported
to countries of concern to the United States. The regimes also have
become a global control standard via United Nations Security Council
resolutions. They help ensure that key technologies and items
available in numerous countries are controlled in order to prevent
their acquisition by actors who would use them contrary to U.S. and
allied interests." (83)
"The U.S. export system itself poses a potential national security
risk. Its structure is overly complicated, contains too many
redundancies, and tries to protect too much. Today’s export control
system encourages foreign customers to seek foreign suppliers and U.S.
companies to seek foreign partners not subject to U.S. export
controls. Furthermore, the U.S. government is not adequately focused
on protecting those key technologies and items that should be
protected and ensuring that potential adversaries do not obtain
technical data crucial for the production of sophisticated weapons
systems." (84)
Crafting a Strategic Approach to Climate and Energy
"Climate change will affect DoD in two broad ways. First, climate
change will shape the operating environment, roles, and missions that
we undertake. The U.S. Global Change Research Program, composed of 13
federal agencies, reported in 2009 that climate-related changes are
already being observed in every region of the world, including the
United States and its coastal waters. Among these physical changes are
increases in heavy downpours, rising temperature and sea level,
rapidly retreating glaciers, thawing permafrost, lengthening growing
seasons, lengthening ice-free seasons in the oceans and on lakes and
rivers, earlier snowmelt, and alterations in river flows.
Assessments conducted by the intelligence community indicate that
climate change could have significant geopolitical impacts around the
world, contributing to poverty, environmental degradation, and the
further weakening of fragile governments. Climate change will
contribute to food and water scarcity, will increase the spread of
disease, and may spur or exacerbate mass migration." (84-85)
"While climate change alone does not cause conflict, it may act as an
accelerant of instability or conflict, placing a burden to respond on
civilian institutions and militaries around the world. In addition,
extreme weather events may lead to increased demands for defense
support to civil authorities for humanitarian assistance or disaster
response both within the United States and overseas. In some nations,
the military is the only institution with the capacity to respond to a
large-scale natural disaster. Proactive engagement with these
countries can help build their capability to respond to such
events." (85)
"In 2008, the National Intelligence Council judged that more than 30
U.S. military installations were already facing elevated levels of
risk from rising sea levels. DoD’s operational readiness hinges on
continued access to land, air, and sea training and test space.
Consequently, the Department must complete a comprehensive assessment
of all installations to assess the potential impacts of climate change
on its missions and adapt as required." (85)
"In this regard, DoD will work to foster efforts to assess, adapt to,
and mitigate the impacts of climate change. Domestically, the
Department will leverage the Strategic Environmental Research and
Development Program, a joint effort among DoD, the Department of
Energy, and the Environmental Protection Agency, to develop climate
change assessment tools. Abroad, the Department will increase its
investment in the Defense Environmental International Cooperation
Program not only to promote cooperation on environmental security
issues, but also to augment international adaptation efforts. The
Department will also speed innovative energy and conservation
technologies from laboratories to military end users. The
Environmental Security and Technology Certification Program uses
military installations as a test bed to demonstrate and create a
market for innovative energy efficiency and renewable energy
technologies coming out of the private sector and DoD and Department
of Energy laboratories. Finally, the Department is improving small-
scale energy efficiency and renewable energy projects at military
installations through our Energy Conservation Investment
Program." (86)
Russia
"To support cooperative engagement in the Arctic, DoD strongly
supports accession to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the
Sea." (86)
"Energy security for the Department means having assured access to
reliable supplies of energy and the ability to protect and deliver
sufficient energy to meet operational needs. Energy efficiency can
serve as a force multiplier, because it increases the range and
endurance of forces in the field and can reduce the number of combat
forces diverted to protect energy supply lines, which are vulnerable
to both asymmetric and conventional attacks and disruptions. DoD must
incorporate geostrategic and operational energy considerations into
force planning, requirements development, and acquisition processes.
To address these challenges, DoD will fully implement the statutory
requirement for the energy efficiency Key Performance Parameter and
fully burdened cost of fuel set forth in the 2009 National Defense
Authorization Act. The Department will also investigate alternative
concepts for improving operational energy use, including the creation
of an innovation fund administered by the new Director of Operational
Energy to enable components to compete for funding on projects that
advance integrated energy solutions."(87)
Renewable resources
"The Department is increasing its use of renewable energy supplies and
reducing energy demand to improve operational effectiveness, reduce
greenhouse gas emissions in support of U.S. climate change
initiatives, and protect the Department from energy price
fluctuations. The Military Departments have invested in noncarbon
power sources such as solar, wind, geothermal, and biomass energy at
domestic installations and in vehicles powered by alternative fuels,
including hybrid power, electricity, hydrogen, and compressed national
gas. Solving military challenges—through such innovations as more
efficient generators, better batteries, lighter materials, and
tactically deployed energy sources—has the potential to yield spin-off
technologies that benefit the civilian community as well. DoD will
partner with academia, other U.S. agencies, and international partners
to research, develop, test, and evaluate new sustainable energy
technologies." (87)
"Indeed, the following examples demonstrate the broad range of Service
energy innovations. By 2016, the Air Force will be postured to cost-
competitively acquire 50 percent of its domestic aviation fuel via an
alternative fuel blend that is greener than conventional petroleum
fuel. Further, Air Force testing and standard-setting in this arena
paves the way for the much larger commercial aviation sector to
follow. The Army is in the midst of a significant transformation of
its fleet of 70,000 non-tactical vehicles (NTVs), including the
current deployment of more than 500 hybrids and the acquisition of
4,000 low-speed electric vehicles at domestic installations to help
cut fossil fuel usage. The Army is also exploring ways to exploit the
opportunities for renewable power generation to support operational
needs: for instance, the Rucksack Enhanced Portable Power System
(REPPS). The Navy commissioned the USS Makin Island, its first
electric-drive surface combatant, and tested an F/A-18 engine on
camelina-based biofuel in 2009—two key steps toward the vision of
deploying a “green” carrier strike group using biofuel and nuclear
power by 2016. The Marine Corps has created an Expeditionary Energy
Office to address operational energy risk, and its Energy Assessment
Team has identified ways to achieve efficiencies in today’s highly
energy-intensive operations in Afghanistan and Iraq in order to reduce
logistics and related force protection requirements." (87-88)
The GAO produces an annual list of high-risk management issues in the
U.S. government, and in 2009 eight applied to DoD: supply chain
management, weapon systems acquisition, contract management, financial
management, business systems modernization, support infrastructure
management, approach to business transformation, and the Personnel
Security Clearance Program. The DoD Inspector General summary of
management and performance challenges for FY 2009 also identified
eight risk areas for the Department: financial management; acquisition
process and contract management; joint warfighting and readiness;
information assurance, security, and privacy; health care; equipping
and training Iraqi and Afghan security forces; the nuclear enterprise;
and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
CyberTerrorism response
"A failure by the Department to secure its systems in cyberspace would
pose a fundamental risk to our ability to accomplish defense missions
today and in the future. Attacks in cyberspace could target command
and control systems and the cyberspace infrastructure supporting
weapons system platforms. To ensure unfettered access to cyberspace,
DoD mission-critical systems and networks must perform and be
resilient in the face of cyberspace attacks.. with the establishment
of U.S. Cyber Command is a critical step forward. In addition, the
Department is taking steps to identify mission-critical command and
control systems and networks, examining how best to further protect
them, and exploring ways to develop operational approaches and
logistics that better address potential vulnerabilities. The
Department is also actively participating in a broader interagency
approach for securing cyberspace, including the Comprehensive National
Cybersecurity Initiative (CNCI). To ensure that U.S. Armed Forces are
properly trained and equipped to counter this threat, the Department
must develop and maintain the ability to accurately assess the
performance of network-enabled information systems in realistic threat
environments." (91-92)
http://www.defense.gov/npr/docs/2010%20Nuclear%20Posture%20Review%20Report.pdf
Ballistic Missile Defense Review
http://www.defense.gov/bmdr/docs/BMDR%20as%20of%2026JAN10%200630_for%20web.pdf
thomaswheat1975
discussion archived here:
On Jun 17, 4:49 pm, thomas wheat <thomasjigmewh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In Defense of Clean Energy
>
> http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/06/clean_energy_defense.html
>
> regarding discussion archived here:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.democrats.d/browse_thread...
>
> Sustaining Defense Investments in Clean Energy to Enhance National
> Security
>
> Marines unload an emergency resupply helicopter in Afghanistan.
> Seventy percent of convoys on the ground in Afghanistan and Iraq are
> dedicated solely to transporting fuel and water.
>
> By Bracken Hendricks, Daniel J. Weiss, Lisbeth Kaufman | June 14,
> 2011
>
> PrintEmailText-size: A A A Share: Download a memo from the Center
> for American Progress Action Fund detailing the Department of
> Defense's efforts and policies driving energy security and innovation
> (pdf)
>
> Read the memo in your web browser
>
> http://www.scribd.com/doc/57834436/In-Defense-of-Clean-Energy
>
> also I think we should invest more research into this program:
>
> http://www.usiter.orgmay have SDI free electron air borne laser
> applications, and alternative unlimited power source for the next
> century
>
> The United States, the world’s largest consumer of energy and oil,
> imports 7 billion barrels of oil a year. One out of five of these
> barrels come from unfriendly countries. Unsurprisingly, our foreign
> oil habit presents major energy challenges affecting our national
> security and economic competitiveness. The Department of Defense under
> Defense Secretary Robert Gates is particularly aware of this energy
> security threat, and has begun to address it across all three branches
> of the military.
>
> Efforts to combat the hazards of oil dependency must continue under
> Leon E. Panetta, the nominee to replace Gates as secretary of defense.
> Panetta, current director of the Central Intelligence Agency, made
> this clear in his confirmation hearing before the Senate Armed
> Services Committee hearing on June 9. He noted that we must determine:
>
> http://www.c-span.org/Events/Panetta-Faces-Questions-on-Situation-in-...
> http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_bi...
> http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/57329567?access_key=key-2k2b9obvt91p...
Thomas Jigme Wheat
> http://www.defense.gov/npr/docs/2010%20Nuclear%20Posture%20Review%20R...
>
> Ballistic Missile Defense Review
>
> http://www.defense.gov/bmdr/
>
> http://www.defense.gov/bmdr/docs/BMDR%20as%20of%2026JAN10%200630_for%...
>
> thomaswheat1975
>
> discussion archived here:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/sonoma.general/browse_thread/thread/51...
>
> On Jun 17, 4:49 pm, thomas wheat <thomasjigmewh...@gmail.com> wrote:> In Defense of Clean Energy
>
> >http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/06/clean_energy_defense.html
>
> > regarding discussion archived here:
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.democrats.d/browse_thread...
>
> > Sustaining Defense Investments in Clean Energy to Enhance National
> > Security
>
> > Marines unload an emergency resupply helicopter in Afghanistan.
> > Seventy percent of convoys on the ground in Afghanistan and Iraq are
> > dedicated solely to transporting fuel and water.
>
> > By Bracken Hendricks, Daniel J. Weiss, Lisbeth Kaufman | June 14,
> > 2011
>
> > PrintEmailText-size: A A A Share: Download a memo from the Center
> > for American Progress Action Fund detailing the Department of
> > Defense's efforts and policies driving energy security and innovation
> > (pdf)
>
> > Read the memo in your web browser
>
> >http://www.scribd.com/doc/57834436/In-Defense-of-Clean-Energy
>
> > also I think we should invest more research into this program:
>
> >http://www.usiter.orgmayhave SDI free electron air borne laser