Reducing DoD Fossil-Fuel Dependence JASON The MITRE Corporation 7515 Colshire Drive McLean, Virginia 22102-7508 (703) 983-6997 JSR-06-135 September 2006 Approved for public release; distribution unlimited Study Leaders: Paul Dimotakis Robert Grober Nate Lewis Contributors: Henry Abarbanel Michael Brenner Graham Candler J. Mike Cornwall Freeman Dyson Stanley Flatté David Hammer Jonathan Katz Mara Prentiss Roy Schwitters John Vesecky Robert Westervelt Intern: Brent Fisher (IDA)
Transcript
Reducing DoD Fossil-Fuel Dependence
JASONThe MITRE Corporation
7515 Colshire DriveMcLean, Virginia 22102-7508
(703) 983-6997
JSR-06-135
September 2006
Approved for public release; distribution unlimited
Study Leaders:Paul DimotakisRobert Grober
Nate Lewis
Contributors:Henry AbarbanelMichael BrennerGraham CandlerJ. Mike CornwallFreeman DysonStanley Flatté
David HammerJonathan KatzMara PrentissRoy SchwittersJohn VeseckyRobert Westervelt
Intern:Brent Fisher (IDA)
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved
OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. 1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY) 12-09-2006
2. REPORT TYPE
3. DATES COVE RED (From - To)
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE Reducing DoD Fossil-Fuel Dependence
5a. CONTRACT NUMBER 13069022-PS
5b. GRANT NUMBER
5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
6. AUTHOR(S) Paul Dimotakis, Nathan Lewis, Robert Grober, et al.
5d. PROJECT NUMBER
5e. TASK NUMBER
5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER
7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER
The MITRE Corporation JASON Program Office 7515 Colshire Drive McLean, Virginia 22102
Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (S&T)
1777 N. Kent St, Suite 9030 11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT
Rosslyn, VA 22209 NUMBER(S) 12. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
Approved for public release. Distribution is unlimited. Distribution Statement A. 13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
14. ABSTRACT In light of an increasing U.S. dependence on foreign oil, as well as rising fuel costs for the U.S. and the DoD, and implications with regard to national security and national defense, JASON was charged in 2006 by the DDR&E to assessing pathways to reduce DoD’s dependence on fossil fuels. The key conclusions of the study are that, barring unforeseen circumstances, availability concerns are not a decision driver in the reduction of DoD fossil-fuel use at present. However, the need to improve logistics requirements and military capabilities, and, secondarily, the need to reduce fuel costs, as well as providing a prudent hedge against a foggy future, especially in the Middle East and South America, argue for a reduction in fuel use, in general.
15. SUBJECT TERMS
16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF:
17. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT
18. NUMBER OF PAGES
19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON
a. REPORT Unclassified
b. ABSTRACTUnclassified
c. THIS PAGEUnclassified
UL
19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (include area code)
Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98)Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39.18
i
Table of contents
Table of contents .………………………………………………………………. i
Executive summary ..……………………………………………………………. iii
World major oil trade movements and distribution of US oil imports …………... iv
I. Background and context ………………………………………………………….. 1
II. Briefings, discussions, and other input ……………………………………………. 2
III. Statement of the problem ………………………………………………………….. 3
IV. Global, domestic, and DoD fossil-fuel supply and demand ………………….…. 5
A. Global fossil energy perspectives ……………………………………….…… 6
B. Domestic fossil energy perspectives ………………………………………… 9
C. DoD fossil energy perspective ………………………………………….…… 13
1. U.S. production and DoD consumption ..……………………………….. 13
2. DoD demand breakdown by service and fuel use ………...……...……... 15
3. Regulatory factors affecting DoD fuel use, planning, and policies ..…… 29
4. Drivers to minimize DoD fuel use ……………………………..………. 31
V. Technology options for the reduction of DoD fossil fuel use ………………….. 33
A. Modification of patterns of use of DoD platforms ………………………….. 33
B. Engine and drive-train technology options ………………………………… 35
D. Alternate fuels in place of crude oil-derived fuels …..……………………… 51
1. Fossil fuel fungibility: conversion of gaseous and solid forms of fossil fuel into liquid hydrocarbon fuels through the Fischer-Tropsch process …… 55
2. Biofuels ………………………………………………………………… 63
Ethanol derived from corn ……………………………………………… 63
Cellulosic ethanol ………………………………………………………. 65
3. Well-To-Pump (WTP) and Well-To-Wheel (WTW) analyses ………….. 68
ii
VI. Discussion and concluding remarks ……………………………………………... 75
A. International and national considerations ……………………………….…… 75
B. Considerations for the DoD …….……………………………………………. 76
VII. Findings ………………………………………………………………………… 79
A. Global, domestic, and DoD fossil-fuel supplies ……………………………... 79
B. DoD fuel costs …………...………………………………………………….. 81
C. Decreasing DoD fuel use …………………………………………………… 83
D. Liquid fuels from coal or natural gas ………………………………………... 85
E. Biofuels ……………………………………………………………………… 87
VIII. Recommendations and path forward ……………………..……………………… 89
Appendices
Appendix I: Energy glossary ….……………………………………………… 90
Executive summary In light of an increasing U.S. dependence on foreign oil, as well as rising fuel costs for the U.S. and the DoD, and implications with regard to national security and national defense, the JASONs were charged in 2006 by the DDR&E with assessing pathways to reduce DoD’s dependence on fossil fuels. The study charge included the following tasks:
A. Explore technology options to reduce the DoD dependence on fossil fuels and/or increase energy efficiency of our operating forces. This assessment will include an assessment of alternative fuels and energy sources at DoD-required energy densities, e.g., exotic alternate fuels, biomass/cellulosic biofuels, hydrogen, shale oil, oil sands, geothermal, etc., and an assessment of the potential of structural shaping, structural mechanical design, and novel materials application in enhancing the survivability of lightweight vehicles.
B. Assess the viability of technologies to provide at least the performance required of current DoD platforms and effort to integrate the technology and achieve the desired level of performance. In particular, alternate fuels and energy sources are to be assessed in terms of multiple parameters, to include (but not limited to) stability, high & low temperature properties, water affinity, storage & handling.
C. Assess blast and penetration resistance in lightweight vehicles.
D. Analyze structures and materials designs that could be adapted for use on combat and utility vehicles, or other DoD platforms.
E. In addition, JASON was asked to defer detailed analyses of USAF energy/fuel use. Some key findings and recommendations are summarized below.
1. Based on proven reserves, estimated resources, and the rate of discovery of new resources, no extended world-wide shortage of fossil-fuel production is reasonably expected over, approximately, the next 25 years. While the possibility of short-term shortages of refined gasoline or diesel product exists, depending on domestic refining capacity relative to domestic petroleum demand, there is not a strong basis to anticipate sustained global shortages of crude oil in the next 25 year (or more) time frame. In addition, there is no basis to anticipate shortages in petroleum available to the DoD, especially considering that present DoD fuel consumption is less than 2% of the total U.S. domestic fuel consumption – a demand that can be met by only a few domestic supply sources, at present – even though likely decreases in domestic-oil production will make the future domestic-coverage margin smaller. This finding is premised on the assumption of no major upheavals in the world, in general, and in the major oil-producing nations and regions, and oil-transportation corridors, in particular, over the next 25-year period.
2. The 2006 DoD fossil-fuel budget is, approximately, 2.5-3% of the national-defense budget, the range dependent on what is chosen as the total national-defense budget.
iv
Larger (percentage) fuel costs are borne by families and many businesses, for example, and fuel costs have only relatively recently become noticeable to the DoD.
3. At present, there is a large spread between oil-production cost and crude-oil prices. Many projections, however, including that of the U.S. Energy Information Agency, indicate that crude oil prices may well decrease to $40-$50/barrel within the next few years, as production and refining capacity increases to match demand.
4. DoD is not a sufficiently large customer to drive the domestic market for demand and consumption of fossil fuel alternatives, or to drive fuel and transportation technology developments, in general. Barring externalities, e.g., subsidies, governmental and departmental directives, etc., non-fossil-derived fuels are not likely to play a significant role in the next 25 years.
5. DoD fuel consumption constraints and patterns of use do not align well with those of the commercial sector. Most commercial-sector fuel use, for example, is in ground transportation, with only 4% of domestic petroleum consumption used for aviation. In contrast, almost 60% of DoD fuel use is by the Air Force, with additional fuel used in DoD aviation if Naval aviation consumption is included. Options for refueling ships at sea are more limited (or nonexistent) compared to those for commercial vehicles in urban areas. Options for DoD use of electrical energy on ground vehicles are limited, since one can not expect to plug into the grid in hostile territory, for example, to refuel/recharge an electric vehicle. Furthermore, drive cycles for DoD ground vehicles differ significantly from EPA drive cycles that, as a consequence, provide poor standards for fuel consumption.
6. Even though fuel is only a relatively small fraction of the total DoD budget, there are several compelling reasons to minimize DoD fuel use:
a. Fuel costs represent a large fraction of the 40-50 year life-cycle costs of mobility aircraft and non-nuclear ships. Note that this is consistent with the life-cycle costs of commercial airliners.
b. Fuel use is characterized by large multipliers and co-factors: at the simplest level, it takes fuel to deliver fuel.
c. Fuel use imposes large logistical burdens, operational constraints and liabilities, and vulnerabilities: otherwise capable offensive forces can be countered by attacking more-vulnerable logistical-supply chains. Part of this is because of changes in military doctrine. In the past, we used to talk of the “front line”, because we used to talk of the line that was sweeping ahead, leaving relatively safe terrain behind. This is no longer true. The rear is now vulnerable, especially the fuel supply line.
d. There are anticipated, and some already imposed, environmental regulations and constraints.
Not least, because of the long life of many DoD systems,
e. uncertainties about an unpredictable future make it advisable to decrease DoD fuel use to minimize exposure and vulnerability to potential unforeseen disruptions in world and domestic supply.
v
The JASONs conclude that the greatest leverage in reducing the DoD dependence on fossil fuel is through an optimization of patterns of use, e.g., planning and gaming, as well as the development of in-situ optimization tools of fuel use that would help planners and field officers choose between operational scenarios to minimize logistical support requirements by minimizing fuel consumption. Such tools for planning and for conducting operations could evolve and improve tactics, and enable significant reductions in fuel consumption, while improving military effectiveness at the same time.
The JASONs noted that little or no hard data are available on fuel consumption at the level of individual vehicles and vehicle types. Instrumenting an adequate fraction of vehicles with the equivalent of commercially available telemetry/logging vehicle-monitoring systems for fuel consumption, vehicle speed, acceleration, etc., e.g., equivalent to the GM “On-star” system, or the real-time fuel monitoring systems as in the Toyota Prius, Honda Accord, etc., would yield valuable database information and help establish realistic baselines against which vehicle mix and operational choices can be optimized with an eye towards fuel consumption.
Large fuel savings could potentially be achieved by considering and optimizing the unmanned platforms and systems to replace functionality of manned platforms and systems.
Other areas with high leverage, in order of importance, include:
1. Optimization of engine types for DoD missions and use patterns. Commercial hybrids are not optimized to DoD use patterns. Re-engine the M1A1 and M1A2 tanks, HMMWVs, B-52 bombers, etc. with modern engines designed and optimized for their pattern of use.
2. Lightweighting vehicles costs money but can return significant fuel savings and other benefits. The greatest potential weight savings are not in armor, but in design, structural materials, and components of the vehicle drive system, radiator, etc.
Alternative fossil-fuel derived fuels, e.g., Fisher-Tropsch liquid fuels from coal, etc., are more costly and less energy efficient than fuels produced by refining crude oil. If crude oil sources are, for some reason, not indicated, the next most-cost-effective method to achieve assured domestic fuels is Fisher-Tropsch on stranded natural gas, such as in Alaska, albeit with attendant Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emission burdens, unless carbon-sequestration measures are employed and prove efficacious and cost-effective. No scaleable biomass processes today can yield DoD-suitable fuels.
The key conclusions of the study are that, barring unforeseen circumstances, availability concerns are not a decision driver in the reduction of DoD fossil-fuel use at present. However, the need to improve logistics requirements and military capabilities, and, secondarily, the need to reduce fuel costs, as well as providing a prudent hedge against a foggy future, especially in the Middle East and South America, argue for a reduction in fuel use, in general.
We conclude by recommending that a more-in-depth analysis be undertaken that would consider future possibilities and scenarios that could invalidate these findings by altering the basic premise of no major upheavals in the next quarter-century, and the consequences to the DoD, indeed, to the nation, should such upheavals occur.
vi
The figure below summarizes world-wide oil movements (crude + refined products) and is extracted from the BP Statistical Review of World Energy (June 2006, page 21). The bottom figure depicts the U.S. imports distribution.
So
uth
& C
entr
alC
anad
aM
exic
o
West
North
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
America Africa Middle East North Sea Russia
U.S. oil import sources (based on the 2005 BP data in the figure above).
1
I. Background and context In light of an increasing U.S. dependence on foreign oil, as well as rising fuel costs and implications with regard to national security and national defense, the JASONs were charged in 2006 by the DDR&E with assessing pathways that could enable a reduction of the DoD’s dependence on fossil fuels.
The study charge included the following tasks:
A. Explore technology options to reduce the DoD dependence on fossil fuels and/or increase energy efficiency of our operating forces. This assessment will include an assessment of alternative fuels and energy sources at DoD-required energy densities, e.g., exotic alternate fuels/biomass/cellulosic biofuels, hydrogen, shale oil, oil sands, geothermal, etc., and an assessment of the potential of structural shaping, structural mechanical design, and novel materials application in enhancing the survivability of lightweight vehicles.
B. Assess the viability of technologies to provide at least the performance required of current DoD platforms and the effort required to integrate the technology and achieve the desired level of performance. In particular, alternate fuels and energy sources are to be assessed in terms of multiple parameters, to include (but not limited to) stability, high- and low-temperature properties, water affinity, storage and handling.
C. Assess blast and penetration resistance in lightweight vehicles.
D. Analyze structures and materials designs that could be adapted for use on combat and utility vehicles, or other DoD platforms.
E. Defer detailed analyses of USAF energy/fuel use.
Part of the original study charge included a call for a study of energetic materials. That was addressed in a separate JASON 2006 study (Prentiss et al. JSR-06-130).
Prior studies on this general topic have been performed by the Defense Science Board (2001), by the Air Force Science Advisory Board (2005), and by other DoD advisory groups. These studies helped place the present study in context and provided an important input to the present study. Other studies for the DoD on this general topic are also in progress by the DSB and other groups at this time.
The JASON study focused more on Science and Technology aspects than on policy perspectives. In addition, the JASON study was performed within the context of the U.S. and global situation in 2006.
At present, U.S. crude oil imports provide 63% of domestic consumption and are slowly rising, public awareness or perception of climate change and global warming concerns attributable to fossil-fuel consumption are also rising, and there are tensions in the relationship between the U.S. and several countries with large proven oil reserves, both in the Middle East and South America (Venezuela, for example), as well as other regions of the world (cf. figures on page iv).
2
II. Briefings, discussions, and other input This was a large study by JASON standards with many dimensions requiring attention, examination, and analysis. We are grateful to the following briefers for their presentations, follow-up materials and conversations, and general assistance and insights.
26Jun06:
Ed Schaffer [ARL / OSD APTI]: Energy and Power Technology Initiative Update Marvin Wenberg [DESC, SC, USN]: DESC Overview William Voorhees [NAVAIR]: Department of the Navy Future Fuels for Tactical
Applications
27Jun06:
Charles Raffa [TARDEC]: Ground Vehicle Powertrains Ghasan Kahlil [TARDEC]: Army Hybrid Electric Efforts Anthony Nickens [ONR]: ONR Science and Technologies for Fuel Savings James Webster [NAVSEA]: Propulsion Methods for Surface Combatants Dieter Multhopp [AFRL]: Addressing Air Force Fuel Issues: Air Vehicle
Efficiency Chris Norden [AFRL]: Turbine Engine Technologies and Future Innovative
Opportunities for Fuel Efficiency Tim Edwards [AFRL]: Alternative Fuels
28Jun06:
Stan Horky [GM]: Current Development of Fuel-Cell Vehicles Ann Karagozian [AFSAB]: Technology Options for Improved Air Vehicle Fuel
Efficiency Paul Scott [ISE]: Advanced Power-Trains and Hydrogen-Fueled Hybrid Electric
Buses: Reporting on In-Service Experience and Fossil-Fuel Substitution. Bill van Amburg [Weststart-CALSTART]: Medium and Heavy Hybrid Vehicles: Field Experience and Commercial Development Scott Kochan [Ovonic Hydrogen]: Hydrogen ICES Vehicles
13Jul06:
Scott Schoenfeld [ARL]: Advances in Armor
17Jul06:
Tad Patzek [UC Berkeley]: The Real Biofuel Cycles Michael Wang [ANL]: Well-to-Wheels Analysis of Vehicle/Fuel Systems
20Jul06: (VTC) Robert Roche and Peter Melik [Army, AMSAA]: Fuel Consumption Modeling
and Support Insights
In addition, we would like to acknowledge the assistance and reference material provided by Prof. David Pimentel [Cornell U.] on biofuels and agricultural-sustainability issues and to Dr. Steven Koonin [BP], for providing otherwise difficult to obtain cost and other data to our study, as acknowledged specifically below.
3
III. Statement of the problem The JASON study was organized around the following series of questions: The first group of questions concerns the present:
1. Is there is a potential future shortage in (crude) oil supply to the DoD?
2. What are the national-security/national-defense implications of the global and domestic oil supply/demand picture?
3. Are present/anticipated DoD fuel costs a decision driver?
4. What are the logistical, operational, and tactical consequences of present DoD fuel-use patterns?
5. What are the main fuel-efficiency and conservation drivers? The second series of questions relates to the future:
6. How could DoD fuel-use reductions be realized and what advantages (e.g., financial, operational, and tactical) would be realized if these reductions were to be achieved?
7. How could one beneficially change tactics, CONOPs, use patterns, etc., in response to a reduction in fossil fuel consumption?
8. What technology options are available to the DoD to facilitate reductions in (fossil-) fuel use?
9. Where should DoD invest for the greatest return on investment?
4
5
IV.
Glo
bal
, d
om
esti
c,
and
D
oD
fo
ssil-
fuel
su
pp
ly a
nd
dem
and
A.
Glo
bal f
ossi
l ene
rgy
pers
pect
ive
The
pre
sent
situ
atio
n is
ass
esse
d w
ith r
espe
ct t
o kn
own,
so-
calle
d “p
rove
n”,
rese
rves
an
d re
sour
ces
of
foss
il en
ergy
, gl
obal
ly.
As
indi
cate
d in
the
lef
t fi
gure
on
page
4,
the
wor
ld
has
appr
oxim
atel
y 41
yea
rs o
f pr
oven
res
erve
s at
thi
s tim
e, i
f th
e 20
05 c
onsu
mpt
ion
rate
is
mai
ntai
ned.
L
ess,
of
cour
se,
is
assu
red
if c
onsu
mpt
ion
incr
ease
s.
The
inf
eren
ce,
how
ever
, sh
ould
not
be
draw
n th
at t
he w
orld
will
run
out
of
oil
in 4
0 ye
ars,
or
so
. T
he
wor
ld
incr
ease
d its
oi
l re
serv
es
from
so
mew
hat
beyo
nd
30
year
s to
ov
er
40
year
s (r
eser
ves-
to-
prod
uctio
n ra
tio),
fol
low
ing
the
even
ts in
the
earl
y 19
80s
in th
e M
iddl
e E
ast,
in
spite
of
su
bsta
ntia
l in
crea
ses
in
tota
l co
nsum
ptio
n.1 O
il p
rodu
cers
will
not
inv
est
to s
ecur
e re
serv
es
on a
tim
e sc
ale
long
er t
han
~40
year
s. T
he n
et p
rese
nt v
alue
of
such
an
inve
stm
ent
wou
ld b
e sm
all
com
pare
d to
the
(co
st o
f)
capi
tal r
equi
red
to e
xplo
re a
nd p
rove
suc
h ad
ditio
nal r
eser
ves.
On
the
othe
r ha
nd,
the
data
als
o in
dica
te t
hat
pres
ent
U.S
. oi
l re
serv
es, e
xtra
cted
at
pres
ent
prod
uctio
n ra
tes,
will
be
depl
eted
in
the
nex
t 12
yea
rs.
Whe
ther
thi
s w
ill b
e al
tere
d by
new
do
mes
tic d
isco
veri
es d
urin
g th
is p
erio
d de
pend
s no
t on
ly o
n w
heth
er t
hey
exis
t w
ithin
the
U.S
., bu
t al
so o
n w
heth
er t
he
prod
uctio
n co
st d
iffe
rent
ial
betw
een
fore
ign
oil
sour
ces
and
pote
ntia
l fu
ture
U.S
. re
sour
ces
war
rant
s ec
onom
ic d
omes
tic
prod
uctio
n.
1 B
P S
tati
stic
al R
evie
w o
f Wor
ld E
nerg
y (J
anua
ry 2
006,
pag
e 10
).
As
indi
cate
d on
th
e ri
ght,
mos
t co
nven
tiona
l pr
oven
oi
l re
sour
ces/
rese
rves
are
con
cent
rate
d in
the
Mid
dle
Eas
t. N
orth
A
mer
ica
has
rela
tivel
y lit
tle o
f th
e w
orld
’s p
rove
n oi
l re
serv
es
and
reso
urce
s, b
ut h
as 3
0% o
f th
e w
orld
’s u
ncon
vent
iona
l oi
l re
sour
ces,
e.g
., ta
r sa
nds,
sha
le, e
tc.
Oil
avai
labl
e de
pend
s on
the
am
ount
one
is
will
ing
to p
ay t
o ex
trac
t it
from
th
e gr
ound
an
d,
ultim
atel
y,
the
amou
nt
rem
aini
ng
in
the
grou
nd.
C
umul
ativ
e gl
obal
cr
ude
oil
prod
uctio
n th
roug
h th
e 20
th c
entu
ry t
o th
e pr
esen
t ac
coun
ts f
or
appr
oxim
atel
y on
e tr
illio
n ba
rrel
s (T
bbl =
1012
bbl
)2 of
oil.
In
the
com
pila
tion
depi
cted
in
th
e fi
gure
s on
pa
ge
6,
the
follo
win
g as
sum
ptio
ns a
re in
corp
orat
ed.
• A
ll M
iddl
e E
ast
oil
(pro
ven
and
yet
to
be
prov
ed
or
disc
over
ed)
is in
expe
nsiv
e to
ext
ract
. •
Oth
er p
rove
n re
serv
es a
re b
elow
$20
/bar
rel
by d
efin
ition
; a
good
por
tion
of “
rese
rve
grow
th”
and
undi
scov
ered
oil
will
co
st le
ss th
en $
25/b
arre
l, ac
cord
ing
to e
volv
ing
tech
nolo
gy.
• D
eepw
ater
will
del
iver
100
Bbb
l at $
20-3
5/bb
l. •
Arc
tic a
reas
can
del
iver
200
Bbb
l at $
20-6
0/bb
l. •
Supe
r-de
ep r
eser
voir
s w
ill
repr
esen
t a
smal
l an
d re
lati
vely
ex
pens
ive
oil c
ontr
ibut
or (
they
con
tain
mos
tly g
as).
•
Enh
ance
d O
il R
ecov
ery
(EO
R)
can
deliv
er 3
00 B
bbl
abov
e w
hat
is c
onta
ined
in
the
USG
S re
serv
e gr
owth
est
imat
es,
but s
ome
wil
l rem
ain
quite
exp
ensi
ve.
2
The
abb
revi
atio
n ‘b
bl’
stem
s fr
om ‘
blue
bar
rel
of o
il’ t
hat
deno
tes
the
colo
r of
sta
ndar
d co
ntai
ners
in th
e pa
st th
at h
eld
42 (
U.S
.) g
allo
ns.
6
7
• N
on-c
onve
ntio
nal
heav
y oi
l ha
s a
larg
e po
tent
ial
(som
e 10
00 B
bbl
betw
een
depo
sits
in
C
anad
a,
Ven
ezue
la
and
othe
r co
untr
ies)
at
$2
0-40
/bbl
, in
clud
ing
CO
2 an
d en
viro
nmen
tal-
miti
gatio
n co
sts,
e.g
., ca
rbon
cap
ture
and
st
orag
e (C
CS)
mea
sure
s.
• O
il sh
ales
bec
ome
econ
omic
al a
t $2
5/bb
l an
d a
sign
ific
ant
port
ion
of t
hose
res
ourc
es c
an b
e ex
ploi
ted
at l
ess
than
$7
0/bb
l, in
clud
ing
CO
2 an
d en
viro
nmen
tal-
miti
gatio
n co
sts.
The
se e
stim
ates
are
illu
stra
ted
on p
age
6. I
n th
e to
p fi
gure
, the
ve
rtic
al
axis
sh
ows
oil
pric
e at
w
hich
th
e ex
ploi
tatio
n of
va
riou
s re
sour
ce
volu
mes
be
com
es
econ
omic
al,
taki
ng
into
ac
coun
t th
e co
st o
f ca
ptur
e an
d st
orag
e of
CO
2 pr
oduc
ed i
n th
e ex
trac
tion
of n
on-c
onve
ntio
nal
oils
. T
he h
oriz
onta
l ax
is s
how
s cu
mul
ativ
e re
sour
ces.
In
cont
rast
with
cla
ssic
cos
t cu
rves
, th
is
pres
enta
tion
faci
litat
es a
lin
k w
ith t
he t
ype
of r
esou
rces
and
th
eref
ore
with
th
e di
ffer
ent
tech
nolo
gies
re
quir
ed.
It
also
un
derl
ines
tha
t su
ch p
roje
ctio
ns a
re n
ot a
n ex
act
scie
nce
and
that
onl
y a
rang
e of
cos
ts c
an b
e pr
ojec
ted.
The
bar
lab
eled
“W
EO
est
. req
uire
d to
tal
need
to
2030
” sh
ows
the
cum
ulat
ive
oil
dem
and
expe
cted
bet
wee
n 20
03 a
nd 2
030
acco
rdin
g to
the
IE
A W
orld
Ene
rgy
Out
look
(W
EO
) 20
04.
Thi
s pr
ovid
es a
us
eful
“sc
ale”
for
leve
ls o
f av
aila
ble
oil.
The
bot
tom
fig
ure
depi
cts
the
sam
e da
ta in
a d
iffe
rent
way
. The
ho
rizo
ntal
axi
s re
pres
ents
oil-
prod
uctio
n co
st a
nd t
he v
ertic
al
axis
the
cor
resp
ondi
ng c
umul
ativ
e ec
onom
ical
ly e
xplo
itabl
e re
sour
ces.
A
t th
e tim
e of
th
at
asse
ssm
ent
(200
4),
mos
t co
mpa
nies
bas
ed th
eir
inve
stm
ent d
ecis
ions
on
a lo
ng-t
erm
cos
t of
$20
-25/
bbl.
The
gra
ph s
ugge
sts
that
acc
eptin
g a
long
-ter
m
prod
uctio
n co
st o
f $3
0-35
/bbl
, for
exa
mpl
e, w
ould
hav
e a
larg
e im
pact
on
econ
omic
ally
ava
ilabl
e fu
ture
res
erve
s.
If r
esou
rces
bec
ome
econ
omic
al a
t a
give
n pr
ice,
allo
win
g fo
r no
rmal
ret
urn
on i
nves
tmen
t, th
is d
oes
not
nece
ssar
ily m
ean
they
will
be
expl
oite
d. O
ther
fac
tors
, how
ever
, com
e in
to p
lay:
•
dem
and;
•
com
peti
tion
fro
m m
ore
appe
alin
g in
vest
men
ts;
• re
gula
tion
s; ta
x, o
ther
ince
ntiv
es, a
nd r
oyal
ty f
ram
ewor
ks;
• ac
cess
to r
esou
rces
; and
•
geop
oliti
cal f
acto
rs.
Thi
s m
eans
the
pri
ce l
evel
s in
dica
ted
are
nece
ssar
y bu
t no
t (s
olel
y) s
uffi
cien
t to
gua
rant
ee t
hat
a pa
rtic
ular
res
ourc
e w
ill
cont
ribu
te t
o w
orld
sup
plie
s. A
lso,
the
se f
igur
es a
re b
ased
on
long
-ter
m,
sust
aine
d pr
ices
, no
t te
mpo
rary
pe
ak-o
f-cy
cle
pric
es,
and
they
ass
ume
long
-ter
m c
osts
for
equ
ipm
ent
and
serv
ices
. T
he l
atte
r co
sts
also
go
thro
ugh
cycl
es a
nd h
ave
incr
ease
d co
nsid
erab
ly b
etw
een
2003
and
200
5.3
JASO
N a
gree
s th
at, a
t le
ast
over
the
nex
t 25
yea
rs a
nd b
arri
ng
unfo
rese
en c
ircu
mst
ance
s, l
onge
r-te
rm m
arke
t m
echa
nism
s ar
e lik
ely
to r
emov
e tig
htne
ss i
n th
e su
pply
and
dem
and
bala
nce,
en
hanc
ing
the
supp
ly c
hain
. C
avea
ts s
tem
fro
m t
he i
ncre
asin
g in
stab
ility
in
th
e M
iddl
e E
ast
and
the
rise
of
na
tiona
l oi
l co
mpa
nies
(N
OC
s) t
hat
pres
ently
dom
inat
e th
e w
orld
sup
ply
chai
n in
rec
ent y
ears
.4
3 T
he e
xpla
nato
ry te
xt o
n th
e da
ta d
epic
ted
in th
e fi
gure
s on
pag
e 6
is b
ased
on
IE
A m
ater
ial r
elay
ed to
the
JASO
N s
tudy
team
by
S. K
ooni
n [B
P].
4 T
he n
atio
naliz
atio
n of
Pet
róle
os d
e V
enez
euel
a (P
DV
SA)
unde
r H
ugo
Cha
vez
and
the
repl
acem
ent
of l
ocal
and
for
eign
pro
fess
iona
ls t
han
ran
it re
port
edly
re
sulte
d in
co
nsid
erab
le
dam
age
to
the
high
-mai
nten
ance
V
enez
uela
n oi
l fi
elds
, pe
rhap
s pe
rman
ently
re
mov
ing
as
muc
h as
0.
4 M
bbl/d
ay f
rom
the
wor
ld p
rodu
ctio
n (E
cono
mis
t, 12
Aug
06).
8
9
The
wor
ld c
urre
ntly
con
sum
es 8
5 M
bbl (
Mbb
l = 1
06 bbl
) of
oil
per
day.
5 T
he
Inte
rnat
iona
l E
nerg
y A
genc
y (I
EA
) W
orld
E
nerg
y O
utlo
ok (
WE
O)
proj
ectio
ns,
assu
min
g a
reas
onab
le
infl
ator
for
the
fut
ure
that
ris
es t
o a
wor
ld-w
ide
dem
and
of
100
Mbb
l/day
of
oil
aver
aged
ove
r th
e ne
xt 2
5 ye
ars,
pro
ject
a
dem
and
for
the
next
25
year
s of
ano
ther
~1
Tbb
l of
oil:
Hen
ce,
as m
uch
oil
will
be
need
ed i
n th
e ne
xt 2
5-30
yea
rs a
s ha
s be
en
prod
uced
cum
ulat
ivel
y to
dat
e ov
er t
he l
ast
150
year
s.
Such
gr
owth
ca
n no
t be
su
stai
ned
inde
fini
tely
an
d pr
ojec
tions
be
yond
a 2
5-ye
ar s
pan
mus
t be
rega
rded
as
spec
ulat
ive.
The
WE
O d
ata
depi
cted
on
page
6 i
ndic
ate
that
oil
dem
and
for
the
next
25
year
s ca
n be
met
at
a 20
04 p
rodu
ctio
n co
st u
nder
$3
0/bb
l. T
hese
dat
a al
so i
ndic
ate
that
a s
imil
ar d
eman
d ca
n be
m
et f
or a
n ad
ditio
nal
25 y
ears
, w
ith t
he a
dditi
onal
cav
eat
that
ex
trap
olat
ions
to 5
0 ye
ars
henc
e ar
e of
que
stio
nabl
e va
lue.
Not
ewor
thy
is t
hat
wor
ld-m
arke
t cr
ude-
oil
pric
es a
re c
urre
ntly
m
uch
high
er t
han
crud
e oi
l pr
oduc
tion
cost
s.
Thi
s re
flec
ts a
pr
ice
prem
ium
com
man
ded
by a
num
ber
of f
acto
rs,
incl
udin
g pr
ofit
that
can
be
sust
aine
d by
the
pre
sent
sup
ply-
dem
and
bala
nce
and
the
limite
d cu
rren
t su
pply
m
argi
nal
capa
city
re
lativ
e to
dem
and,
geo
polit
ical
-ris
k co
nsid
erat
ions
suc
h as
the
pr
esen
t si
tuat
ion
in t
he M
iddl
e E
ast
and
Ven
ezue
la,
and
a nu
mbe
r of
oth
er f
acto
rs.
For
ref
eren
ce,
acco
rdin
g to
the
U.S
. E
nerg
y In
form
atio
n A
genc
y (E
IA),
a $
30/b
bl p
rodu
ctio
n co
st
in a
glo
bal
com
mod
ity s
uch
as c
rude
oil
shou
ld,
in t
he l
ong
term
, sho
uld
resu
lt in
cru
de p
rice
s in
the
rang
e of
$40
-45/
bbl.
5 W
orld
pri
mar
y en
ergy
con
sum
ptio
n in
crea
sed
by 2
.7%
in 2
005.
Coa
l was
th
e w
orld
’s f
aste
st-g
row
ing
fuel
, in
crea
sing
by
5% i
n 20
05,
with
Chi
na
acco
untin
g fo
r 80
% o
f gl
obal
gro
wth
. B
P S
tati
stic
al R
evie
w o
f W
orld
E
nerg
y (J
anua
ry 2
006)
.
Coa
l an
d na
tura
l ga
s re
sour
ces
are
not
incl
uded
in
this
gra
ph.
Hen
ce,
the
reso
urce
bas
e fo
r co
nver
sion
of
foss
il en
ergy
int
o liq
uid
fuel
s is
pot
entia
lly e
ven
larg
er t
han
show
n he
re.
Thi
s w
ill b
e di
scus
sed
in g
reat
er d
etai
l bel
ow.
Est
imat
ed U
.S. f
ossi
l re
sour
ces,
i.e
., oi
l, en
hanc
ed o
il re
cove
ry
(EO
R),
coa
l, sh
ale,
nat
ural
gas
(N
G),
etc
., am
ount
to
abou
t 2
Tbb
l, i.e
., ap
prox
imat
ely
260
year
s w
orth
of
reso
urce
s at
the
pr
esen
t co
nsum
ptio
n ra
te o
f 7.
5 B
bbl
of o
il pe
r ye
ar.
As
note
d la
ter,
how
ever
, the
con
vers
ion
of s
uch
reso
urce
s to
liq
uid
fuel
s re
quir
es
othe
r re
sour
ces,
su
ch
as
ener
gy6
and
cons
ider
able
am
ount
s of
cle
an w
ater
, an
d th
e pr
oduc
tion
of,
in s
ome
case
s,
cons
ider
able
gre
en-h
ouse
gas
(G
HG
) em
issi
ons.
B
. D
omes
tic
foss
il en
ergy
per
spec
tive
As
depi
cted
in
the
figu
re o
n pa
ge 8
, th
e U
.S.
cons
umes
abo
ut
one
quar
ter
of t
he w
orld
’s o
il pr
oduc
tion.
O
ne c
an s
ee t
he
effe
cts
of H
urri
cane
Kat
rina
as
the
smal
l re
duct
ion
in U
.S.
supp
ly d
urin
g th
e su
mm
er o
f 20
05.
The
dat
a w
ere
com
pile
d by
JA
SON
cor
resp
ondi
ng t
o nu
mbe
rs p
ublis
hed
for
annu
al t
otal
s pr
ior
to 2
005,
and
qua
rter
ly t
here
afte
r by
the
EIA
. T
he s
light
de
viat
ion
betw
een
the
wor
ld p
rodu
ctio
n an
d co
nsum
ptio
n lin
es
in t
he g
raph
occ
urs
beca
use
a si
gnif
ican
t fr
actio
n of
oil
is i
n tr
ansi
t an
d st
orag
e at
any
one
tim
e.
The
re a
re a
lso
seas
onal
ad
just
men
ts.
6
Typ
ical
ly,
conv
ersi
on
ener
gy
requ
irem
ents
ar
e m
et
by
burn
ing
the
feed
stoc
k, e
.g.,
natu
ral
gas,
or
coal
, al
beit
with
an
atte
ndan
t de
crea
se i
n en
ergy
eff
icie
ncy
rela
tive
to s
tart
ing
with
cru
de o
il as
a s
ourc
e, f
or
exam
ple,
and
an
incr
ease
d G
HG
pro
duct
ion
burd
en.
Suc
h is
sues
will
be
asse
ssed
and
dis
cuss
ed la
ter.
10
11
As
alre
ady
note
d, p
rese
nt o
il pr
ices
are
sig
nifi
cant
ly h
ighe
r th
an th
e co
st o
f pr
oduc
tion,
pri
mar
ily b
ecau
se d
eman
d is
ahe
ad
of s
uppl
y.
Thi
s is
exa
cerb
ated
by
inst
abili
ty i
n th
e pa
rts
of t
he
wor
ld c
ontr
ibut
ing
to o
il pr
oduc
tion.
T
he m
arke
t pr
ice
of o
il,
defi
ned
by th
e fu
ture
s m
arke
t, bu
ilds
into
it a
pre
miu
m h
edgi
ng
agai
nst
unan
ticip
ated
re
duct
ion
in
prod
uctio
n fr
om
such
po
litic
al i
nsta
bilit
ies
and
othe
r fa
ctor
s.
With
oil
dem
and
clos
e to
sup
ply,
sm
all
redu
ctio
ns i
n su
pply
, w
heth
er b
y ac
cide
nt,
wea
ther
, em
barg
o, o
r w
ar, d
ram
atic
ally
aff
ect o
il m
arke
ts.
The
spr
ead
betw
een
the
pric
e of
cru
de a
nd r
efin
ed p
rodu
cts
in
abso
lute
te
rms
is
also
ri
sing
fo
r th
ree
reas
ons.
Ref
inin
g ca
paci
ty i
s pr
esen
tly c
lose
r to
dem
and.
W
hile
U.S
. re
fine
ry
capa
city
an
d ef
fici
ency
ha
ve
incr
ease
d in
th
e la
st
quar
ter
cent
ury,
no
new
U.S
. re
fine
ries
hav
e be
en b
uilt
in t
he l
ast
30
year
s.
Seco
nd,
the
incr
easi
ng m
ix i
n hi
gh-s
ulfu
r Sa
udi
oil
incr
ease
s re
fini
ng c
osts
if
sulf
ur c
onte
nt i
s to
be
cont
rolle
d.
Fina
lly, p
art o
f th
e sp
read
is s
cale
d by
the
pric
e of
oil
itsel
f.
At
pres
ent,
the
U.S
. us
es 7
.5 B
bbl/y
ear
of c
rude
oil.
Gro
ss
impo
rts
cove
r 63
% o
f U
.S.
cons
umpt
ion.
T
his
is c
ompa
rabl
e (±
10%
) to
the
fra
ctio
n of
im
port
ed o
il fo
r E
urop
e an
d C
hina
. In
con
tras
t, Ja
pan
impo
rts
90%
of
its o
il.7
U.S
. con
sum
ptio
n is
7
The
sig
nifi
canc
e of
oil
impo
rts
in n
atio
nal
and
regi
onal
eco
nom
ies,
suc
h as
th
e E
.U.,
is
a st
rong
fu
nctio
n of
th
e co
rres
pond
ing
bala
nce
of
paym
ents
. T
he E
.U.
as a
who
le,
Chi
na,
and
Japa
n ar
e ne
t ex
port
ers
(pos
itive
bal
ance
of
paym
ents
) an
d, a
s a
cons
eque
nce,
the
mai
n lo
ng-t
erm
co
ncer
ns f
ocus
on
avai
labi
lity
of c
rude
-oil
supp
lies
and
tran
spor
tatio
n ro
utes
, and
not
on
thei
r ec
onom
ic c
onse
quen
ces.
T
his
is n
ot t
he c
ase
for
the
U.S
., as
dis
cuss
ed b
elow
. A
lso
note
wor
thy
is t
hat
Chi
na’s
bal
ance
of
paym
ents
is
actu
ally
neg
ativ
e w
ith r
espe
ct t
o th
e re
st o
f th
e w
orld
, bu
t
incr
easi
ng a
t a
rate
of
0.5-
1% p
er y
ear,
wit
h re
cent
inc
reas
es
clos
er t
o th
e lo
wer
bou
nd.
E.U
. co
nsum
ptio
n is
inc
reas
ing
at
half
the
rate
of
incr
ease
of
the
U.S
. con
sum
ptio
n, w
hile
Chi
na’s
is
incr
easi
ng 6
tim
es f
aste
r th
an th
e U
.S. c
onsu
mpt
ion.
The
pea
k in
U.S
. oi
l pr
oduc
tion,
gen
eral
ly d
enot
ed a
s “p
eak
U.S
. oil”
, has
oft
en b
een
inte
rpre
ted
to in
dica
te th
at th
e am
ount
of
oil
that
can
be
extr
acte
d fr
om U
.S.
soil
is i
n ir
reve
rsib
le
decl
ine.
H
owev
er,
the
part
icul
ar p
eak
is m
ore
dire
ctly
rel
ated
to
the
int
rodu
ctio
n at
the
tim
e of
ine
xpen
sive
for
eign
oil
(<
FY05
$ 4/
bbl
prod
uctio
n co
sts)
, mos
tly
from
Sau
di A
rabi
a, i
nto
the
wor
ld m
arke
t. R
ecen
t eco
nom
ic d
rive
rs f
avor
red
ucti
ons
of
dom
estic
pro
duct
ion,
with
for
eign
sou
rces
of
oil
avai
labl
e at
lo
wer
pr
ices
.
Des
pite
th
e on
goin
g de
plet
ion
of
the
U.S
. re
sour
ce,
dom
estic
pr
oduc
tion
is
prim
arily
dr
iven
by
ec
onom
ics
and
perh
aps
seco
ndar
ily b
y ge
olog
ical
con
stra
ints
.8 C
onve
rsel
y,
risi
ng
oil
(and
ot
her)
im
port
s,
unba
lanc
ed
by
com
men
sura
te i
ncre
ases
in
expo
rts,
tra
nsla
te i
nto
a ba
lanc
e-of
-pa
ymen
ts is
sue
for
the
U.S
.
Not
ewor
thy
is
the
2005
U
.S.
impo
rt
sour
ce
dist
ribu
tion
(pag
e iv
),
with
th
e re
mai
nder
of
th
e A
mer
ican
co
ntin
ent
cont
ribu
ting
51.1
%,
Afr
ica
19.1
%,
the
Mid
dle
Eas
t 18
%,
and
the
bala
nce
from
the
Nor
th S
ea a
nd R
ussi
a.
po
sitiv
e ov
eral
l, w
hen
the
larg
e an
d po
sitiv
e im
port
-exp
ort
bala
nce
with
re
spec
t to
the
U.S
. is
incl
uded
(FY
2004
dat
a).
8 T
hat
said
, it
is u
nlik
ely
that
fut
ure
U.S
. pr
oduc
tion
will
ris
e to
val
ues
high
er th
an th
e pa
st p
eak
befo
re th
e 19
80s.
12
13
The
gra
ph o
n pa
ge 1
0 al
so i
ndic
ates
the
dra
mat
ic r
educ
tion
in
dom
estic
con
sum
ptio
n in
the
ear
ly 1
980s
, in
resp
onse
to
stro
ng
pric
ing
sign
als
(cf.
fig
ure
on p
. 61)
. T
he d
eclin
e w
as i
n pa
rt
beca
use
of c
onse
rvat
ion
and
in p
art
beca
use
of t
he t
rans
ition
fr
om o
il-fi
red
to c
oal-
fire
d el
ectr
ic p
ower
pla
nts.
9 The
dat
a fr
om
the
1980
s al
so
dem
onst
rate
th
e ab
ility
to
re
duce
oi
l co
nsum
ptio
n in
res
pons
e to
suf
fici
ently
sev
ere
pric
e si
gnal
s on
oi
l, ev
en t
houg
h a
sim
ilar
sw
itch
from
con
sum
ptio
n of
oil
in
the
pow
er s
ecto
r is
no-
long
er a
vaila
ble.
N
otew
orth
y is
tha
t th
e re
spon
se t
o th
e ec
onom
ic i
mpe
tus
of t
he p
rice
hik
es r
equi
red
abou
t 5
year
s. A
lso
note
wor
thy
is t
hat,
at p
rese
nt,
even
in
the
face
of
high
ret
ail
gaso
line
pric
es, U
.S. o
il c
onsu
mpt
ion
is a
t a
reco
rd h
igh.
T
his
indi
cate
s ei
ther
tha
t th
e ca
paci
ty t
o re
duce
co
nsum
ptio
n w
as e
xhau
sted
larg
ely
by d
e-em
phas
is o
f cr
ude
in
the
elec
tric
-pow
er-p
rodu
ctio
n se
ctor
in
the
1980
’s, t
hat
curr
ent
pric
es a
re i
nsuf
fici
ently
hig
h to
spu
r si
gnif
ican
t co
nser
vatio
n ef
fort
s, o
r th
at t
he t
ime
requ
ired
to
resp
ond
to t
he p
rice
cha
nge
at t
his
time
is l
onge
r th
an h
as a
lrea
dy t
rans
pire
d.
How
ever
, pr
oduc
tion
of h
igh
fuel
-con
sum
ptio
n ve
hicl
es (
e.g.
, SU
Vs)
is in
de
clin
e, a
t pre
sent
. C
. D
oD f
ossi
l ene
rgy
pers
pect
ive
1.
U.S
. pro
duct
ion
and
DoD
con
sum
ptio
n
The
fi
gure
s on
pa
ges
10
and
14
indi
cate
th
at
the
U.S
. G
over
nmen
t co
nsum
es 1
.9%
of
the
oil
cons
umed
by
the
rest
of
the
coun
try.
Fu
rthe
rmor
e, t
he D
oD a
ccou
nts
for
93%
of
the
9
Thi
s tr
ansi
tion
occu
rred
with
an
atte
ndan
t in
crea
se i
n gr
een-
hous
e ga
s (G
HG
) em
issi
ons,
per
kW
h of
ele
ctri
cal
pow
er p
rodu
ced.
A
t pr
esen
t, al
mos
t no
oil-
fire
d el
ectr
ic p
ower
pla
nts
are
oper
ated
in th
e U
.S.
U.S
. Gov
ernm
ent c
onsu
mpt
ion.
Fo
r re
fere
nce,
DoD
con
sum
ed
0.36
Mbb
l/day
in F
Y05
, or
133
Mbb
l tha
t yea
r.
DoD
fu
el
use
both
in
th
e co
ntin
enta
l U
.S.
(CO
NU
S)
and
abro
ad (
out
of C
ON
US,
or,
OC
ON
US)
, as
rep
orte
d by
the
D
efen
se E
nerg
y Su
ppor
t C
ente
r (D
ESC
), i
s a
rela
tivel
y sm
all
frac
tion
of t
he t
otal
dom
estic
cur
rent
cru
de-o
il pr
oduc
tion
rat
e (c
f. f
igur
e on
p. 1
2).
The
ann
ual
DoD
cru
de o
il co
nsum
ptio
n ca
n be
cov
ered
by
the
tota
l an
nual
pro
duct
ion
of t
wo
Gul
f of
M
exic
o oi
l pl
atfo
rms
(Thu
nder
hors
e an
d A
tlant
is),
or
by a
sm
all
frac
tion
of C
alif
orni
a an
d A
lask
a pr
oduc
tion,
at
pres
ent.
Thu
nder
hors
e is
a
plat
form
th
at
cost
~$
3B,
size
d fo
r a
0.25
Mbb
l/day
pro
duct
ion,
and
whi
ch i
s pr
esen
tly p
rodu
cing
, ap
prox
imat
ely,
90
Mbb
l/yea
r.
If t
here
wer
e re
al s
uppl
y is
sues
fo
r th
e D
oD,
the
depa
rtm
ent
coul
d, i
n pr
inci
ple,
pur
chas
e a
Gul
f oi
l pl
atfo
rm f
or a
n as
sure
d su
pply
for
man
y ye
ars,
at
an
amor
tized
pro
duct
ion
cost
of
unde
r $3
0/bb
l, as
is
done
by
the
larg
e co
mm
erci
al o
il pr
oduc
tion
firm
s at
pre
sent
, ev
en t
houg
h th
at is
har
dly
advi
sabl
e.
In t
his
cont
ext,
the
tota
l de
ep w
ater
Gul
f of
Mex
ico
prod
uctio
n is
1.5
Mbb
l/day
. Pr
oduc
tion
from
the
Nor
th S
lope
of
Ala
ska
is,
appr
oxim
atel
y, 1
Mbb
l/day
. H
ence
, to
tal
DoD
nee
ds c
ould
be
prov
ided
fro
m a
por
tion
of t
he p
rodu
ctio
n of
jus
t on
e of
the
se
regi
ons
of
the
U.S
.
Thu
s,
even
th
ough
63
%
of
US
oil
cons
umpt
ion
is d
eriv
ed f
rom
im
port
s, i
t do
es n
ot f
ollo
w t
hat
a do
mes
tic-s
uppl
y su
pply
sho
rtag
e fo
r D
oD is
inev
itabl
e. I
n fa
ct,
pres
ent-
day
DoD
re
quir
emen
ts
are
rela
tivel
y m
odes
t w
hen
com
pare
d no
t onl
y to
the
pres
ent n
atio
nal-
cons
umpt
ion
rate
but
al
so w
hen
com
pare
d w
ith th
e pr
esen
t dom
estic
-pro
duct
ion
rate
.
14
15
We
note
tha
t th
ese
infe
renc
es a
ssum
e re
lativ
ely
stab
le D
oD
mis
sion
req
uire
men
ts,
e.g.
, m
issi
ons
no m
ore
dem
andi
ng o
f fo
ssil
fuel
s th
an t
he c
urre
nt I
raqi
con
flic
t. J
ASO
N h
as n
ot
anal
yzed
th
e co
nseq
uenc
es
on
foss
il-fu
el
avai
labi
lity
of
a fu
ture
, WW
II-s
cale
DoD
mis
sion
. Pr
esum
ably
, suc
h a
conf
lict
wou
ld
requ
ire
and
indu
ce
cons
ider
able
na
tiona
l sa
crif
ice,
in
clud
ing
civi
lian
rest
rict
ions
on
acce
ss t
o pe
trol
eum
pro
duct
s,
and
is n
ot c
onsi
dere
d as
par
t of
thi
s st
udy
and
repo
rt.
Furt
her,
th
e an
alys
es a
bove
als
o as
sum
e no
maj
or w
orld
-wid
e up
heav
als
that
cou
ld d
isru
pt e
ither
sup
plie
s fr
om, s
ay, t
he M
iddl
e E
ast
or
Ven
ezue
la,
or
mai
n cr
ude-
oil
or
refi
ned
oil-
prod
uct
tran
spor
tatio
n co
rrid
ors.
10 O
ther
than
to n
ote
that
suc
h sc
enar
ia
cann
ot b
e ex
clud
ed a
t th
is t
ime
and
to n
ote
the
sign
ific
ant
cons
eque
nces
on
the
DoD
and
the
nat
ion
they
wou
ld i
mpl
y,
they
wer
e no
t con
side
red
as p
art o
f th
e pr
esen
t JA
SON
stu
dy.
Inst
abili
ty i
n th
e pr
ice
of o
il pr
ovid
es a
n im
port
ant
budg
etar
y im
pact
of
foss
il-fu
el u
se o
n D
oD.
Whi
le p
rese
nt f
uel
cost
s re
pres
ent
a sm
all
part
of
the
over
all
DoD
bud
get,
at c
urre
nt
cons
umpt
ion
rate
s,
for
ever
y $1
0/bb
l ri
se
in
pric
e,
DoD
re
quir
es a
n ad
ditio
nal $
1.5B
in it
s an
nual
bud
get.
The
re a
re, i
n ge
nera
l, tw
o w
ays
to d
eal
with
thi
s is
sue.
O
ne i
s to
red
uce
DoD
dem
and,
whi
ch is
dis
cuss
ed b
elow
. T
he s
econ
d is
to
atte
mpt
to
beat
the
com
mer
cial
mar
ket
pric
e at
any
one
tim
e in
curr
ing
som
e m
arke
t ri
sk b
y en
teri
ng i
nto
long
-ter
m
cont
ract
s, o
r he
dgin
g ag
ains
t fu
ture
pri
ces
of c
rude
oil
on t
he
wor
ld m
arke
t.
10
The
rec
ent
tens
ions
and
dis
agre
emen
ts b
etw
een
Rus
sia
and
the
Ukr
aine
ov
er t
he R
ussi
an n
atur
al-g
as p
ipel
ine
over
Ukr
aine
had
an
imm
edia
te
impa
ct o
n th
e E
.U.’
s na
tura
l-ga
s su
pplie
s an
d ou
tlook
.
2.
DoD
dem
and
brea
kdow
n by
ser
vice
and
fuel
use
The
dem
and
for
petr
oleu
m i
n th
e D
oD b
y se
rvic
e an
d by
use
is
now
ass
esse
d. A
s de
pict
ed o
n pa
ge 1
4, th
e U
.S. g
over
nmen
t, at
pr
esen
t, ac
coun
ts f
or 1
.9%
of
the
tota
l oi
l co
nsum
ed b
y th
e co
untr
y.
DoD
con
sum
ptio
n re
pres
ents
93%
of
the
tota
l U
.S.
gove
rnm
ent
cons
umpt
ion.
W
ithin
DoD
, th
e U
.S.
Air
For
ce i
s th
e la
rges
t co
nsum
er o
f pe
trol
eum
pro
duct
s, i
ts 7
5 M
bbl/y
ear
amou
ntin
g to
57%
of
DoD
con
sum
ptio
n.
Seco
nd i
s th
e N
avy,
w
ith 3
3% o
f to
tal
DoD
con
sum
ptio
n, f
ollo
wed
by
the
Arm
y (9
%)
and
the
Mar
ines
( <
1%
).
The
se f
igur
es a
re s
kew
ed b
y th
e fa
ct t
hat
som
e pa
rt o
f th
e U
.S.
Air
For
ce’s
use
of
jet
fuel
is
cons
umed
mov
ing
the
Arm
y an
d su
pply
ing
the
Nav
y.
JASO
N w
as n
ot a
ble
to o
btai
n th
ese
num
bers
and
we
reco
mm
end
that
suc
h ac
coun
ting
shou
ld b
e im
plem
ente
d to
hel
p pr
ovid
e th
e ba
sis
for
a us
eful
bud
geta
ry
plan
ning
tool
.
With
in t
he A
ir F
orce
, th
e la
rges
t sh
are
of f
uel
(54.
2%)
is
cons
umed
by
tank
ers
and
tran
spor
ts.
Fig
hter
s ac
coun
t fo
r 30
.1%
of
the
fuel
, bo
mbe
rs f
or 7
.1%
, an
d tr
aine
rs f
or 4
.2%
. M
oder
n co
mpu
ter-
base
d sy
stem
s ca
n he
lp d
ecre
ase
the
latte
r fu
rthe
r.
For
refe
renc
e, J
P-8,
the
pri
mar
y fu
el u
sed
by t
he A
ir F
orce
, co
st $
0.91
/gal
in
FY04
but
ros
e to
$2.
58/g
al i
n FY
06,
i.e.,
a fa
ctor
of
over
2.8
in ju
st tw
o ye
ars.
11
11
Com
mer
cial
avi
atio
n ha
s be
en f
aced
with
sim
ilar
fuel
pri
ce i
ncre
ases
, as
as
sess
ed a
nd d
iscu
ssed
bel
ow.
16
17
The
Def
ense
Ene
rgy
Supp
ort
Cen
ter
(DE
SC)
is r
espo
nsib
le f
or
the
proc
urem
ent,
tran
spor
tatio
n,
owne
rshi
p,
acco
unta
bilit
y,
budg
etin
g, q
ualit
y as
sura
nce,
and
qua
lity
surv
eilla
nce
of a
ll pe
trol
eum
pr
oduc
ts
used
by
th
e D
oD.
In
FY
05,
DE
SC
di
stri
bute
d 13
3 M
bbl o
il.
Acc
ordi
ng t
o da
ta p
rovi
ded
by D
ESC
and
ava
ilabl
e on
the
ir
Web
site
, m
obili
ty f
uels
rep
rese
nt t
he p
repo
nder
ant
frac
tion
of
DoD
fue
l us
e.
The
se m
obili
ty f
uels
are
dom
inat
ed b
y di
esel
fu
el, a
nd J
P-5
and
JP-8
. T
he la
tter
repr
esen
ts t
he la
rges
t sin
gle
com
pone
nt,
by
cate
gory
, of
fu
el
supp
lied.
JP
-5
is
a N
avy
ship
boar
d je
t fu
el w
ith a
hig
her
flas
h po
int
tem
pera
ture
tha
n JP
-8.
The
fla
sh t
empe
ratu
re,
Tfl
ash,
for
JP-
5 is
+60
°C (
140°
F),
whe
reas
Tfl
ash
for
JP-8
is
+38
°C (
100°
F).
Alth
ough
JP-
5 co
sts
slig
htly
mor
e th
an J
P-8,
it is
use
d on
shi
ps f
or s
afet
y re
ason
s.
JASO
N n
otes
that
, exc
ludi
ng o
il pu
rcha
ses/
deliv
erie
s on
beh
alf
of T
F-R
IO,12
DoD
fue
l co
nsum
ptio
n de
crea
sed
cont
inuo
usly
in
the
FY03
-05
peri
od.
Furt
her
decr
ease
s in
fue
l co
nsum
ptio
n by
the
U.S
. A
ir F
orce
, th
e la
rges
t co
nsum
er,
are
also
ant
icip
ated
, as
the
num
ber
of
airc
raft
in
the
U.S
. Air
For
ce i
nven
tory
dec
reas
es i
n th
e fu
ture
, as
dis
cuss
ed b
elow
.
12 T
F-R
IO i
s th
e 20
04 T
ask
Forc
e -
Res
tore
Ira
qi O
il th
at p
rovi
ded
oil
to
Iraq
.
18
19
Jet A
and
Jet
A-1
, th
e do
min
ant
com
mer
cial
avi
atio
n fu
els,
di
ffer
onl
y by
thei
r re
spec
tive
free
zing
poi
nts,
whi
ch a
re −
40°C
fo
r Je
t A
and
−47
°C f
or J
et A
-1,
and
in t
heir
fla
sh p
oint
s, a
s di
scus
sed
abov
e.
Whi
le t
here
are
min
or d
iffe
renc
es i
n an
d su
bsta
ntia
l ov
erla
p be
twee
n w
orld
-wid
e co
mm
erci
al a
viat
ion
fuel
del
iver
y sp
ecif
icat
ions
,13 m
ost
com
mer
cial
avi
atio
n fu
els
toda
y m
eet t
he J
et A
-1 s
peci
fica
tion.
One
can
obt
ain
JP-8
and
JP-
8 +
100
from
Jet
A a
nd J
et A
-1
thro
ugh
the
use
of a
dditi
ves.
A
ddin
g a
fuel
sys
tem
ici
ng
inhi
bito
r, a
cor
rosi
on i
nhib
itor/
lubr
icity
im
prov
er,
and
an a
nti-
stat
ic a
dditi
ve t
o Je
t A
-1,
yiel
ds t
he m
ilita
ry J
P-8.
Fu
rthe
r ad
ding
a d
ispe
rsan
t, an
ant
i-ox
idan
t, an
d a
met
al d
eact
ivat
or t
o JP
-8 y
ield
s JP
-8 +
100,
whi
ch a
dds
an a
dditi
onal
100
°F t
o th
e op
erat
iona
l ra
nge
of J
P-8.
In
tot
al,
thes
e ad
ditiv
es c
ost
at
pres
ent,
appr
oxim
atel
y, $
0.05
per
gal
lon
of f
uel.
Oil
refi
neri
es
tend
to
re
alig
n th
eir
dist
ribu
tion
of
refi
ned
prod
ucts
eve
ry f
ew d
ays.
If
the
DoD
has
an
unus
ually
lar
ge
need
for
JP-
8, D
oD c
an i
nduc
e th
e re
fine
ries
to
prod
uce
mor
e JP
-8 f
rom
the
ir c
omm
erci
al a
viat
ion
fuel
str
eam
at
a no
min
al
incr
ease
d co
st o
f, a
ppro
xim
atel
y, $
0.05
/gal
.
If D
oD i
s op
erat
ing
in a
par
t of
the
wor
ld w
here
JP-
8 is
un
avai
labl
e, i
t co
uld
prod
uce
JP-8
for
its
use
by
the
addi
tion
of
13
By
way
of
exam
ple,
a q
uest
ion
that
aro
se i
n th
e in
vest
igat
ion
of t
he
TW
A-8
00 a
ccid
ent o
n 17
Jul
y 19
96 is
whe
ther
the
(rem
aini
ng)
fuel
in th
e ai
rcra
ft’s
cen
tral
tan
k w
as (
som
ewha
t) m
ore
vola
tile
than
usu
al b
ecau
se
the
airc
raft
had
bee
n fu
eled
in
Ath
ens,
Gre
ece,
for
the
ret
urn
trip
to
New
Y
ork,
and
not
ref
uele
d in
New
Yor
k fo
r th
e tr
ip b
ack,
ow
ing
to th
e lig
hter
lo
ad f
or t
he f
light
out
. As
a co
nseq
uenc
e, v
apor
s in
the
cent
ral
tank
whe
n th
e ai
rcra
ft e
xplo
ded
wer
e fr
om f
uel t
hat h
ad b
een
obta
ined
in A
then
s.
the
indi
cate
d ad
ditiv
es
to
Jet
A-1
, w
hich
is
ge
neri
cally
av
aila
ble
acro
ss m
uch
of t
he w
orld
, ra
ther
tha
n tr
ansp
ort
it fr
om
CO
NU
S.
JA
SON
is
un
der
the
impr
essi
on
that
th
is
poss
ibili
ty h
as n
ot b
een
asse
ssed
and
is
not
bein
g ex
ploi
ted
at
this
tim
e.
20
21
22
23
As
note
d ab
ove,
the
cos
t of
JP-
8 ha
s in
crea
sed
by a
fac
tor
of
2.8
sinc
e 20
04.
T
his
incr
ease
tr
ansl
ates
in
to
a $4
B/y
r ad
ditio
nal
cost
for
the
U.S
. Air
For
ce.
At
pres
ent
cons
umpt
ion
rate
s, e
very
$10
/bbl
inc
reas
e in
pri
ce d
rive
s up
U.S
. A
ir F
orce
fu
el c
osts
by
~ $0
.6B
/yr.
Show
n on
pa
ge
21
is
the
DE
SC
sale
s di
stri
butio
n.
A
s in
dica
ted,
del
iver
ies
to f
orei
gn g
over
nmen
ts in
200
4, a
s w
ell a
s to
for
eign
gov
ernm
ents
and
com
mer
cial
rec
ipie
nts
(tog
ethe
r) in
20
05 a
re s
igni
fica
nt.
JA
SON
cou
ld n
ot a
scer
tain
whe
ther
the
T
F-R
IO
deliv
erie
s (c
f.
page
16
) w
ere
coun
ted
as
2004
de
liver
ies
to f
orei
gn g
over
nmen
ts,
or w
heth
er t
he n
ear-
mat
ch
of th
e to
tal o
f fo
reig
n-go
vern
men
t and
com
mer
cial
del
iver
ies
in
2005
w
ith
deliv
erie
s to
fo
reig
n go
vern
men
ts
in
2004
is
co
inci
dent
al.
Not
ewor
thy
also
in
the
figu
re o
n pa
ge 2
1 is
the
lar
ge i
ncre
ase
in t
he c
ost
of U
.S.
Air
For
ce d
eliv
erie
s in
200
5 ov
er t
hose
in
2004
.
As
show
n on
pag
e 22
, de
spite
som
e re
duct
ion
in D
oD f
uel
cons
umpt
ion,
th
e pr
ice
DoD
pa
id
for
fuel
ha
s in
crea
sed
dram
atic
ally
fro
m F
Y04
($5
.9B
) to
FY
05 (
$8.3
B).
D
oD f
uel
purc
hase
s in
FY
06 a
re e
xpec
ted
to b
e hi
gher
than
$12
B.
The
fig
ure
on p
age
22 a
lso
indi
cate
s th
e la
rge
exte
nt t
o w
hich
m
obili
ty f
uels
are
res
pons
ible
for
the
pre
dom
inan
t fr
actio
n of
D
oD f
uel c
onsu
mpt
ion,
as
note
d pr
evio
usly
.
24
25
It i
s he
lpfu
l to
put
the
U.S
. Air
For
ce j
et f
uel
cons
umpt
ion
into
th
e co
ntex
t of
th
e do
mes
tic
cons
umpt
ion
of
com
mer
cial
av
iatio
n fu
els.
In
ter
ms
of f
uel,
the
Air
For
ce w
ith $
4.6B
in
fuel
pur
chas
es i
n 20
05,
is a
som
ewha
t la
rger
fue
l co
nsum
er
than
, bu
t cl
ose
to,
the
larg
est
com
mer
cial
U
.S.
airl
ine
(Am
eric
an).
A
s su
ch,
the
DoD
and
the
U.S
. A
ir F
orce
are
not
m
arke
t dr
iver
s fo
r av
iatio
n fu
els,
or
an
y ot
her
petr
oleu
m
prod
uct,
for
that
mat
ter.
Com
mer
cial
av
iatio
n is
ex
pend
ing
cons
ider
able
ef
fort
s to
de
crea
se i
ts f
uel
use.
A
t th
is t
ime,
com
mer
cial
avi
atio
n fu
el
cost
s al
mos
t mat
ch la
bor
cost
s, a
s in
dica
ted
in th
e fi
gure
bel
ow
that
plo
ts u
nit
oper
atin
g co
sts
(¢ p
er a
vaila
ble
seat
-mile
) fr
om
1990
thr
ough
the
fou
rth
quar
ter
of 2
005.
N
ote
that
the
tim
e un
its f
or 2
005
are
in q
uart
ers,
vs.
yea
rs f
or t
ime
prio
r to
200
5,
indi
catin
g th
e ve
ry r
apid
rec
ent i
ncre
ase
in f
uel-
cost
bur
dens
to
U.S
. com
mer
cial
air
lines
.
26
27
In
wha
t ca
n on
ly
be
char
acte
rize
d as
an
ag
gres
sive
bu
t ob
viou
sly
corr
ect
call,
Sou
thw
est
Air
lines
, so
me
time
ago,
he
dged
75%
of
thei
r fu
el p
urch
ases
at
$35/
bbl
in l
ong-
term
co
ntra
cts.
In
the
com
mer
cial
-avi
atio
n in
dust
ry,
whi
ch
is
char
acte
rize
d by
ver
y sm
all
prof
it m
argi
ns a
nd w
hose
pro
fits
ar
e a
cons
eque
nce
of v
ery
high
gro
ss s
ales
, lo
wer
fue
l co
sts
rela
tive
to c
ompe
titor
s ca
n pr
oduc
e la
rge
diff
eren
ces.
Pro
fits
be
ing
the
perc
enta
ge-w
ise
smal
l di
ffer
ence
of
larg
e nu
mbe
rs,
smal
l va
riat
ions
in
un
anti
cipa
ted
cost
s or
ev
en
min
or
acco
untin
g er
rors
tra
nsla
te i
nto
the
diff
eren
ce b
etw
een
prof
it an
d (p
oten
tially
lar
ge)
loss
es.
In t
he u
nreg
ulat
ed c
omm
erci
al
avia
tion
indu
stry
, co
mpe
titor
s ar
e lim
ited
in t
heir
abi
lity
to
rais
e pr
ices
uni
late
rally
, fo
r fe
ar o
f si
gnif
ican
t lo
ss i
n m
arke
t sh
are.
Par
tly a
s a
resu
lt, S
outh
wes
t A
irlin
es i
s qu
ite p
rofi
tabl
e,
at p
rese
nt, c
erta
inly
rel
ativ
e to
the
mai
n bo
dy o
f th
e re
st o
f th
e co
mm
erci
al a
irlin
e in
dust
ry.
Thi
s m
etho
d il
lust
rate
s on
e ap
proa
ch t
o en
suri
ng s
tabi
lity
of
fuel
pr
icin
g:
ente
ring
in
to
long
-ter
m
cont
ract
s as
a
hedg
e ag
ains
t si
gnif
ican
t fu
ture
pri
ce i
ncre
ases
and
thu
s al
low
ing
for
budg
etar
y pl
anni
ng f
or a
per
iod
of y
ears
int
o th
e fu
ture
. T
he
pote
ntia
l dow
nsid
e, o
f co
urse
, is
the
high
er c
osts
in th
e ev
ent o
f fu
ture
de
crea
ses
in
crud
e-oi
l pr
ices
.
Such
ef
fect
s ca
n be
m
itiga
ted
by h
edgi
ng f
or o
nly
a fr
actio
n of
fut
ure
antic
ipat
ed
oil n
eeds
, as
the
airl
ines
list
ed o
n pa
ge 2
6 ha
ve d
one.
28
29
3.
Reg
ulat
ory
fact
ors
affe
ctin
g D
oD f
uel
use,
pla
nnin
g, a
nd
poli
cies
D
oD l
ives
in
a co
mpl
ex a
nd c
hang
ing
regu
lato
ry e
nvir
onm
ent.
A
dditi
onal
ly,
mos
t of
th
e D
oD
fuel
is
co
nsum
ed
in
the
cont
inen
tal
U.S
. C
ongr
ess
has
man
date
d th
at m
ost
of t
his
fuel
m
ust
mee
t th
e 15
ppm
sul
fur
regu
latio
n in
the
fut
ure.
JP
-8
does
not
mee
t th
is s
peci
fica
tion.
N
ote
that
exc
eptio
ns a
re
prov
ided
for
gro
und
com
bat
vehi
cles
, e.
g.,
Bra
dley
, A
bram
s,
and
Stry
ker
vehi
cles
.
A m
yria
d of
oth
er r
egul
atio
ns a
nd d
irec
tives
are
man
date
d by
C
ongr
ess.
Fo
r in
stan
ce,
as t
he s
lide
indi
cate
s, D
oD h
as b
een
dire
cted
to d
evel
op a
str
ateg
y to
use
fue
l pro
duce
d, in
who
le o
r in
par
t, fr
om c
oal,
oil s
hale
, and
tar
sand
s an
d to
dev
elop
a p
lan
for
coal
-to-
liqui
d fu
el p
rodu
ctio
n an
d co
nsum
ptio
n.
The
tra
de-
offs
be
twee
n ob
tain
ing
liqui
d fu
el
from
co
al
rela
tive
to
biom
ass,
nat
ural
gas
, m
unic
ipal
sol
id w
aste
, or
oth
er s
ourc
es
are
disc
usse
d in
som
e de
pth
and
in r
espo
nse
to t
he s
tudy
ch
arge
, in
a la
ter
sect
ion
of th
is r
epor
t.
DoD
mus
t liv
e w
ithin
the
se C
ongr
essi
onal
, typ
ical
ly u
nfun
ded,
m
anda
tes
and
othe
r di
rect
ives
. T
o th
e ex
tent
th
at
it ha
s in
flue
nce
over
the
m,
DoD
sho
uld
atte
mpt
to
ensu
re t
hat
the
mos
t co
st-e
ffec
tive
mea
ns a
re e
ncou
rage
d an
d im
plem
ente
d in
ea
ch c
ase
in o
btai
ning
the
fue
l it
need
s to
sup
port
its
mis
sion
s ef
fect
ivel
y.
30
31
4.
Dri
vers
to m
inim
ize
DoD
fuel
use
Bar
ring
unf
ores
een
uphe
aval
s an
d if
pri
ce i
s im
port
ant
but
not
a de
cisi
on d
rive
r, w
hy s
houl
d th
e D
oD r
educ
e fu
el u
se?
As
disc
usse
d be
low
, th
ere
are
com
pell
ing
reas
ons
for
the
DoD
to
redu
ce f
uel
cons
umpt
ion,
for
whi
ch t
he d
rive
rs a
re:
pote
ntia
l fu
ture
un
cert
aint
ies
over
th
e ne
xt
25
year
s an
d be
yond
, lo
gist
ics,
sup
ply
cost
s, a
nd o
ther
rel
ated
con
side
ratio
ns.
In
part
icul
ar,
deliv
ery
of f
uel
is c
ostly
not
onl
y in
ter
ms
of f
uel-
acqu
isiti
on d
olla
rs, b
ut a
lso
in in
fras
truc
ture
and
live
s.
Fuel
del
iver
y co
sts
are
acco
mpa
nied
by
larg
e m
ultip
liers
. A
s ca
n be
ap
prec
iate
d vi
a va
rian
ts
of
the
rock
et
or
Bre
guet
eq
uatio
ns,
it ca
n re
quir
e a
lot
of f
uel
to d
eliv
er f
uel.
Fue
l de
liver
ed
is
the
payl
oad
of
the
fuel
-del
iver
y ve
hicl
e.
Unf
ortu
nate
ly, l
ittle
qua
ntita
tive
info
rmat
ion
is a
vaila
ble
on th
e m
ultip
liers
tha
t pe
rvad
e th
e lo
gist
ics
chai
n fo
r re
pres
enta
tive
scen
ario
s of
m
issi
ons.
To
wit,
ho
w
muc
h fu
el
mus
t be
de
liver
ed a
t the
rea
r to
sup
ply
a ga
llon
of f
uel t
o th
e fr
ont?
As
part
of
this
stu
dy, J
ASO
N a
ttem
pted
to a
naly
ze w
hat i
t cos
ts
to d
eliv
er f
uel a
ir-t
o-ai
r. D
etai
ls o
f th
e an
alys
is a
re p
rovi
ded
in
App
endi
x II
. T
he e
stim
ated
FY
05 c
ost
is $
20-2
5/ga
l. T
his
incl
udes
the
cos
t of
the
fue
l, w
hich
rep
rese
nts
the
smal
lest
fr
actio
n, t
he c
ost
of o
pera
tions
and
mai
nten
ance
(O
&M
), a
nd
the
acqu
isiti
on c
ost o
f th
e K
C-1
35 ta
nker
air
craf
t (FY
98-$
40M
, ea
ch,
acqu
isiti
on c
ost,
amor
tized
ove
r a
40 y
ear
lifet
ime
of t
he
airc
raft
, ad
just
ed f
or i
nfla
tion
to F
Y05
dol
lars
) an
d in
ter
ms
of
gallo
ns d
eliv
ered
in a
ir-t
o-ai
r re
fuel
ing.
Thi
s an
alys
is d
emon
stra
tes
that
the
cos
t of
fue
l is
not
the
de
cisi
on
driv
er;
rath
er,
the
prim
ary
cost
is
O
&M
.
For
refe
renc
e, in
200
5, o
nly
6.5%
(3.
9 M
bbl)
of
U.S
. Air
For
ce f
uel
was
del
iver
ed i
n th
e ai
r. T
he J
ASO
N e
stim
ate
is a
lso
in a
ccor
d w
ith t
he 2
001
DSB
est
imat
e, e
ven
thou
gh c
apita
l co
sts
for
the
tank
er f
leet
wer
e no
t con
side
red
in th
at a
naly
sis.
14
JASO
N w
as a
dvis
ed t
hat
the
cost
of
deliv
erin
g A
rmy
fuel
to
the
fron
t lin
e ca
n be
in
the
rang
e of
$10
0-60
0/ga
l. T
he l
arge
co
st r
ange
dep
ends
on
“fro
nt l
ine”
to
“bac
k lin
e” s
epar
atio
n in
di
stan
ce, t
erra
in, d
efen
se a
nd o
ther
logi
stic
s re
quir
emen
ts, e
tc.
A l
arge
fra
ctio
n of
inf
rast
ruct
ure
cost
s an
d vu
lner
abili
ties
scal
e w
ith t
he f
uel
volu
me
that
mus
t be
del
iver
ed.
One
mus
t al
so
cons
ider
the
cos
t in
liv
es o
f de
liver
ing
fuel
due
to
rece
nt
chan
ges
in m
ilita
ry d
octr
ine.
The
pre
sent
log
istic
sup
ply
chai
n w
as d
esig
ned
at a
tim
e w
hen
“beh
ind
the
fron
t lin
es”
deno
ted
mor
e-or
-les
s sa
fe te
rrai
n.
Thi
s is
no
long
er tr
ue.
Furt
her,
fue
l-su
pply
veh
icle
s ar
e no
t ar
mor
ed a
nd, a
s a
cons
eque
nce,
pre
sent
a
vuln
erab
le t
arge
t an
d a
cost
ly l
iabi
lity
in t
erm
s of
liv
es a
nd
trea
sure
for
U.S
. for
ces.
We
conc
lude
tha
t th
e gr
eate
st d
rive
r fo
r re
duci
ng f
uel
use
lies
not
in t
he r
educ
tion
of t
he d
irec
t co
st o
f th
e fu
el i
tsel
f, b
ut i
n th
e re
duct
ion
of t
he a
ttend
ant
indi
rect
cos
ts o
f lo
gist
ics
to
supp
ly t
he f
uel,
the
cost
of
the
fuel
req
uire
d to
del
iver
the
fue
l ne
eded
, as
wel
l as
the
enh
ance
men
ts i
n ta
ctic
s th
at w
ould
ac
com
pany
in
crea
sed
vehi
cula
r ra
nge,
if
fu
el
cons
umpt
ion
wer
e to
be
decr
ease
d on
a g
iven
type
of
vehi
cle.
14 D
efen
se S
cien
ce B
oard
Tas
k Fo
rce
on I
mpr
ovin
g Fu
el E
ffic
ienc
y of
W
eapo
ns P
latf
orm
s (J
anua
ry 2
001)
Mor
e ca
pabl
e w
arfig
htin
g th
roug
h re
duce
d fu
el b
urde
n.
32
33
V.
Tec
hn
olo
gy
op
tio
ns
for
the
red
uct
ion
o
f D
oD
fo
ssil
fuel
use
G
iven
tha
t m
ost
of D
oD f
ossi
l fu
el u
se i
s re
late
d to
mob
ility
an
d gi
ven
the
com
pelli
ng r
atio
nale
for
red
ucin
g fo
ssil
fuel
use
, va
riou
s ve
hicl
e te
chno
logy
op
tions
ar
e no
w
eval
uate
d th
at
wou
ld
enab
le
fuel
-use
re
duct
ions
. T
echn
olog
y op
tions
ev
alua
ted
incl
ude
hybr
id d
iese
l-el
ectr
ic v
ehic
les,
all-
elec
tric
ve
hicl
es,
fuel
-cel
l ve
hicl
es,
stru
ctur
al-w
eigh
t re
duct
ion
and
light
-arm
ored
ve
hicl
es,
com
pari
sons
be
twee
n m
anne
d an
d un
man
ned
vehi
cles
, and
veh
icle
mix
.
In
a su
bseq
uent
se
ctio
n,
othe
r ge
neri
c ap
proa
ches
ar
e ex
amin
ed, i
.e.,
repl
acin
g D
oD f
uel
cons
umpt
ion
from
100
% o
f fu
els
deri
ved
from
cru
de o
il to
inc
lude
fue
ls d
eriv
ed f
rom
a
dive
rsity
of
so
urce
s,
incl
udin
g m
ater
ial
cont
ribu
tions
fr
om
alte
rnat
e fu
els
such
as
gas-
to-l
iqui
ds,
coal
-to-
liqui
ds,
biof
uels
, an
d/or
oth
er s
uppl
y-si
de f
uel t
echn
olog
ies.
A
. M
odif
icat
ion
of p
atte
rns
of u
se o
f D
oD p
latf
orm
s
Ove
rall
fuel
con
sum
ptio
n is
str
ongl
y de
pend
ent
on t
he p
atte
rns
of u
se o
f ve
hicl
es, w
hich
inc
lude
veh
icle
mix
, the
tot
al n
umbe
r of
en
gine
-hou
rs
per
day,
m
obili
ty
vs.
idlin
g/ho
tel-
pow
er
cons
umpt
ion
whe
n st
oppe
d, e
tc.
App
aren
tly,
the
Arm
y do
es
not
have
su
ffic
ient
da
ta
on
this
su
bjec
t to
fa
cilit
ate
a qu
antit
ativ
e ev
alua
tion
of t
he v
ario
us o
ptio
ns.
We
ther
efor
e st
rong
ly
reco
mm
end,
as
a
criti
cal
firs
t st
ep
to
achi
evin
g im
prov
ed
fuel
ef
fici
ency
, th
at
the
Arm
y in
stal
l re
lativ
ely
inex
pens
ive,
com
mer
cial
ly a
vaila
ble,
sys
tem
s si
mila
r to
the
G
M “
On-
Star
” ve
hicl
e m
onito
ring
sys
tem
, or
equ
ival
ent,
to
trac
k fu
el u
se.
Thi
s w
ill a
llow
the
Arm
y to
dev
elop
a d
atab
ase
that
w
ill
enab
le
plan
ning
, pr
ojec
tion,
an
d op
erat
iona
l op
timiz
atio
n, a
s w
ell
as p
rovi
ding
a b
asel
ine
agai
nst
whi
ch
futu
re
vehi
cles
ca
n be
co
mpa
red
and
asse
ssed
.
Fuel
co
nsum
ptio
n ra
te, p
er u
nit p
ower
pro
duce
d, is
a s
tron
g fu
nctio
n of
the
pow
er le
vels
req
uire
d fo
r ea
ch v
ehic
le a
nd e
ngin
e, w
hich
de
pend
on
th
e pa
ttern
of
us
e.
If
the
use
patt
ern
is
not
unde
rsto
od,
relia
ble
optim
izat
ion
of
engi
ne
sele
ctio
n an
d ef
fici
ency
is n
ot p
ossi
ble.
Des
pite
the
lac
k of
qua
ntita
tive
data
on
actu
al A
rmy
vehi
cle
oper
atio
n, i
t is
pos
sibl
e to
dra
w s
ome
qual
itativ
e an
d se
mi-
quan
titat
ive
infe
renc
es
rega
rdin
g th
e re
lativ
e m
erits
of
te
chno
logy
opt
ions
to
achi
eve
fuel
con
sum
ptio
n re
duct
ion
in
Arm
y ve
hicl
es.
The
se v
ario
us o
ptio
ns b
road
ly i
nvol
ve n
ew
engi
ne d
esig
n op
tions
and
/or
stru
ctur
al l
ight
wei
ghtin
g. S
uch
choi
ces
are
disc
usse
d an
d ev
alua
ted
belo
w i
n th
e co
ntex
t of
th
eir
suita
bilit
y fo
r D
oD m
issi
ons
and
goal
s.
34
35
B.
Eng
ine
and
driv
e-tr
ain
tech
nolo
gy o
ptio
ns
1.
H
ybri
d ve
hicl
es
Hyb
rid
vehi
cles
hav
e th
e ca
paci
ty t
o do
wor
k us
ing
both
an
inte
rnal
com
bust
ion
engi
ne (
ICE
) an
d an
ele
ctri
cal
mot
or,
in
seri
es,
or i
n pa
ralle
l. T
he I
CE
dri
ves
an e
lect
ric
gene
rato
r,
stor
ing
ener
gy
in
batte
ries
.
The
en
ergy
st
ored
is
us
ed
to
augm
ent
the
ICE
out
put
to m
eet
peak
-pow
er d
eman
ds.
Thi
s co
mbi
natio
n re
sults
in
a de
crea
se i
n th
e in
stal
led
ICE
pla
nt
peak
-pow
er r
equi
rem
ents
, w
hich
is
wha
t sc
ales
eng
ine
size
(d
ispl
acem
ent)
an
d,
ultim
atel
y,
fuel
co
nsum
ptio
n.
Add
ition
ally
, hy
brid
izat
ion
of t
he e
ngin
e w
ith t
he e
lect
rica
l m
otor
por
tion
of t
he p
ower
pla
nt a
llow
s th
e IC
E t
o op
erat
e (m
ostly
) w
ithin
its
pe
ak-e
ffic
ienc
y re
gim
e.
T
he
elec
tric
ge
nera
tor
and
stor
age
syst
em
can
augm
ent
elec
tric
-pow
er
dem
ands
whe
n th
e ve
hicl
e is
sto
pped
. The
eff
icie
nt a
nd c
apab
le
gene
rato
r ca
n al
so b
e us
ed f
or o
ther
veh
icle
nee
ds,
e.g.
, in
pr
ovid
ing
hote
l and
oth
er (
elec
tric
al-)
pow
er r
equi
rem
ents
.
Hyb
rid
vehi
cles
ar
e at
trac
ting
muc
h at
tent
ion
in
the
com
mer
cial
tra
nspo
rtat
ion
sect
or d
ue t
o th
eir
incr
ease
d fu
el
econ
omy
rela
tive
to c
onve
ntio
nal I
CE
veh
icle
s. T
he e
ffic
ienc
y of
hyb
rid
vehi
cles
is,
how
ever
, str
ongl
y de
pend
ent
on t
heir
use
pa
ttern
s.
Rec
over
y of
ene
rgy
by r
egen
erat
ive
brak
ing
mak
es
thes
e ve
hicl
es e
spec
ially
goo
d in
sto
p-an
d-go
dri
ving
on
low
-fr
ictio
n su
rfac
es.
Thu
s, t
he g
reat
est
fuel
sav
ings
for
hyb
rid
vehi
cles
are
inc
urre
d fo
r ci
ty b
uses
, ut
ility
-ser
vice
veh
icle
s,
espe
cial
ly i
f po
wer
dem
ands
whe
n st
oppe
d ar
e m
odes
t an
d ca
n be
(m
ostly
) pr
ovid
ed b
y st
ored
ele
ctri
cal
ener
gy i
n ba
tteri
es,
and
post
al-d
eliv
ery
vehi
cles
. A
s an
exa
mpl
e of
this
, the
Toy
ota
Priu
s ca
n ob
tain
(sl
ight
ly)
bette
r m
ileag
e in
city
dri
ving
tha
n
unde
r hi
ghw
ay
driv
ing
cond
ition
s.
Und
er
high
way
dr
ivin
g co
nditi
ons,
th
e ad
vant
age
of
rege
nera
tive
brak
ing
ener
gy
reco
very
is
min
imal
, an
d fu
el e
cono
my
is a
ctua
lly a
dver
sely
af
fect
ed b
y ha
ving
to c
arry
the
extr
a w
eigh
t ass
ocia
ted
with
the
(unu
sed
unde
r th
ese
cond
ition
s) b
atte
ries
, ge
nera
tor,
and
mor
e co
mpl
icat
ed/h
eavy
dri
ve tr
ain
for
the
requ
ired
hor
sepo
wer
.
Thi
s is
con
firm
ed b
y th
e re
sults
of
the
anal
ysis
dep
icte
d in
the
fi
gure
abo
ve t
hat
com
pare
s hy
brid
vs.
con
vent
iona
lly p
ower
ed,
20-t
on t
rack
ed v
ehic
les,
mod
eled
as
oper
atin
g ov
er a
var
iety
of
terr
ains
.15 I
n ge
nera
l, hy
brid
veh
icle
s of
fer
little
or
no f
uel
savi
ngs
if th
e av
erag
e po
wer
del
iver
ed b
y th
e en
gine
is c
lose
to
(i.e
., w
ithin
app
roxi
mat
ely
30%
of)
the
pea
k po
wer
loa
d of
a
typi
cal d
rivi
ng c
ycle
.
15
Rob
ert
M. R
oche
[A
rmy
Mat
erie
l Sy
stem
s A
naly
sis
Act
ivity
- A
MSA
A]
Fuel
Con
sum
ptio
n M
odel
ing
Supp
ort
and
Insi
ghts
. JA
SON
20
July
200
6 (V
TC
) br
iefi
ng.
Not
iona
l Dat
a
Mov
ing
Onl
y,
Leve
l Ter
rain
36
37
In o
ff-r
oad
envi
ronm
ents
, co
nditi
ons
for
whe
n hy
brid
s ca
n of
fer
impr
oved
per
form
ance
are
eve
n m
ore
disc
oura
ging
. Su
ch
cond
ition
s m
ore-
clos
ely
refl
ect
DoD
veh
icle
use
tha
n th
e E
PA
driv
e cy
cle
for
com
mer
cial
veh
icle
use
, for
exa
mpl
e, o
r th
e bu
s dr
ive
cycl
e de
pict
ed a
bove
. H
ence
, th
e pa
ttern
of
use
for
the
Arm
y do
es n
ot l
end
itsel
f to
ren
deri
ng h
ybri
d-ve
hicl
e de
sign
s ad
vant
ageo
us f
or f
uel-
use-
redu
ctio
n pu
rpos
es.
Ano
ther
pos
sibl
e ad
vant
age
of h
ybri
d ve
hicl
es i
nvol
ves
the
capa
bilit
y fo
r si
lent
wat
ch.
If
no o
ther
dem
ands
are
pla
ced
on
the
syst
em (
i.e.,
sust
aine
d ho
tel p
ower
), th
e st
oppe
d ve
hicl
e ca
n tu
rn t
he e
ngin
e of
f co
mpl
etel
y, e
limin
atin
g id
ling
fuel
cos
ts.
The
eng
ine
wou
ld t
hen
be t
urne
d on
onl
y w
hen
the
batte
ries
ne
ed to
be
repl
enis
hed.
Arm
y co
mba
t ve
hicl
es s
pend
as
muc
h as
80%
of
the
time
stop
ped,
i.e
., pr
ovid
ing
hote
l po
wer
, on
ly.
Hen
ce,
a si
lent
w
atch
cap
abili
ty s
eem
s at
trac
tive.
H
owev
er,
for
the
futu
re
com
bat
syst
em,
hote
l po
wer
req
uire
men
ts a
re s
peci
fied
to
be
25-3
2 kW
(t
he
addi
tiona
l 7
kW
for
air
cond
ition
ing
whe
re
need
ed).
T
o m
eet
this
req
uire
men
t fo
r ev
en 1
-2 h
ours
wou
ld
requ
ire
a ve
ry l
arge
sui
te o
f ba
tteri
es, w
hich
are
hea
vy p
er u
nit
of
stor
ed
ener
gy.
A
ty
pica
l L
i ba
ttery
pa
ck
wou
ld,
for
exam
ple,
pro
vide
0.2
kW
⋅hr/
kg.
Supp
lyin
g 25
kW
for
2 h
ours
is
50
kW⋅h
r w
ould
req
uire
an
addi
tiona
l 200
kg
of e
xtra
bat
tery
w
eigh
t ju
st
to
mee
t ho
tel-
pow
er
requ
irem
ents
.
Thi
s ex
tra
wei
ght w
ould
com
e at
the
expe
nse
of p
aylo
ad, f
uel c
arri
ed, a
nd
fuel
eco
nom
y w
hile
dri
ving
the
vehi
cle.
The
dis
adva
ntag
es o
f th
e in
crea
sed
wei
ght o
f th
e hy
brid
ext
end
furt
her.
Hea
vier
veh
icle
s ar
e m
ore
diff
icul
t to
dep
loy
by a
irlif
t. A
dditi
onal
ly, i
f th
e ov
eral
l w
eigh
t of
the
hyb
rid
rela
tive
to t
hat
of a
con
vent
iona
l pl
atfo
rm i
s in
crea
sed,
the
pay
load
of
the
hybr
id v
ehic
le i
s ne
cess
arily
red
uced
. C
onsi
deri
ng t
hat
a la
rge
frac
tion,
if n
ot th
e m
ajor
ity, o
f ta
ctic
al g
roun
d ve
hicl
es a
re u
sed
for
carr
ying
sup
plie
s in
the
ater
, a
mor
e ap
prop
riat
e m
etri
c fo
r fu
el e
ffic
ienc
y sh
ould
be
payl
oad-
mile
s (t
on-m
iles
) pe
r ga
llon
inst
ead
of v
ehic
le-m
iles
per
gallo
n.
By
this
met
ric,
hyb
rid
vehi
cles
off
er e
ven
few
er a
dvan
tage
s in
ter
ms
of p
oten
tial
fuel
sa
ving
s.
Add
ition
ally
, hy
brid
veh
icle
s ha
ve h
ighe
r ca
pita
l co
sts
and
incr
ease
d po
wer
-pla
nt c
ompl
exity
(an
d m
aint
enan
ce).
T
hese
co
sts
are
diff
icul
t to
am
ortiz
e ov
er v
ehic
le l
ife
even
in
the
case
of
an
aver
age
com
mer
cial
-veh
icle
10,
000
mile
per
yea
r ra
nge.
In
the
cas
e of
the
mil
itar
y, J
ASO
N w
as i
nfor
med
tha
t th
e ty
pica
l HM
MW
V tr
avel
s on
ly ~
2000
mile
s pe
r ye
ar.
Such
low
m
ileag
e m
akes
it
espe
cial
ly d
iffi
cult
to j
ustif
y th
e hi
gher
cos
t of
the
hyb
rid
syst
em p
ower
plan
t on
the
bas
is o
f fu
el c
ost
savi
ngs
(if
any)
alo
ne.
As
disc
usse
d be
low
, JA
SON
fou
nd t
hat
mod
ern
dies
el e
ngin
es
offe
r a
cons
ider
able
adv
anta
ge o
ver
hybr
id v
ehic
les
for
mos
t D
oD c
omba
t, an
d pe
rhap
s ta
ctic
al, v
ehic
le p
atte
rns
of u
se.
2.
A
ll-e
lect
ric
vehi
cles
All-
elec
tric
veh
icle
s pr
ovid
e ef
fici
ent c
onve
rsio
n (~
85-9
0%)
of
stor
ed e
lect
rica
l en
ergy
to
mec
hani
cal
pow
er.
An
all-
elec
tric
po
wer
tr
ain
is
wel
l-su
ited
to
vehi
cles
w
ith
high
el
ectr
ical
de
man
ds.
In
pr
inci
ple,
su
ch
vehi
cle
desi
gns
enab
le
quie
t/ste
alth
y op
erat
ion,
w
ith
a re
duct
ion
in
acou
stic
no
ise
emis
sion
s,
IR
emis
sion
s,
(det
ecta
ble)
co
mbu
stio
n ex
haus
t/odo
rs, a
nd o
ther
gre
enho
use
gas
(GH
G)
emis
sion
s.
38
39
All-
elec
tric
veh
icle
s, h
owev
er,
have
ver
y ex
pens
ive
batte
ry
life-
cycl
e co
sts.
C
harg
ing
is s
low
and
req
uire
s ei
ther
a d
iese
l ge
nera
tor
or a
cces
s to
wal
l-pl
ug e
lect
rici
ty.
Thi
s by
its
elf
seem
s to
pre
clud
e th
eir
wid
espr
ead
use
in m
ilita
ry t
actic
al
oper
atio
ns.
Mor
eove
r, th
ese
vehi
cles
hav
e a
smal
l ran
ge u
nles
s ag
gres
sive
ly li
ght-
wei
ghte
d.
Ene
rgy
stor
age
(per
uni
t m
ass
or v
olum
e) o
f ev
en t
he b
est
avai
labl
e L
i ba
tter
ies
is t
oo s
mal
l fo
r m
ost
mili
tary
veh
icul
ar
uses
. T
he e
nerg
y st
orag
e de
nsity
of
the
best
bat
teri
es i
s,
appr
oxim
atel
y, 1
% t
hat
of d
iese
l fu
el (
by v
olum
e),
i.e.,
2% o
f di
esel
-fue
l eq
uiva
lent
(be
caus
e el
ectr
ic v
ehic
les
are
~2×
mor
e ef
fici
ent
than
a d
iese
l IC
E).
E
lect
ric
vehi
cles
(lik
e ga
s or
di
esel
-bas
ed h
ybri
ds)
mig
ht b
e su
ited
for
spec
ializ
ed c
ivili
an-
type
use
s (l
ocal
-mai
l de
liver
y, b
ase
patr
ols,
etc
.) o
n D
oD b
ases
in
CO
NU
S, a
nd c
ould
pro
vide
fue
l sav
ings
in th
at c
apac
ity, b
ut
are
not
indi
cate
d fo
r us
e in
gen
eral
mil
itary
app
licat
ions
in
thea
ter.
3.
F
uel-
Cel
l veh
icle
s
Fuel
ce
ll ve
hicl
es
prov
ide
dire
ct
conv
ersi
on
of
fuel
to
el
ectr
icity
. T
hey
have
dem
onst
rate
d hi
gh b
ench
-top
eff
icie
ncy
(> 5
0%)
rela
tive
to t
he t
ypic
al I
CE
pow
erpl
ants
(15
-25%
).
Hyd
roge
n fu
el c
ells
hav
e no
(ve
hicl
e) G
HG
em
issi
ons,
tho
ugh
thei
r up
stre
am G
HG
em
issi
ons
can
be l
arge
, as
wel
l as
the
ir
emis
sion
s fr
om in
-veh
icle
-pro
duce
d re
form
ed h
ydro
gen.
Fuel
ce
lls
are
low
po
wer
de
nsity
sy
stem
s,
if
the
requ
ired
th
erm
al-m
anag
emen
t sys
tem
s ar
e in
clud
ed. F
uel c
ells
gen
eral
ly
scal
e po
orly
to
high
pow
er d
ensi
ties
on a
mas
s ba
sis.
L
ow-
tem
pera
ture
fue
l ce
lls a
re p
oiso
ned
by f
uel
impu
ritie
s su
ch a
s su
lfur
and
car
bon
mon
oxid
e an
d, a
s a
cons
eque
nce,
req
uire
hi
ghly
pur
ifie
d fu
el.
Add
ition
ally
, ev
en i
f th
e fu
el f
eeds
tock
w
ere
suita
bly
puri
fied
, in
trod
uctio
n of
the
se c
onta
min
ants
int
o th
e ai
r in
take
of
a fu
el c
ell
vehi
cle
rapi
dly
pois
ons
the
cata
lyst
an
d im
mob
iliz
es th
e ve
hicl
e.
Cur
rent
H2-
base
d fu
el c
ells
hav
e pr
ohib
itive
cat
alys
t co
sts,
of
orde
r $1
00K
-$1M
, for
100
kW
pow
er p
lant
s, t
ypic
al o
f bu
sses
, he
avy-
duty
car
s, o
r tr
ucks
, fo
r ex
ampl
e.
Add
ition
ally
, su
ch
fuel
cel
ls h
ave
very
exp
ensi
ve m
embr
ane
cost
s w
ith n
o lo
ng-
term
(i.e
., 1-
year
) du
rabi
lity
and/
or w
arra
nty.
Ano
ther
dra
wba
ck o
f H
2-fu
el-c
ell b
ased
veh
icle
s is
the
logi
stic
s tr
ain
that
wou
ld b
e re
quir
ed to
sup
ply
the
gas-
phas
e fu
el, H
2, to
th
eate
r.
Can
iste
rs t
o co
ntai
n H
2 ga
s ar
e la
rge
and
heav
y; a
n ob
viou
s fl
amm
abili
ty a
nd, u
nder
som
e co
nditi
ons,
an
expl
osio
n an
d de
tona
tion
liabi
lity
wou
ld e
xist
thr
ough
out
the
logi
stic
s tr
ain.
On-
boar
d H
2 st
orag
e al
so r
equi
res
muc
h la
rger
mas
s (w
eigh
t) o
r vo
lum
e th
an l
iqui
d fu
els.
T
his
draw
back
wou
ld
dele
teri
ousl
y im
pact
veh
icle
ran
ge,
mili
tary
per
form
ance
, an
d su
pply
-cha
in lo
gist
ics
of s
uch
a sy
stem
.
For
dire
ct d
iese
l us
e in
a f
uel
cell,
hig
h-te
mpe
ratu
re c
eram
ics
are
also
pr
ohib
itive
ly
expe
nsiv
e,
have
lo
ng
star
t-up
tim
es,
suff
er c
okin
g, a
nd s
cale
poo
rly
to h
igh
pow
er.
Fue
l ce
lls u
sed
in
conj
unct
ion
with
re
form
ers
exhi
bit
low
ef
fici
ency
at
m
oder
ate
pow
er a
nd e
nerg
y de
nsity
.
40
41
4.
Adv
ance
d di
esel
eng
ine
vehi
cles
The
com
mer
cial
sec
tor
is f
ocus
ed o
n op
timiz
ing
engi
nes
to
exce
l on
the
EPA
dri
ve c
ycle
and
tes
ting
prot
ocol
s.
In t
hat
test
ing,
whi
ch i
nvol
ves
a dy
nam
omet
er,
ther
e is
no
elec
tric
al
load
on
the
vehi
cle
due
to t
he a
ir c
ondi
tione
r, f
or e
xam
ple,
no
aero
dyna
mic
(w
ind)
res
ista
nce,
and
no
road
fri
ctio
n.16
N
or
does
the
pat
tern
of
use
in a
n E
PA d
rive
cyc
le (
city
sto
p-an
d-go
or
hig
hway
dri
ving
) re
flec
t th
e pa
ttern
of
use
of D
oD v
ehic
les.
In
par
ticul
ar, D
oD c
omba
t ve
hicl
es s
pend
a s
igni
fica
nt a
mou
nt
of t
ime
stop
ped
and
prov
idin
g ho
tel
pow
er.
The
y al
so g
o of
f-ro
ad a
nd g
o th
roug
h m
ud, e
tc.
Hen
ce, e
ngin
es th
at d
o no
t yie
ld
high
sco
res
in t
he E
PA d
rive
cyc
le a
nd t
est
cond
ition
s co
uld
yiel
d ve
ry d
iffe
rent
res
ults
for
mili
tary
use
and
, in
par
ticul
ar,
sign
ific
ant
impr
ovem
ents
in
DoD
lan
d-ve
hicl
e fu
el e
cono
my
if
they
are
wel
l-m
atch
ed to
DoD
pat
tern
s of
use
.
Spec
ific
ally
, re
cent
adv
ance
s in
die
sel
engi
nes
offe
r a
grea
ter
retu
rn i
n fu
el s
avin
gs f
or A
rmy
patte
rns
of u
se,
and
obvi
ate
mos
t, if
not
all,
of
the
pote
ntia
l ad
vant
ages
tha
t m
ight
pos
sibl
y be
gai
ned
by h
ybri
diza
tion.
In
par
ticul
ar,
the
new
inl
ine-
6 di
esel
eng
ines
are
ver
y at
trac
tive
in t
his
rega
rd.
The
y ar
e al
so
muc
h m
ore
fuel
eff
icie
nt t
han
prio
r di
esel
eng
ines
. T
hese
en
gine
s ar
e de
sign
ed t
o ha
ve v
ery
good
eff
icie
ncy
at i
dle
and
whe
n pr
ovid
ing
hote
l po
wer
.17
T
hey
thus
ap
pear
to
be
pr
efer
able
to
hy
brid
izat
ion
as
a m
etho
d of
im
prov
ing
fuel
16
The
var
ianc
e be
twee
n pe
ople
s’ a
ctua
l m
iles-
per-
gallo
n ex
peri
ence
and
ex
pect
atio
ns
base
d on
sh
ow-r
oom
E
PA
stic
ker
mile
age
data
(“
You
r m
ilea
ge m
ay v
ary.
”) a
re n
ot d
iffi
cult
to u
nder
stan
d.
17 C
harl
es R
affa
[T
AR
DE
C]
27Ju
n06
JASO
N b
rief
ing
and
acco
mpa
nyin
g m
ater
ial.
effi
cien
cy f
or A
rmy
vehi
cles
, red
ucin
g fo
ssil-
fuel
con
sum
ptio
n,
impr
ovin
g ve
hicl
e ra
nge,
dec
reas
ing
the
ther
mal
-man
agem
ent
burd
en,
and
ther
eby
impr
ovin
g m
ilita
ry
capa
bilit
y.
Add
ition
ally
, th
ey a
re c
apab
le o
f a
fair
ly r
apid
tra
nsiti
on i
nto
the
exis
ting
mili
tary
fue
l inf
rast
ruct
ure
and
perh
aps
pose
less
of
a pe
rtur
batio
n on
logi
stic
s an
d O
&M
.
Not
ewor
thy
is
that
in
crea
ses
in
engi
ne
effi
cien
cy,
i.e.,
a re
duct
ion
in
fuel
co
nsum
ptio
n fo
r a
give
n (m
echa
nica
l)
hors
epow
er o
utpu
t is
acc
ompa
nied
by
decr
ease
s in
the
the
rmal
m
anag
emen
t bu
rden
. T
his
is a
ver
y im
port
ant
cons
ider
atio
n in
th
at a
rmor
ed v
ehic
les
are
not o
nly
seve
rely
vol
ume-
lim
ited,
but
ar
e fo
rced
to
re
ject
un
wan
ted
heat
th
roug
h pl
aces
on
th
e ve
hicl
e of
hig
her
vuln
erab
ility
to e
nem
y fi
re; t
he m
ore
heat
that
m
ust
be r
ejec
ted
the
mor
e vu
lner
able
the
arm
ored
veh
icle
is,
ot
her
fact
ors
held
con
stan
t.
Est
imat
es f
rom
tes
ts i
n th
e la
te 7
0s f
or t
he f
uel
cons
umpt
ion
of
the
turb
ine-
pow
ered
Abr
ams
vs. t
he d
iese
l-po
wer
ed M
60 t
anks
w
ere
roug
hly
2:1,
bu
t fi
eld
data
fr
om
the
RE
FOR
GE
R
exer
cise
s in
Ger
man
y sh
owed
the
tur
bine
tan
ks h
ad a
bout
4:1
ra
ther
tha
n th
e pr
evio
usly
est
imat
ed 2
:1 f
uel
cons
umpt
ion.
The
di
ffer
ence
was
attr
ibut
ed t
o tim
e at
idl
e, e
stim
ated
to
be a
s m
uch
as 8
3% o
f to
tal
oper
atin
g tim
e. W
hat
little
dat
a ex
ist
indi
cate
tha
t, at
idl
e, t
he r
atio
of
fuel
con
sum
ptio
n be
twee
n th
e tw
o ta
nks
is
mor
e th
an
4:1
(at
10 k
W
elec
tric
al
outp
ut,
10.6
gal
/hr
norm
al i
dle
vs.
2.3
gal/h
r).
At
the
Abr
ams
“tac
tical
id
le”
setti
ng w
ith t
he e
ngin
e at
120
0-12
50 r
pm i
nste
ad o
f th
e 89
0-90
0 rp
m
of
norm
al
idle
an
d w
ith
the
tran
smis
sion
in
ne
utra
l, in
stal
led
fuel
con
sum
ptio
n is
abo
ut 1
7 ga
l/hr.
18
18
Cha
rles
Raf
fa [
TA
RD
EC
] 31
Jul0
6 pv
t. co
mm
. (cf
. als
o fi
gure
on
p. 3
5).
42
43
Rel
ativ
e to
the
tur
bine
eng
ines
cur
rent
ly u
sed
in t
he A
bram
s ta
nk,
mod
ern
dies
els
offe
r im
prov
ed e
ffic
ienc
y, e
spec
ially
at
idle
, dr
amat
ic
impr
ovem
ents
in
fu
el
cons
umpt
ion
(3-4
×,
depe
ndin
g on
the
pat
tern
of
use)
, de
crea
ses
in m
aint
enan
ce
cost
s, a
nd a
n in
crea
se in
(au
tono
mou
s) r
ange
(~2
×, o
r m
ore)
.19
For
thes
e re
ason
s, t
he M
1-A
bram
s ta
nk s
houl
d be
re-
engi
ned
with
die
sel
engi
nes
as s
oon
as p
ossi
ble.
T
hese
veh
icle
s ar
e li
kely
to
rem
ain
in t
he i
nven
tory
for
som
e ti
me
– pe
rhap
s th
roug
h 20
20, o
r m
ore
– an
d sh
ould
be
upgr
aded
. Thi
s pr
opos
al
has
been
arg
ued
for
som
e tim
e an
d th
e re
ason
s ar
e m
ore
com
pelli
ng to
day
than
they
wer
e in
the
past
. C
. L
ight
wei
ghti
ng D
oD p
latf
orm
s
Ano
ther
m
etho
d to
in
crea
se
fuel
ef
fici
ency
w
ill
now
be
di
scus
sed:
re
duct
ion
of
vehi
cle
wei
ght
whi
le
mai
ntai
ning
m
ilita
ry p
erfo
rman
ce.
The
re a
re t
wo
appr
oach
es:
light
wei
ght
man
ned
vehi
cles
, an
d re
plac
e m
anne
d ve
hicl
es b
y un
man
ned
vehi
cles
. T
he f
orm
er m
aint
ains
sim
ilar
mis
sion
s an
d pe
rson
nel
dem
ands
and
req
uire
men
ts t
o th
e on
es i
n pl
ace
now
, th
e la
tter
chan
ges
thos
e de
man
ds a
nd r
equi
rem
ents
sig
nifi
cant
ly.
Eac
h op
tion
is d
iscu
ssed
sep
arat
ely.
1.
M
anne
d ve
hicl
es
The
fue
l con
sum
ptio
n of
a h
eavy
veh
icle
in m
otio
n at
mod
erat
e sp
eeds
is d
omin
ated
by
fric
tion
loss
es to
gro
und,
as
oppo
sed
to
aero
dyna
mic
s.
For
this
rea
son,
fue
l co
nsum
ptio
n is
nea
rly
19
One
(m
inor
) dr
awba
ck m
ay b
e in
acc
eler
atio
n in
tha
t tu
rbin
e-en
gine
rpm
ca
n in
crea
se/d
ecre
ase
fast
er th
an w
ith a
die
sel.
prop
ortio
nal
to t
he p
rodu
ct o
f w
eigh
t an
d di
stan
ce (
i.e.,
ton-
mile
).
Thu
s, i
f th
e w
eigh
t of
a v
ehic
le i
s re
duce
d by
2×
, th
e fu
el c
onsu
mpt
ion
is r
educ
ed b
y ap
prox
imat
ely
2×.
The
net
ef
fect
of
this
inc
reas
ed e
ffic
ienc
y m
ultip
lies
sign
ific
antly
bac
k th
roug
h th
e su
pply
cha
in.
Arm
y ve
hicl
e w
eigh
t ca
n be
par
titio
ned
into
arm
or,
stru
ctur
e,
fuel
, an
d pa
yloa
d. F
or m
ilit
ary
vehi
cles
use
d in
com
bat,
arm
or
wei
ght
natu
rally
at
trac
ts
atte
ntio
n as
a
wei
ght–
redu
ctio
n ca
ndid
ate.
H
owev
er, a
t pr
esen
t, ar
mor
is
~20%
of
tota
l w
eigh
t of
mos
t ar
mor
ed v
ehic
les,
so
the
pote
ntia
l ov
eral
l be
nefi
ts a
re
not
larg
e.
Prog
ress
in
arm
or c
apab
ilitie
s co
uld
decr
ease
arm
or
wei
ght
by
a fa
ctor
of
tw
o,
for
a gi
ven
prot
ectio
n le
vel.
H
owev
er,
chan
ges
in t
hrea
t le
vels
and
eng
agem
ent
scen
aria
dr
ive
the
desi
gn s
pace
tow
ards
inc
reas
ed p
rote
ctio
n fo
r th
e sa
me
wei
ght,
rath
er t
han
decr
ease
d ar
mor
wei
ght.
JA
SON
en
cour
ages
fu
rthe
r im
prov
ed-a
rmor
ca
pabi
litie
s,
but
favo
rs
incr
ease
d pr
otec
tion
over
red
uctio
ns in
tota
l arm
or w
eigh
t.
Pote
ntia
l sa
ving
s in
wei
ght
are
likel
y po
ssib
le b
y re
duct
ion
of
the
rem
aini
ng 8
0% o
f ve
hicl
e w
eigh
t. T
his
can
be d
one
by
redu
cing
ve
hicl
e st
ruct
ural
w
eigh
t by
th
e us
e of
m
oder
n m
ater
ials
and
con
stru
ctio
n m
etho
ds,
such
as
carb
on r
einf
orce
d po
lym
er a
nd t
he r
educ
tion
in f
uel
wei
ght/v
olum
e fo
r a
give
n ra
nge
that
the
red
uctio
n in
wei
ght
will
ena
ble.
A
dditi
onal
ly,
one
may
be
ab
le
to
redu
ce
the
requ
ired
pa
yloa
d th
roug
h im
prov
emen
ts in
pat
tern
s of
use
.
It i
s w
orth
not
ing
that
, as
cur
rent
ly p
ract
iced
in
Iraq
, up
-ar
mor
ing
is d
one
at th
e ex
pens
e of
pay
load
. T
his
is n
ot a
goo
d tr
ade
for
over
all
fuel
con
sum
ptio
n pu
rpos
es,
but
of c
ours
e is
ne
cess
ary
in t
he c
urre
nt t
heat
er e
nvir
onm
ent
to c
ount
er t
he
thre
at to
per
sonn
el in
thes
e ve
hicl
es.
44
45
2.
Unm
anne
d la
nd v
ehic
les
Fuel
con
sum
ptio
n pe
r m
ile tr
avel
ed o
n la
nd is
sca
led
by w
eigh
t (a
erod
ynam
ic
drag
is
no
t im
port
ant
for
mos
t D
oD
land
ve
hicl
es).
Fu
el u
se i
s th
en (
near
ly)
prop
ortio
nal
to t
he t
on-
mile
s dr
iven
, m
ultip
lied
by t
he p
ower
-pla
nt e
ffic
ienc
y, a
nd
incl
udin
g th
e fu
el c
onsu
mpt
ion
idlin
g an
d th
e ne
ed f
or h
otel
-po
wer
pro
duct
ion
whe
n st
oppe
d.
Spec
ializ
ed u
nman
ned
vehi
cles
can
obv
iate
(m
ost)
arm
or –
th
ey c
ould
be
trea
ted
as e
xpen
dabl
e –
and
coul
d re
quir
e m
uch
low
er h
otel
pow
er.
Bot
h gu
ided
and
aut
onom
ous
land
veh
icle
s ar
e, h
owev
er,
at a
ver
y di
ffer
ent
tech
nica
l re
adin
ess
leve
l th
an
unm
anne
d ai
r ve
hicl
es, f
or e
xam
ple,
dis
cuss
ed b
elow
. Fo
r la
nd
vehi
cles
, th
e le
ap t
o to
tally
aut
onom
ous
vehi
cles
may
not
be
war
rant
ed,
cons
ider
ing
the
tech
nica
l di
ffic
ultie
s an
d de
velo
pmen
t co
sts,
con
side
ring
the
pot
entia
l be
nefi
ts f
rom
the
us
e of
gui
ded
(rem
ote-
cont
rolle
d) v
ehic
les
that
can
rel
ay d
ata
from
the
ir o
wn
sens
ors,
inc
ludi
ng c
amer
as,
crea
ting
a vi
rtua
l pa
nel
for
a (r
emot
e) c
ontr
olle
r w
ho m
ay b
e ei
ther
dis
tant
, or
in
a fo
llow
ing
vehi
cle,
dep
endi
ng o
n ap
plic
atio
n.
For
exam
ple,
m
uch
light
er g
uide
d un
man
ned
vehi
cles
dri
ving
ahe
ad o
f ot
her
vehi
cles
in a
col
umn
coul
d he
lp s
erve
eith
er a
s de
coys
for
, or
to
help
cle
ar im
prov
ised
exp
losi
ve d
evic
es (
IED
s).
46
47
48
49
3.
Unm
anne
d ae
rial
veh
icle
s
Am
ong
the
DoD
unm
anne
d ve
hicl
es, U
AV
s re
pres
ent
the
mos
t m
atur
e te
chno
logy
, ben
efiti
ng f
rom
dec
ades
of
deve
lopm
ent
of
auto
pilo
t sys
tem
s in
man
ned
airc
raft
. The
tran
sfer
of
trad
ition
al
pilo
ted-
airc
raft
fun
ctio
ns t
o U
AV
s co
uld
enab
le t
he r
ealiz
atio
n of
ver
y hi
gh f
uel-
use
redu
ctio
ns.
Thi
s is
esp
ecia
lly t
rue
if a
ir-
to-a
ir r
efue
ling
can
be o
bvia
ted
com
plet
ely.
In a
maj
or d
evel
opm
ent p
rogr
am, o
n-go
ing
sinc
e 20
00 a
nd n
ow
focu
sed
on a
maj
or f
light
tes
t in
201
0, t
he A
ir F
orce
Res
earc
h L
abor
ator
y (A
FRL
) ha
s be
en w
orki
ng o
n a
desi
gn f
or a
hig
h-al
titud
e,
long
-end
uran
ce,
auto
nom
ous
ISR
pl
atfo
rm
dubb
ed
Sens
orC
raft
. O
ne s
uch
unm
anne
d sy
stem
cou
ld r
epla
ce a
nd
inte
grat
e th
e fu
nctio
nalit
y of
3 m
anne
d sy
stem
s:
JST
AR
S,
AW
AC
S, a
nd R
ivet
Joi
nt.
Its
lon
g en
dura
nce
wou
ld o
bvia
te
in-f
light
ref
uelin
g, s
avin
g 20
0 kl
b of
fue
l (2
8,56
0 ga
llons
) pe
r ai
rcra
ft s
ortie
. A
sin
gle
Sens
orC
raft
with
a 3
0 hr
loi
ter
sort
ie
wou
ld r
epla
ce 3
cur
rent
ISR
10
hr lo
iter
mis
sion
s, w
hich
wou
ld
requ
ire
9 IS
R s
ortie
s an
d 9
tank
er s
ortie
s.
The
res
ultin
g fu
el
savi
ngs
is a
ppro
xim
atel
y 97
%,
i.e.,
a fu
el-s
avin
g fa
ctor
of
30.
If o
pera
tiona
l or
oth
er c
onsi
dera
tions
ind
icat
e th
at t
he t
hree
fu
nctio
ns t
hat
can
be i
nteg
rate
d in
thi
s U
AV
sho
uld
not
be
collo
cate
d,
thre
e su
ch
craf
t w
ould
m
ore
than
re
stor
e th
e pr
evio
us f
unct
iona
lity
with
a s
till-
sign
ific
ant f
uel-
use
redu
ctio
n fa
ctor
of
10, r
athe
r th
an th
e fa
ctor
of
30 f
or a
sin
gle
craf
t.
As
the
AFR
L s
lides
im
ply,
UA
Vs
can
be s
ized
and
con
figu
red
to
acco
mm
odat
e co
nfor
mal
ar
ray
ante
nnas
fo
r SA
R,
for
exam
ple.
Ass
umin
g an
an
tenn
a si
ze
of
20×
0.5
m2 ,
for
exam
ple,
SA
R p
erfo
rman
ce,
with
the
cen
tral
fre
quen
cy o
f th
e L
ynx
SAR
of
abou
t 17
GH
z (K
u ba
nd),
the
for
war
d-lo
okin
g re
al-a
pert
ure
azim
uth
reso
lutio
n w
ould
be,
, m
km)
/(
7.0λ
real
RDR
x=
=Δ
Whe
re D
is th
e (r
eal)
ape
rtur
e, λ
is th
e ra
dar
wav
elen
gth,
and
R
the
rang
e. A
tra
nsve
rse
aper
ture
of
D⊥=
20
m i
s th
en p
erti
nent
to
for
war
d-lo
okin
g re
solu
tion
and
an a
long
-pat
h ap
ertu
re o
f D
|| =
0.5
m
for
side
-loo
king
re
solu
tion.
The
im
plie
d ra
nge
reso
lutio
n is
1 m
in
the
stri
p-m
ap m
ode
and
0.1
m i
n th
e sp
ot-
light
mod
e. I
n gr
ound
-mov
ing
targ
et i
ndic
ator
(G
MT
I) m
ode,
th
e m
inim
um d
etec
tabl
e ve
loci
ty (
MD
V)
is,
, λ DU
u=
Δ
at U
AV
spe
eds
of U
= 1
00-2
00 m
/s,
i.e.,
Δu⊥ =
0.1
5 m
/s i
n fo
rwar
d-lo
okin
g m
ode
(D =
D⊥)
and
Δu|| =
3-5
m/s
in
side
war
d m
ode
(D =
D||)
.
As
part
of
this
stu
dy,
JASO
N e
xplo
red
the
desi
gn p
ossi
bilit
ies
offe
red
by
the
altit
ude-
spee
d-si
ze
corr
idor
, w
ith
an
eye
to
max
imiz
ing
endu
ranc
e (u
nref
uele
d fl
ight
tim
e) f
or U
AV
s in
the
1000
kg-
clas
s pa
yloa
d re
gim
e.
Pr
elim
inar
y ca
lcul
atio
ns
sugg
est
that
it
shou
ld b
e po
ssib
le t
o do
con
side
rabl
y be
tter
(> 2
×)
than
the
tar
get
30 h
r en
dura
nce
targ
et i
ndic
ated
for
Se
nsor
Cra
ft.
The
pot
entia
l fo
r pe
rsis
tent
ISR
as
wel
l as
for
ot
her
uses
nee
d no
t be
emph
asiz
ed h
ere.
Con
side
ring
the
mul
tiplie
rs o
f de
liver
ing
fuel
to th
e ai
r ta
nker
s,
the
savi
ngs
wou
ld b
e la
rger
yet
bec
ause
of
the
fuel
-del
iver
y m
ultip
liers
. As
is t
he c
ase
gene
rica
lly,
fuel
sav
ings
pro
paga
ted
thro
ugh
the
entir
e su
pply
cha
in s
houl
d be
an
impo
rtan
t pa
rt o
f th
e sy
stem
cos
t an
alys
is i
n th
e pl
anni
ng,
logi
stic
s, a
nd D
oD
acqu
isiti
on p
roce
ss.
50
51
D.
Alt
erna
te f
uels
in p
lace
of
crud
e oi
l-de
rive
d fu
els
Ano
ther
tool
to r
educ
ing
the
DoD
dep
ende
nce
on f
ossi
l fue
ls is
to
sub
stitu
te s
ome
port
ion
of c
rude
-oil-
deri
ved
fuel
s w
ith f
uels
de
rive
d fr
om o
ther
sou
rces
. In
thi
s co
ntex
t, an
alte
rnat
ive
fuel
is
def
ined
to
be a
ny f
uel
that
is
not
dire
ctly
der
ived
fro
m c
rude
oi
l. H
ence
, liq
uid
hydr
ocar
bon
fuel
s de
rive
d fr
om c
oal
or
natu
ral g
as w
ould
be
clas
sifi
ed a
s al
tern
ativ
e fu
els,
eve
n th
ough
th
ey a
re in
fac
t der
ived
fro
m f
ossi
l sou
rces
.
Poss
ible
pri
mar
y en
ergy
sou
rces
for
pro
duct
ion
of a
ltern
ativ
e fu
els
also
inc
lude
non
-car
bon
ener
gy s
ourc
es s
uch
as n
ucle
ar,
sola
r,
win
d,
geot
herm
al,
and
tidal
-ene
rgy
sour
ces.
T
hese
so
urce
s, h
owev
er, a
re b
est u
sed
in th
e pr
oduc
tion
of e
lect
rici
ty,
whi
ch i
s hi
gh t
herm
odyn
amic
ava
ilabi
lity
ener
gy.
Usi
ng s
uch
sour
ces
to
prod
uce
liqui
d fu
els
conv
erts
hi
gh-v
alue
(h
igh-
ther
mod
ynam
ic-a
vaila
bilit
y) e
nerg
y in
to l
ow-v
alue
ene
rgy.
In
ad
ditio
n to
con
vers
ion
loss
es to
obt
ain
fuel
, an
addi
tiona
l fac
tor
of, a
ppro
xim
atel
y, 3
red
uctio
n in
its
ultim
ate
ener
gy v
alue
, e.g
., to
war
ds t
he p
rodu
ctio
n of
mec
hani
cal
wor
k, i
s th
en i
ncur
red
in
the
conv
ersi
on o
f th
e (l
ow-v
alue
) fu
el t
o (h
igh-
valu
e) w
ork.
A
s a
rule
, hi
gh-a
vaila
bilit
y/-v
alue
ene
rgy
is b
est
used
as
such
, ra
ther
tha
n be
ing
conv
erte
d to
low
-val
ue e
nerg
y to
the
n be
co
nver
ted
back
, at
con
side
rabl
e lo
ss,
to h
igh-
valu
e en
ergy
and
w
ork.
Furt
her,
the
re i
s cu
rren
tly n
o st
raig
htfo
rwar
d or
eco
nom
ical
m
etho
d to
con
vert
the
se e
lect
rica
l en
ergy
sou
rces
int
o fu
els,
ot
her
than
H2
(thr
ough
ele
ctro
lysi
s),
and
H2
is n
ot w
ell-
suite
d fo
r us
e by
the
DoD
for
a v
arie
ty o
f te
chni
cal a
nd in
fras
truc
ture
-ba
sed
reas
ons
(vid
e in
fra)
. A
bre
akth
roug
h in
thi
s ar
ea w
ould
be
a
met
hod
to
dire
ctly
co
nver
t, fo
r ex
ampl
e,
sunl
ight
ef
fici
ently
and
cos
t-ef
fect
ivel
y in
to l
iqui
d fu
els
with
out
goin
g
thro
ugh
elec
tric
ity
as
an
inte
rmed
iate
st
ep.
A
bsen
t su
ch
brea
kthr
ough
s,
such
al
tern
ativ
e en
ergy
so
urce
s w
ill
not
be
cons
ider
ed f
urth
er i
n th
is r
epor
t, at
lea
st i
n th
e co
ntex
t of
po
tent
ial D
oD f
uel-
supp
ly s
ourc
es.
Bel
ow,
alte
rnat
ive
foss
il-de
rive
d fu
els
are
cons
ider
ed,
incl
udin
g th
ose
from
enh
ance
d oi
l re
cove
ry (
EO
R),
coa
l an
d ga
s, a
s w
ell
as b
iofu
els,
inc
ludi
ng e
than
ol,
biod
iese
l, an
d bi
o-Fi
sche
r-T
rops
ch (
FT)
dies
el.
52
53
As
note
d ea
rlie
r, e
ven
thou
gh t
he U
.S.
has
only
2%
of
the
wor
ld’s
con
vent
iona
l oi
l re
serv
es, i
t ha
s ap
prox
imat
ely
30%
of
the
wor
ld’s
unc
onve
ntio
nal
foss
il re
sour
ces,
inc
ludi
ng ~
1 T
bbl
(tri
llion
bar
rels
of
oil
equi
vale
nt =
100
0 bo
e) o
f sh
ale
oil,
800
boe
of F
T c
oal,
0.15
boe
of
petr
oleu
m-d
eriv
ed c
oke,
and
gr
eate
r th
an 3
2 bo
e of
oil
from
enh
ance
d oi
l re
cove
ry (
EO
R).
In
tota
l, th
e U
.S. h
as e
stim
ated
res
ourc
es e
qual
ing
1.9
Tbo
e.
At
a U
.S.
cons
umpt
ion
rate
of
7.5
Bbb
l/yr,
thi
s ca
n yi
eld
a ~2
60 y
ear
supp
ly f
rom
the
se s
ourc
es a
lone
. T
he F
T p
roce
ss
that
con
vert
s on
e fo
rm o
f fo
ssil
ener
gy i
nto
anot
her,
e.g
., vi
a co
al-t
o-liq
uid
(CT
L)
or g
as-t
o-liq
uid
(GT
L)
proc
esse
s w
ould
yi
eld
an a
ssur
ed d
omes
tic s
uppl
y of
liq
uid
hydr
ocar
bon
fuel
s fo
r th
e D
oD
for
man
y de
cade
s in
to
the
futu
re,
albe
it ac
com
pani
ed w
ith l
arge
env
iron
men
tal
burd
ens,
as
disc
usse
d be
low
, un
less
car
bon
sequ
estr
atio
n an
d ot
her
mea
sure
s ar
e ad
opte
d w
ith a
ttend
ant i
ncre
ases
in c
ost.
In a
dditi
on t
o pr
oduc
tion
cost
s, c
arbo
n se
ques
trat
ion,
bas
ical
ly,
capt
urin
g C
O2
from
the
com
bust
ion
of f
ossi
l fu
els
and
bury
ing
it un
der
grou
nd t
o ke
ep i
t fr
om c
ontr
ibut
ing
to g
reen
hous
e-ga
s em
issi
ons
in
the
atm
osph
ere,
al
so
enta
ils
envi
ronm
enta
l un
know
ns.
For
exam
ple,
a p
ilot e
xper
imen
t in
Hou
ston
, Tex
as,
foun
d th
at,
the
CO
2 dr
oppe
d th
e pH
of
the
form
atio
n’s
brin
e fr
om a
nea
r-ne
utra
l 6.
5 to
3.0
, abo
ut a
s ac
idic
as
vine
gar.
Tha
t ch
ange
in
turn
dis
solv
ed m
any
min
eral
s, r
elea
sing
met
als
such
as
iro
n an
d m
anga
nese
. O
rgan
ic m
atte
r en
tere
d so
lutio
n as
w
ell,
and
rela
tivel
y la
rge
amou
nts
of
carb
onat
e m
iner
als
diss
olve
d. T
hese
nat
ural
ly o
ccur
ring
che
mic
als
seal
por
es a
nd
frac
ture
s in
the
roc
k th
at,
if o
pene
d, c
ould
rel
ease
CO
2 as
wel
l as
fou
led
brin
e in
to o
verl
ying
aqu
ifer
s th
at s
uppl
y dr
inki
ng a
nd
irri
gatio
n w
ater
. Pe
rhap
s m
ore
trou
blin
g, i
s th
at t
he a
cid
mix
coul
d at
tack
car
bona
te i
n th
e ce
men
t se
als
plug
ging
aba
ndon
ed
oil
or g
as w
ells
, 2.5
mill
ion
of w
hich
pep
per
the
Uni
ted
Stat
es.
The
le
sson
is
th
at
wha
teve
r w
e do
[w
ith
CO
2],
ther
e ar
e en
viro
nmen
tal i
mpl
icat
ions
that
we
have
to d
eal w
ith.20
It i
s im
port
ant
to e
stab
lish
scie
ntif
ical
ly w
heth
er i
n fa
ct,
at
scal
e, i
f ca
rbon
seq
uest
ratio
n ca
n be
rel
ied
upon
to
keep
CO
2 fr
om le
akin
g to
the
atm
osph
ere
for
the
inde
fini
te f
utur
e –
if n
ot,
the
prob
lem
is
only
del
ayed
– o
r if
oth
er,
seco
ndar
y, s
ide
effe
cts
prov
e to
be
seri
ous.
20
Y.K
. Kha
raka
et a
l. (2
006)
Gas
-wat
er-r
ock
inte
ract
ions
in F
rio
Form
atio
n fo
llow
ing
CO
2 in
ject
ion:
Im
plic
atio
ns f
or th
e st
orag
e of
gre
enho
use
gase
s in
sed
imen
tary
bas
ins.
Geo
logy
34:
577-
80.
54
55
1.
Fos
sil
fuel
fun
gibi
lity
: co
nver
sion
of
gase
ous
and
soli
d fo
rms
of f
ossi
l fu
el i
nto
liqu
id h
ydro
carb
on f
uels
thr
ough
the
F
isch
er-T
rops
ch p
roce
ss
Ove
r su
itabl
e ca
taly
sts,
hea
ting
any
carb
onac
eous
mat
eria
l in
th
e pr
esen
ce o
f w
ater
will
pro
duce
syn
thes
is g
as (
syng
as):
CO
an
d H
2.
Thr
ough
use
of
appr
opri
ate
Fisc
her-
Tro
psch
(FT
) ca
taly
sts,
th
e sy
ngas
ca
n th
en
be
conv
erte
d in
to
liqui
d hy
droc
arbo
n fu
els.
T
he F
T p
roce
ss w
as u
sed
for
larg
e-sc
ale
prod
uctio
n of
liq
uid
fuel
s fr
om
coal
by
th
e G
erm
ans
and
Japa
nese
dur
ing
Wor
ld W
ar I
I.
In t
he g
as-t
o-liq
uid
(GT
L)
proc
ess,
one
bur
ns m
etha
ne (
CH
4)
with
ai
r to
(p
artia
lly)
prod
uce
hydr
ogen
(H
2)
and
carb
on
mon
oxid
e (C
O),
and
then
the
high
er h
ydro
carb
ons,
i.e.
,
CH
4 +
½ O
2 →
2 H
2 +
CO
(2n+
1) H
2 +
n C
O →
CnH
2n+
2 +
n H
2O
The
fir
st r
eact
ion
is v
ery
endo
ther
mic
and
req
uire
s en
ergy
in
put.
In a
dditi
on, m
ore
H2
is n
eede
d th
an is
for
med
alo
ng w
ith
CO
in
the
firs
t re
actio
n fo
r th
e se
cond
rea
ctio
n to
pro
ceed
. Fu
rthe
r, p
art
of t
he m
etha
ne i
n th
e fi
rst
reac
tion
is o
xidi
zed
all
the
way
to
CO
2, i
.e.,
not
all
mak
es C
O,
decr
easi
ng e
ffic
ienc
y fu
rthe
r. T
he r
atio
of
H2
to C
O is
fur
ther
adj
uste
d by
run
ning
the
wat
er-g
as s
hift
rea
ctio
n, C
O +
H2O
→ C
O2
+ H
2, i
nvol
ved
in
the
chem
istr
y of
cat
alyt
ic c
onve
rter
s. T
hese
con
sum
e en
ergy
, w
hich
ul
timat
ely
com
es
from
th
e fo
ssil
or
othe
r en
ergy
fe
edst
ock,
one
way
or
the
othe
r. F
or C
TL
, st
artin
g fr
om c
oal,
whi
ch i
s es
sent
ially
all
carb
on,
H2
mus
t co
me
from
wat
er a
nd
O2,
and
tha
t re
quir
es m
ore
coal
ene
rgy
inpu
t (b
urne
d to
mak
e C
O2
outp
ut)
to f
orm
H2
in t
he f
irst
pla
ce s
o as
to
mak
e th
e hy
droc
arbo
n fu
el in
the
seco
nd p
lace
.
All
DoD
mob
ility
fue
l sto
cks
can
be m
ade
by F
T p
roce
sses
. In
so
me
case
s, t
he l
ack
of a
rom
atic
s in
the
FT
pro
cess
req
uire
s in
trod
uctio
n of
ad
ditiv
es
to
rest
ore
the
exac
t di
esel
fu
el
spec
ific
atio
ns o
f JP
-8,
for
exam
ple,
but
thi
s ca
n be
don
e fo
r re
lativ
ely
little
cos
t by
pay
ing
a re
fine
ry t
o bl
end
the
need
ed
addi
tives
into
the
FT f
uel.
Ano
ther
opt
ion
is to
mix
the
FT f
uel
50:5
0 w
ith c
onve
ntio
nal
JP-8
die
sel
fuel
, so
as
to p
rodu
ce a
m
ixtu
re t
hat
gene
rally
mee
ts t
he J
P-8
fuel
spe
cifi
catio
ns f
or
lubr
icity
, vo
latil
ity,
and
othe
r pe
rfor
man
ce-r
elat
ed p
rope
rtie
s.
The
re s
houl
d th
us b
e no
nee
d to
req
ualif
y al
l D
oD e
ngin
es o
n FT
fue
l, si
nce
it ca
n be
mad
e to
be
nom
inal
ly i
dent
ical
to
JP-8
fu
el w
ith r
elat
ivel
y lo
w-c
ost b
lend
ing
proc
esse
s.
The
FT
pr
oces
s is
ca
pita
l-in
tens
ive,
w
ith
capi
tal
cost
s ap
prox
imat
ely
four
tim
es h
ighe
r th
an th
ose
requ
ired
to p
rodu
ce
an
equi
vale
nt
quan
tity
of
fuel
s by
re
fini
ng
crud
e oi
l. T
he
larg
est
coal
-to-
liqui
d pr
oduc
tion
plan
t is
pre
sent
ly l
ocat
ed i
n So
uth
Afr
ica
(SA
SOL
), p
rodu
cing
up
to 2
00 k
bbl o
f liq
uid
fuel
pe
r da
y.
Ori
gina
lly
built
to
co
unte
r ea
rlie
r fu
el-e
mba
rgo
polic
ies
agai
nst
that
cou
ntry
, at
pre
sent
it
also
pro
duce
s FT
av
iatio
n fu
el
that
it
mix
es
(50:
50)
with
cr
ude-
oil-
deri
ved
avia
tion
fuel
, as
dis
cuss
ed a
bove
. It
has
ins
talle
d no
car
bon
sequ
estr
atio
n m
easu
res,
how
ever
, an
d at
pre
sent
, it
repo
rted
ly
repr
esen
ts
the
larg
est
sing
le
CO
2 em
issi
on
sour
ce
in
the
Afr
ican
con
tinen
t an
d, p
erha
ps,
the
wor
ld.
At
pres
ent,
Roy
al
Dut
ch S
hell
and
SASO
L a
re d
evel
opin
g 10
CT
L p
lant
s in
C
hina
.
In t
he f
igur
e on
pag
e 54
, ‘W
TW
’ is
an
abbr
evia
tion
for
‘Wel
l-T
o-W
heel
s’ a
naly
sis
that
will
be
disc
usse
d be
low
.
56
57
Les
s of
the
ene
rgy
cont
ent
(MJ/
kg)
of t
he f
eeds
tock
(e.
g., c
oal,
natu
ral
gas)
end
s up
in
FT-d
eriv
ed f
uels
com
pare
d to
cru
de o
il pr
oces
sing
and
ref
inin
g. I
gnor
ing
pass
-thr
ough
wat
er,
a C
TL
pl
ant
wou
ld r
equi
re 8
gal
lons
of
wat
er p
er g
allo
n of
FT
die
sel
prod
uced
(cf
. pag
e 54
).
Add
ition
ally
, in
th
e FT
pr
oces
s,
mor
e fe
edst
ock
carb
on
is
rele
ased
as
GH
Gs
than
wou
ld b
e re
leas
ed t
o pr
oduc
e th
e sa
me
amou
nt o
f fu
el f
rom
cru
de o
il.
The
se p
roce
sses
the
refo
re h
ave
an in
crea
sed
wel
l-to
-whe
el (
WT
W)
GH
G b
urde
n pe
r to
n-m
ile.
GT
L-F
T i
s m
ore
effi
cien
t (a
nd l
ess
cost
ly)
than
CT
L-F
T,
as
allu
ded
to a
bove
and
as
indi
cate
d in
the
figu
re o
n pa
ge 5
6. T
he
50%
CT
L e
nerg
y ef
fici
ency
lea
ds t
o tw
o tim
es m
ore
CO
2 em
issi
ons
than
fr
om
petr
oleu
m-d
eriv
ed
dies
el
fuel
, fo
r th
e sa
me
ultim
ate
mec
hani
cal
pow
er
deliv
ered
to
th
e ve
hicl
e w
heel
. W
hile
it
is p
ossi
ble
to m
itiga
te t
he G
HG
s by
car
bon-
sequ
estr
atio
n m
easu
res,
suc
h m
easu
res
com
e at
an
incr
ease
in
cost
(+
25-
40%
) an
d w
ith
som
e un
cert
aint
y on
fu
ture
an
d se
cond
ary
cons
eque
nces
, as
disc
usse
d ab
ove.
Fina
lly,
as n
oted
on
page
54,
an
FT p
lant
is
(ver
y) c
apita
l-in
tens
ive,
app
roxi
mat
ely
4 tim
es th
at o
f an
equ
ival
ent p
lant
(oi
l re
fine
ry)
that
pro
duce
s fu
el s
tart
ing
with
cru
de o
il fe
edst
ock.
A
bsen
t ex
tern
aliti
es
and
othe
r co
nsid
erat
ions
, th
e co
st
of
capi
tal a
lone
suf
fice
s to
dis
cour
age
such
pla
nts.
In
a m
anne
r th
at
para
llels
re
cent
cr
ude-
oil
rese
rves
vs
. pr
oduc
tion
patte
rns,
w
orld
na
tura
l-ga
s re
serv
es/p
rodu
ctio
n ra
tios
have
bee
n su
stai
ned
at a
roun
d 60
yea
rs,
or m
ore,
as
indi
cate
d in
the
gra
phic
on
this
pag
e, d
espi
te i
ncre
ases
in
cons
umpt
ion
over
the
sam
e pe
riod
.
Wor
ld-w
ide
natu
ral g
as r
eser
ves-
to-p
rodu
ctio
n ra
tio.21
21
BP
Sta
tist
ical
Rev
iew
of W
orld
Ene
rgy
(Jan
uary
200
6, p
age
26).
58
59
The
re
sour
ce
base
of
th
e va
riou
s ca
rbon
so
urce
s is
no
w
eval
uate
d to
ass
ess
whe
ther
the
re w
ould
be
suff
icie
nt d
omes
tic
prod
uctio
n ca
pabi
lity
to a
t le
ast
mee
t an
ticip
ated
DoD
fue
l su
pply
nee
ds.
The
gra
phic
on
page
58
show
s th
e an
nual
US
cons
umpt
ion
and
prod
uctio
n of
fue
ls,
pote
ntia
l fu
el s
ourc
es,
and
biom
ass,
ref
eren
ced
to c
arbo
n m
ass.
T
he d
ata
on t
he l
eft-
mos
t si
de o
f th
e gr
aph
indi
cate
car
bon
dom
estic
ally
con
sum
ed
in t
he f
orm
of
foss
il fu
els,
inc
ludi
ng g
asol
ine
(‘pe
trol
’) a
nd
dies
el
fuel
s,
othe
r pe
trol
eum
pr
oduc
ts,
natu
ral
gas
liqui
ds
(pro
pane
, bu
tane
, et
c.),
coa
l an
d na
tura
l ga
s.
In t
otal
, th
ese
dom
estic
ally
co
nsum
ed
fuel
s am
ount
to
2.
4 G
t-C
(b
illio
n m
etri
c to
ns o
f ca
rbon
) ea
ch y
ear.
The
gr
aphi
c al
so
show
s th
e bi
omas
s ca
rbon
-equ
ival
ent
curr
ently
use
d do
mes
tical
ly f
or e
nerg
y.
Mos
t of
tha
t bi
omas
s is
was
te p
rodu
cts
used
to
mak
e el
ectr
icity
. H
owev
er,
the
tota
l al
so i
nclu
des
the
14%
of
the
corn
cro
p th
at i
s cu
rren
tly u
sed
to
mak
e et
hano
l, as
dis
cuss
ed b
elow
. T
he b
iom
ass
pote
ntia
l re
pres
ents
the
1.3
Gt
(tot
al, ×
½ f
or c
arbo
n) o
f dr
y bi
omas
s th
at
the
DO
E-U
SDA
est
imat
es c
an b
e su
stai
nabl
y pr
oduc
ed f
or
ener
gy c
onsu
mpt
ion
in t
he U
.S.
Thi
s es
timat
e as
sum
es t
hat
73%
of
the
biom
ass
will
com
e fr
om a
gric
ultu
re a
nd t
hat
27%
w
ill c
ome
from
for
est
prod
ucts
. J
ASO
N d
id n
ot h
ave
the
oppo
rtun
ity to
ass
ess
the
asse
rtio
n of
sus
tain
abili
ty in
the
DO
E-
USD
A s
tudy
of
such
lar
ge a
mou
nts
of d
omes
tical
ly p
rodu
ced
biom
ass.
Fina
lly,
for
refe
renc
e, t
he r
ight
-mos
t si
de o
f th
e ch
art
depi
cts
the
equi
vale
nt c
arbo
n co
nten
t of
cur
rent
dom
estic
agr
icul
tura
l pr
oduc
tion.
C
lear
ly,
thes
e va
lues
are
rel
ativ
ely
mod
est
in
com
pari
son
to t
he a
mou
nt o
f bi
omas
s th
at w
ould
hav
e to
be
prod
uced
to
di
spla
ce
a re
ason
able
qu
antit
y of
cu
rren
t do
mes
tical
ly c
onsu
med
liqu
id f
uel d
eriv
ed f
rom
cru
de o
il.
Of
som
e si
gnif
ican
ce is
the
indi
catio
n of
the
equi
vale
nt c
arbo
n-m
ass
requ
irem
ents
that
the
DoD
fos
sil-
fuel
nee
ds c
orre
spon
d to
(f
ar
righ
t).
If
econ
omic
ally
pe
rmis
sibl
e,
they
co
uld,
in
pr
inci
ple,
be
co
vere
d by
ex
ploi
ting
the
natio
nal
mun
icip
al
solid
-was
te (
MSW
) st
ream
alo
ne.
60
61
Hav
ing
esta
blis
hed
the
feas
ibili
ty
of
conv
ertin
g no
n-liq
uid
form
s of
fos
sil
ener
gy i
nto
liqui
d hy
droc
arbo
n fu
els
thro
ugh
the
FT p
roce
ss a
nd h
avin
g es
tabl
ishe
d th
at th
ere
is, i
n pr
inci
ple
at l
east
, an
am
ple
supp
ly o
f su
ch c
arbo
n fr
om a
var
iety
of
dom
estic
res
ourc
es,
the
rela
tive
cost
s of
pro
duci
ng l
iqui
d fu
el
from
the
vari
ous
diff
eren
t for
ms
of c
arbo
n av
aila
ble
in th
e U
.S.
are
now
ass
esse
d.
Prod
uctio
n co
sts
of
FT
dies
el
depe
nd
on
the
choi
ce
of
feed
stoc
k.
Dif
fere
ntia
l cos
ts r
efle
ct d
iffe
renc
es i
n ha
ndlin
g th
e fe
edst
ock
in t
he f
acili
ty (
solid
vs.
gas
, et
c.)
as w
ell
as e
nerg
y co
sts
need
ed t
o pr
oduc
e th
e hi
gh t
empe
ratu
res
from
gas
eous
(n
atur
al g
as)
vs.
poro
us m
ater
ial
(bio
mas
s),
vs.
solid
s (c
oal)
. Pr
oduc
tion
cost
s va
ry f
rom
$30
/bbl
for
str
ande
d ga
s (G
TL
),22
to
$7
0+/b
bl
for
biom
ass.
CT
L
($45
/bbl
) is
50
%
mor
e ex
pens
ive
than
GT
L (
$30/
bbl)
. I
n al
l ca
ses,
it
cost
s m
ore
to
prod
uce
dies
el b
y an
y FT
pro
cess
tha
n it
does
to
mak
e JP
-8
from
cru
de o
il.
The
mos
t-co
st-e
ffec
tive
sour
ce o
f FT
die
sel
is v
ia c
onve
rsio
n of
str
ande
d ga
s, e
.g.,
on t
he n
orth
slo
pe o
f A
lask
a.
As
also
no
ted
abov
e, in
add
ition
to h
igh
prod
uctio
n co
sts,
FT
pro
cess
es
have
hig
h ca
pita
l co
sts
that
det
er i
nves
tmen
t in
the
fac
e of
un
cert
ain
futu
re c
rude
-oil
pric
es,
i.e.,
in t
he e
vent
of
a fa
ll in
pr
ices
. T
hat
larg
e sw
ings
are
par
t of
the
his
tori
cal
reco
rd i
s
22
A ‘
stra
nded
gas
’ re
serv
e is
a n
atur
al g
as f
ield
tha
t ha
s be
en d
isco
vere
d,
but
rem
ains
unu
sabl
e fo
r ei
ther
phy
sica
l or
eco
nom
ic r
easo
ns. G
as t
hat
is
foun
d w
ithin
oil
wel
ls i
s co
nven
tiona
lly r
egar
ded
as a
ssoc
iate
d ga
s [o
r st
rand
ed
gas]
an
d ha
s hi
stor
ical
ly
been
fl
ared
. It
is
al
so
som
etim
es
reci
rcul
ated
ba
ck
into
oi
l w
ells
to
m
aint
ain
extr
actio
n pr
essu
re,
or
conv
erte
d in
to e
lect
rici
ty u
sing
gas
-pow
ered
eng
ines
.
[http
://en
.wik
iped
ia.o
rg/w
iki/S
tran
ded_
gas_
rese
rve,
6 A
ugus
t 200
6]
ampl
y do
cum
ente
d in
the
fig
ure
belo
w t
hat
depi
cts
the
pric
e of
cr
ude
oil,
sinc
e 18
61,
in
FY05
do
llars
.
It
illus
trat
es
the
cons
ider
able
ris
k th
at w
ould
be
incu
rred
by
assu
min
g th
at t
he
curr
ent
high
pri
ces
in t
he v
icin
ity o
f $7
5/bb
l w
ill b
e su
stai
ned.
It
als
o ill
ustr
ates
tha
t th
ey w
ere
exce
eded
aro
und
1980
(Ir
ania
n re
volu
tion)
.23
As
with
any
inv
estm
ents
and
bar
ring
ext
erna
litie
s, i
nves
tmen
ts
in b
iofu
els,
FT
pro
cess
es,
etc.
, ne
ed t
o co
mpe
te w
ith c
urre
nt
retu
rns
from
dri
lling
for
cru
de o
il.
23
BP
Sta
tist
ical
Rev
iew
of W
orld
Ene
rgy
(Jan
uary
200
6, p
. 16)
.
62
63
2.
Bio
fuel
s
For
com
pari
son,
the
pro
duct
ion
of l
iqui
d fu
els
from
non
-fos
sil
ener
gy s
ourc
es w
ill n
ow b
e di
scus
sed.
Bio
mas
s is
the
mos
t oft
-ci
ted
rout
e fo
r su
ch p
urpo
ses
beca
use,
in
prin
cipl
e, b
iom
ass-
deri
ved
fuel
s co
uld
be w
idel
y av
aila
ble.
A
dditi
onal
ly, b
iofu
els
coul
d be
, at l
east
to s
ome
exte
nt, s
usta
inab
le a
nd r
enew
able
. Of
conc
ern,
the
refo
re,
is n
ot o
nly
the
rela
tive
cost
of
the
biof
uel
with
res
pect
to
the
cost
of
crud
e-oi
l-ba
sed
fuel
s, o
r FT
-der
ived
fu
els,
bu
t th
e su
itabi
lity
of
bio-
deri
ved
fuel
s fo
r th
e D
oD
mis
sion
and
whe
ther
the
pro
duct
ion
of s
uch
fuel
s st
ems
from
a
rene
wab
le p
roce
ss,
e.g.
, th
e fr
actio
n of
sun
light
ene
rgy
stor
ed
in t
he f
inal
fue
l pr
oduc
t, as
wel
l as
the
res
ult
of a
ful
l ac
coun
t of
all
othe
r en
ergy
and
oth
er i
nput
s re
quir
ed t
o pr
oduc
e th
e bi
ofue
l. E
than
ol d
eriv
ed f
rom
cor
n
The
mai
n pr
esen
ce i
n th
e do
mes
tic b
iofu
els
mar
ket
at t
his
time
is e
than
ol d
eriv
ed f
rom
cor
n.
In t
he U
.S.,
etha
nol
is p
rim
arily
us
ed a
s an
oxy
gena
te in
aut
omot
ive
fuel
, rep
laci
ng th
e ad
ditiv
e M
TB
E (
met
hyl
tert
iary
-but
yl e
ther
).
Pres
ently
, 14
% o
f U
.S.
corn
pro
duct
ion
is u
sed
to p
rovi
de t
he e
than
ol t
hat
com
pris
es
2% o
f U
.S. t
rans
port
atio
n fu
el.
The
vol
umet
ric
ener
gy c
onte
nt o
f et
hano
l (C
2H5O
H)
is 2
/3 t
hat
of g
asol
ine
or d
iese
l fue
ls (
1.5
gallo
ns o
f et
hano
l sto
re th
e sa
me
ener
gy a
s 1
gallo
n of
gas
olin
e).
Thi
s is
bec
ause
one
car
bon
in
etha
nol
is a
lrea
dy p
artly
oxi
dize
d an
d th
eref
ore
is l
ess
of a
co
ntri
buto
r to
the
hea
t of
com
bust
ion
to f
orm
CO
2 th
an t
he
fully
red
uced
for
m o
f ca
rbon
in li
quid
hyd
roca
rbon
fue
ls.
Cor
n is
con
vert
ed t
o et
hano
l in
eith
er a
dry
or
wet
mill
ing
proc
ess.
In
dry
mill
ing,
liq
uefi
ed c
orn
star
ch i
s pr
oduc
ed b
y he
atin
g co
rn m
eal
with
wat
er a
nd e
nzym
es.
A s
econ
d en
zym
e co
nver
ts t
he l
ique
fied
sta
rch
to s
ugar
s th
at a
re f
erm
ente
d by
ye
ast,
prod
ucin
g et
hano
l and
car
bon
diox
ide.
In
the
(pre
ferr
ed)
wet
mill
ing
proc
ess,
the
fib
er,
germ
(oi
l),
and
prot
ein
are
sepa
rate
d fr
om th
e st
arch
bef
ore
ferm
enta
tion
to e
than
ol.
In B
razi
l, et
hano
l is
deri
ved
from
sug
ar c
ane.
E
than
ol c
an a
lso
be p
rodu
ced
from
whe
at a
nd s
oybe
ans.
Of
the
sola
r en
ergy
in
cide
nt
per
unit
area
fa
rmed
, ap
prox
imat
ely,
0.2
2 kW
/m2 y
earl
y an
d da
y-ni
ght
aver
aged
at
repr
esen
tativ
e m
id-l
atitu
des,
onl
y 0.
1% e
nds
up i
n co
rn.
Aft
er
the
fina
l pr
oces
s, o
nly
0.03
-0.0
5% o
f th
e in
itial
ins
olat
ion
ener
gy i
s co
ntai
ned
in l
iqui
d fu
el.24
A
noth
er f
acto
r of
thr
ee i
s th
en l
ost
duri
ng c
onve
rsio
n of
the
fue
l in
to u
sefu
l w
ork
in a
n in
tern
al c
ombu
stio
n en
gine
.
The
low
sol
ar-e
nerg
y co
nver
sion
eff
icie
ncy,
cou
pled
with
the
en
ergy
-int
ensi
ve p
roce
ss t
o pr
oduc
e co
rn e
than
ol,
resu
lts i
n an
ov
eral
l pr
oces
s th
at y
ield
s no
sig
nifi
cant
net
ene
rgy
bene
fit
from
cor
n-de
rive
d et
hano
l, as
it
is w
ithin
±20
% o
f “e
nerg
y br
eake
ven”
. A
s im
plem
ente
d in
the
U.S
. at
pre
sent
, m
uch
of
the
ener
gy u
sed
to m
ake
corn
-bas
ed e
than
ol i
s pr
oduc
ed b
y bu
rnin
g co
al to
pro
vide
hea
t to
the
proc
ess.
24 A
noth
er f
acto
r of
3,
or s
o, i
s th
en l
ost
in c
onve
rtin
g th
e (l
ow-v
alue
) en
ergy
in
the
fuel
to
wor
k (h
igh-
valu
e en
ergy
), i.
e., a
n ov
eral
l co
nver
sion
ef
fici
ency
of
in
cide
nt
sunl
ight
en
ergy
to
hi
gh-v
alue
en
ergy
(e
.g.,
mec
hani
cal
wor
k) o
f 0.
01%
. In
con
tras
t, so
lar
cells
hav
e an
eff
icie
ncy
in
the
rang
e of
15-
22%
and
pro
duce
hig
h-va
lue
ener
gy (
elec
tric
ity),
alb
eit a
t to
o hi
gh a
cos
t in
ter
ms
of $
/inst
alle
d-kW
to
be c
ompe
titiv
e fo
r m
ost
appl
icat
ions
.
64
65
Cel
lulo
sic
etha
nol
The
net
ene
rgy
conv
ersi
on e
ffic
ienc
y in
a p
roce
ss i
n w
hich
ce
llulo
sic
biom
ass
is c
onve
rted
int
o liq
uid
fuel
is
pote
ntia
lly a
t le
ast
thre
e tim
es
high
er
than
th
e 0.
03-0
.05%
va
lue
char
acte
rist
ic
of
etha
nol
from
co
rn.
H
owev
er,
a pr
oper
(t
herm
odyn
amic
-) c
ycle
ana
lysi
s th
at a
ccou
nts
for
cons
erva
tion
of m
ass
and
wha
t fr
actio
n of
the
ene
rgy
is s
usta
inab
le w
ill
redu
ce t
his
figu
re.
The
low
con
vers
ion
effi
cien
cy c
ombi
ned
with
the
rel
ativ
ely
low
pow
er/e
nerg
y de
nsity
of
the
year
ly
aver
aged
in
sola
tion
requ
ire
very
la
rge
area
s to
pr
ovid
e si
gnif
ican
t (ne
t) e
nerg
y re
sour
ces
from
suc
h a
proc
ess.
The
req
uisi
te c
ellu
losi
c bi
omas
s co
uld
be p
rodu
ced
from
a
wid
e va
riet
y of
fee
dsto
cks,
inc
ludi
ng a
gric
ultu
ral
plan
t w
aste
s (c
orn
stov
er,
cere
al s
traw
s, s
ugar
cane
bag
asse
), w
aste
s fr
om
fore
st p
rodu
cts
(saw
dust
, pa
per
pulp
, et
c.),
and
cro
ps g
row
n sp
ecif
ical
ly f
or f
uel
prod
uctio
n (m
isca
nthu
s, s
witc
hgra
ss).
A
s di
scus
sed
abov
e,
the
2005
D
OE
-USG
A
Bil
lion
T
on
Vie
w
estim
ated
tha
t th
e U
.S. c
ould
sus
tain
ably
pro
duce
1.3
Gt
of d
ry
biom
ass
annu
ally
, of
whi
ch a
ppro
xim
atel
y ha
lf i
s ca
rbon
by
mas
s.
Cel
lulo
sic
biom
ass
is c
ompo
sed
of c
ellu
lose
, he
mic
ellu
lose
, an
d lig
nin,
w
ith
smal
ler
amou
nts
of
prot
eins
, lip
ids
(fat
s,
wax
es,
and
oils
) an
d as
h.
Rou
ghly
, 2/
3 of
the
dry
mas
s of
ce
llulo
sic
mat
eria
ls
is
com
pose
d of
ce
llulo
se
and
hem
icel
lulo
se,
whi
le l
igni
n m
akes
up
mos
t of
the
rem
aini
ng
dry
mas
s.
Cel
lulo
se a
nd h
emic
ellu
lose
can
be
conv
erte
d in
to
etha
nol,
whi
le li
gnin
can
not
. L
igni
n ca
n be
bur
ned
to p
rodu
ce
elec
tric
ity,
or
coul
d be
co
nver
ted
to
fuel
th
roug
h th
e FT
pr
oces
s.
The
cel
lulo
sic-
biom
ass
com
mun
ity m
ust d
evel
op c
ost-
effe
ctiv
e pr
oces
ses
to c
onve
rt c
ellu
losi
c bi
omas
s to
liq
uid
fuel
s if
the
y ar
e to
com
pete
in
the
mar
ketp
lace
with
fos
sil-
fuel
bas
ed l
iqui
d fu
els.
At p
rese
nt, a
via
ble
proc
ess
does
not
exi
st.
Cel
lulo
sic
biom
ass
mus
t al
so
com
pete
ec
onom
ical
ly
with
gr
owin
g fo
od
on
the
sam
e pa
rcel
of
la
nd.
Pr
esen
tly,
(uns
ubsi
dize
d)
farm
ing
for
food
is
m
ore
prof
itabl
e th
an
(uns
ubsi
dize
d) f
arm
ing
for
ener
gy.
66
67
It m
ust
also
be
dem
onst
rate
d th
at s
uffi
cien
t ce
llulo
sic
biom
ass
feed
stoc
k ca
n be
har
vest
ed w
ith s
usta
inab
le a
gric
ultu
ral c
ycle
s.
Sust
aina
bilit
y re
quir
es t
hat
a fu
ll th
erm
odyn
amic
cyc
le f
or t
he
proc
ess
be c
onsi
dere
d, in
clud
ing
the
mas
s, p
artic
ular
inor
gani
c,
orga
nic,
and
bio
mas
s sp
ecie
s, a
s w
ell
as e
nerg
y re
quir
ed t
o re
med
iate
an
y “d
amag
e”
to
crop
la
nd
from
gr
owin
g an
d ha
rves
ting
the
ener
gy
crop
ov
er
man
y ye
ars
(in
orde
r to
m
aint
ain
prod
uctio
n in
defi
nite
ly).
T
op s
oil
is g
ener
ated
on
cent
ury
time
scal
es.
Mon
itori
ng f
or d
amag
e/de
plet
ion
from
ev
en c
aref
ul a
gric
ultu
ral
prac
tices
on
such
a t
ime
scal
e is
a
chal
leng
e.
The
sus
tain
able
bio
mas
s fu
el c
ycle
sho
uld
incl
ude
all
of t
he
inpu
ts a
nd o
utpu
ts o
f th
e pr
oces
s.
Inpu
ts t
o th
e cy
cle
wou
ld
need
to
incl
ude
fert
ilize
r an
d th
e en
ergy
and
fee
dsto
ck t
o pr
oduc
e it,
che
mic
als,
fue
ls,
pest
icid
es,
labo
r, m
achi
nery
, so
il,
sun,
rai
n, C
O2
upta
ke,
and
any
wat
er.
Out
puts
sho
uld
incl
ude
heat
, GH
Gs,
and
was
te w
ater
.
An
impo
rtan
t asp
ect o
f a
com
plet
e cy
cle
is w
ater
. U
sing
wat
er,
othe
r th
an
relia
nce
on
rain
wat
er,
to
grow
en
ergy
cr
ops
is
com
mon
ly a
ckno
wle
dged
to
incu
r a
larg
e pe
nalty
bec
ause
of
the
requ
ired
ene
rgy
(and
cos
t) t
o de
liver
the
wat
er (
ener
gy i
s re
quir
ed t
o de
liver
it,
or p
ump
it up
fro
m t
he g
roun
d: a
100
m
rise
is
not
atyp
ical
), a
nd b
ecau
se l
ong
term
irr
igat
ion
impl
ies
a bu
ild-u
p of
sal
inity
(so
il sa
ltifi
catio
n).25
25
See
art
icle
s in
(19
94)
Agr
. Wat
er M
anag
emen
t, vo
l. 25
, “M
anag
emen
t of
Ir
riga
tion
Wat
er a
nd i
ts E
colo
gica
l Im
pact
,” C
omm
issi
on I
I: S
ympo
sia
of
the
Tra
nsac
tion
s of
the
15t
h W
orld
Con
gres
s of
Soi
l Sc
ienc
e (A
capu
lco,
M
exic
o,
1994
),
vol.
3a;
Pim
ente
l et
al
. (1
995)
E
nvir
onm
enta
l an
d ec
onom
ic
cost
s of
so
il er
osio
n an
d co
nser
vatio
n be
nefi
ts.
Scie
nce
276:
1117
-23;
T
. Pa
tzek
&
D
. Pi
men
tel
(200
5)
“The
rmod
ynam
ics
of
Eve
n w
here
the
re i
s pl
enty
of
rain
to
grow
the
can
dida
te
feed
stoc
k, e
than
ol g
ener
atio
n fr
om b
iom
ass
requ
ires
a g
reat
de
al o
f pr
oces
s w
ater
. A
ssum
ing
an e
nzym
atic
pro
cess
tha
t re
ache
s 10
-15%
eth
yl a
lcoh
ol, t
here
will
be
abou
t 6-
10 g
allo
ns
of w
aste
wat
er f
or e
very
gal
lon
of f
uel-
qual
ity a
lcoh
ol.
The
dr
egs
will
hav
e to
be
rem
oved
fro
m t
he w
ater
(an
d pe
rhap
s re
turn
ed t
o th
e la
nd),
if
the
wat
er i
s to
be
re-u
sed
and
that
par
t of
the
cyc
le c
lose
d.
Thi
s al
so i
ncur
s tr
ansp
orta
tion
cost
s. T
he
only
al
tern
ativ
e to
be
arin
g th
e en
ergy
co
st
of
this
w
ater
tr
ansp
orta
tion
and
clea
nup
is p
ollu
tion
of w
ater
way
s or
the
oc
ean.
Fina
lly,
no c
ellu
losi
c co
nver
sion
tec
hnol
ogy
exis
ts t
oday
on
a co
mm
erci
al s
cale
and
an
eval
uatio
n of
its
eff
icac
y, r
elat
ive
cost
s, s
usta
inab
ility
, or
its
pot
entia
l to
mee
t D
oD f
uel-
supp
ly
need
s ca
nnot
be
mad
e at
this
tim
e.
E
nerg
y Pr
oduc
tion
from
Bio
mas
s,”
Cri
tica
l R
evie
ws
in P
lant
Sci
ence
s,
24:3
27–6
4; a
nd P
imen
tel
(200
6) S
oil
eros
ion:
A f
ood
and
envi
ronm
enta
l th
reat
. Env
. Dev
. & S
usta
inab
ility
8:1
16-1
37.
68
69
70
71
3.
Wel
l-T
o-P
ump
(WT
P)
and
Wel
l-T
o-W
heel
(W
TW)
anal
yses
A
prop
er
anal
ysis
re
quir
es
the
eval
uatio
n of
th
e en
ergy
re
quir
ed t
o no
t on
ly p
rodu
ce,
but
also
to
stor
e, d
istr
ibut
e, a
nd
ultim
atel
y ut
ilize
var
ious
fue
ls o
f po
tent
ial
inte
rest
to
the
DoD
. W
ithou
t su
ch a
n an
alys
is,
a fo
cus
on o
nly
fuel
pro
duct
ion
will
no
t ad
equa
tely
cap
ture
the
tru
e su
pply
con
stra
ints
and
nee
ds,
nor
the
suita
bilit
y of
the
fuel
for
DoD
use
. In
suc
h an
ana
lysi
s,
it is
use
ful
to a
ccou
nt f
or t
he e
ntir
e en
ergy
str
eam
fro
m t
he
wel
l, i.e
., th
e en
ergy
sou
rce,
to th
e w
heel
, i.e
., th
e (f
uel)
ene
rgy
cons
umpt
ion
by t
he e
nd u
ser.
Thi
s is
kno
wn
as t
he W
ell-
To-
Whe
el (
WT
W)
proc
ess.
T
his
proc
ess
is o
ften
sub
divi
ded
into
tw
o se
para
te
com
pone
nts,
on
e fr
om t
he w
ell
to t
he p
ump
(WT
P), a
nd th
e se
cond
fro
m th
e pu
mp
to th
e w
heel
(PT
W).
The
WT
P en
ergy
eff
icie
ncy
for
dies
el a
nd g
asol
ine
is o
f or
der
85%
, w
hile
th
e W
TP
effi
cien
cy
of
cellu
losi
c et
hano
l is
es
timat
ed to
be
clos
er to
40%
(cf
. pag
e 68
).26
Hen
ce, t
o su
pply
a
cert
ain
need
ed
ener
gy
to
DoD
pl
atfo
rms
wou
ld
requ
ire
alm
ost
twic
e as
man
y jo
ules
in
etha
nol
prod
uctio
n as
in
dies
el
or g
asol
ine
prod
uctio
n fr
om c
rude
oil.
The
PT
W e
ffic
ienc
y is
pri
mar
ily a
fun
ctio
n of
eng
ine
type
. I
t is
typ
ical
ly o
f or
der
30%
, whi
ch i
s a
mea
sure
of
the
frac
tion
of
the
ener
gy o
f th
e fu
el th
at c
an b
e co
nver
ted
to u
sefu
l wor
k.
26
‘L
S D
iese
l’ a
nd ‘
LS
Gas
olin
e’ d
enot
e ‘L
ow-S
ulfu
r’ d
iese
l/gas
olin
e, a
s pr
oduc
ed i
n E
urop
e.
Rem
oval
of
sulf
ur f
rom
tra
nspo
rtat
ion
fuel
s is
re
quir
ed t
o pr
even
t po
ison
ing
of c
atal
ytic
con
vert
ers
in t
he e
xhau
st-g
as
stre
am.
At
pres
ent,
U.S
. die
sel
does
not
mee
t th
e lo
w-s
ulfu
r re
quir
emen
t an
d di
esel
-pow
ered
car
s in
the
U.S
., at
pre
sent
, can
not a
vail
them
selv
es o
f th
e sa
me
emis
sion
s bu
rden
red
uctio
n te
chno
logy
.
Com
bini
ng
thes
e tw
o co
mpo
nent
s in
to
the
anal
ysis
of
an
ov
eral
l ene
rgy
proc
ess
prod
uces
the
full
WT
W a
naly
sis.
It i
s us
eful
to
perf
orm
tw
o se
para
te W
TW
ana
lyse
s, o
ne b
ased
on
the
net
ene
rgy
deliv
ery/
inpu
t an
d th
e ot
her
base
d on
the
net
G
HG
s em
itted
for
the
ful
l fu
el p
rodu
ctio
n to
con
sum
ptio
n pr
oces
s.
The
lef
t-m
ost
WT
W g
raph
ic o
n pa
ge 6
9 de
pict
s th
e to
tal
ener
gy r
equi
red
to m
ove
100
km.
Con
vent
iona
l di
esel
an
d ga
solin
e fu
els
are
supe
rior
on
this
ene
rgy
basi
s, w
hile
w
ood
prod
ucts
are
the
wor
st.
How
ever
, on
a G
HG
bas
is,
biom
ass
can
be
a ve
ry
low
G
HG
so
urce
, w
hen
mea
sure
d W
TW
, whi
le m
ost a
ll fo
ssil
fuel
s ar
e le
ss f
avor
able
. C
oal i
s by
fa
r th
e m
ost o
ffen
sive
GH
G e
mitt
er.
From
this
per
spec
tive,
gas
(G
TL
) is
a m
uch
bette
r so
urce
of
fuel
than
coa
l (C
TL
).
72
73
Ove
rall-
proc
ess
(WT
W)
ener
gy a
nd G
HG
em
issi
ons
prov
ide
usef
ul c
rite
ria,
but
not
the
only
con
side
ratio
ns f
or a
sses
sing
the
suita
bilit
y of
va
riou
s fu
els
for
DoD
us
e.
A
n es
peci
ally
im
port
ant
oper
atio
nal
cons
trai
nt f
or t
he D
oD i
s en
ergy
den
sity
, i.e
., th
e en
ergy
con
tent
per
uni
t vo
lum
e, o
r its
rec
ipro
cal,
the
fuel
vol
ume
requ
ired
for
a g
iven
ene
rgy
cont
ent.
Ene
rgy
per
unit
volu
me
in e
ssen
ce d
eter
min
es v
ehic
le r
ange
for
a g
iven
fu
el-t
ank
capa
city
, an
d ca
n di
ctat
e (l
imit
or e
nhan
ce)
mili
tary
ta
ctic
s of
mob
ile p
latf
orm
s.
In t
his
rega
rd,
it is
use
ful
to c
onsi
der
the
fuel
vol
ume
requ
ired
fo
r a
give
n en
ergy
con
tent
in
term
s of
the
rat
io o
f th
e fu
el
volu
me
for
a gi
ven
ener
gy c
onte
nt, r
elat
ive
to t
hat
of g
asol
ine.
T
he g
raph
ic o
n pa
ge 7
2 ill
ustr
ates
that
die
sel,
gaso
line,
and
JP-
8 ar
e ve
ry s
imila
r, w
ith b
utan
ol (
C4H
9OH
) po
sses
sing
90%
of
the
ener
gy d
ensi
ty o
f ga
solin
e.
Eth
anol
, ho
wev
er,
has
a 50
% l
ower
vol
umet
ric
ener
gy d
ensi
ty
than
gas
olin
e. W
ith 5
0% l
ess
ener
gy d
ensi
ty t
han
gaso
line,
D
oD
oper
atio
ns
will
re
quir
e 50
%
mor
e fu
elin
g so
rtie
s by
ta
nker
tr
ucks
, im
plyi
ng
a 50
%
grea
ter
dang
er
for
thos
e re
spon
sibl
e fo
r th
at e
ndea
vor.
T
o ke
ep th
e sa
me
rang
e pe
r fi
ll-up
by
com
bat
vehi
cles
, fu
el t
anks
wou
ld h
ave
to b
e in
crea
sed
in s
ize
by 5
0%.
Fur
ther
mor
e, e
than
ol h
as a
low
er f
lash
poi
nt
and,
th
eref
ore,
m
ore
pron
e to
ex
plos
ion
than
is
ga
solin
e.
Hen
ce, e
ven
if i
t w
ere
com
para
ble
on a
WT
W e
nerg
y or
GH
G
emis
sion
s ba
sis,
eth
anol
wou
ld s
till
be u
nsui
tabl
e fo
r us
e on
D
oD m
issi
ons
on a
per
form
ance
bas
is.
On
this
per
form
ance
bas
is, l
iqui
d hy
droc
arbo
n fu
els
emer
ge a
s th
e pr
efer
red
ener
gy s
ourc
e fo
r m
obili
ty o
n D
oD t
actic
al a
nd
com
bat v
ehic
les,
bot
h ai
r an
d la
nd-b
ased
. Si
nce
thes
e fu
els
are
mos
t ch
eapl
y m
ade
from
fos
sil
ener
gy o
f on
e ty
pe o
r an
othe
r,
and
sinc
e,
barr
ing
unfo
rese
en
uphe
aval
s,
the
foss
il-fu
el
feed
stoc
k su
pplie
s ap
pear
ad
equa
te
for
som
etim
e in
to
the
futu
re,
the
best
m
etho
d fo
r re
duct
ion
of
a D
oD
fuel
co
nsum
ptio
n is
to
redu
ce d
eman
d, a
s de
scri
bed
abov
e, t
hrou
gh
a va
riet
y of
met
hods
inc
ludi
ng p
atte
rns
of u
se,
light
wei
ghtin
g ve
hicl
es,
re-e
ngin
ing
tank
s an
d B
-52
bom
bers
, an
d re
plac
ing
man
ned
plat
form
s w
ith u
nman
ned
ones
. I
n ag
greg
ate,
the
se
appr
oach
es c
an y
ield
con
side
rabl
e fu
el s
avin
gs w
hile
at
the
sam
e ti
me
enha
ncin
g pe
rfor
man
ce
of
DoD
pl
atfo
rms
and
open
ing
up n
ew m
issi
on c
apab
iliti
es f
or D
oD f
orce
s.
74
[Thi
s pa
ge in
tent
iona
lly le
ft b
lank
.]
75
VI.
Dis
cuss
ion
an
d c
on
clu
din
g r
emar
ks
The
pre
cedi
ng d
ata
and
anal
ysis
pro
vide
a b
asis
for
ass
essi
ng
prob
lem
s an
d is
sues
ass
ocia
ted
with
U.S
. an
d D
oD f
ossi
l-fu
el
use,
the
sho
rt-
and
inte
rmed
iate
-ter
m p
rosp
ects
, as
wel
l as
gu
idan
ce f
or a
pat
h fo
rwar
d th
at w
ould
red
uce
the
DoD
’s
foss
il-fu
el d
epen
denc
e.
A. I
nter
nati
onal
and
nat
iona
l con
side
rati
ons
The
tw
o fi
gure
s on
pag
e iv
, fo
llow
ing
the
exec
utiv
e su
mm
ary,
de
pict
th
e m
ovem
ent
of
crud
e oi
l an
d oi
l pr
oduc
ts
acro
ss
boun
dari
es o
f th
e m
ajor
pro
duct
ion
and
cons
umpt
ion
area
s in
th
e w
orld
. T
hey
also
dep
ict t
he p
rese
nt d
epen
denc
e of
the
U.S
. on
its
maj
or f
orei
gn s
uppl
iers
.
Oil
impo
rts
acco
unt
for
a la
rge
frac
tion
of t
he U
.S.
curr
ent
acco
unt b
alan
ce. T
he E
cono
mis
t (20
Apr
il 20
06)
note
s th
at,
“Ple
nty
of A
mer
ican
s bl
ame
unfa
ir c
ompe
titio
n fr
om A
sia,
and
es
peci
ally
C
hina
, fo
r th
eir
coun
try'
s gi
gant
ic
curr
ent-
acco
unt
defi
cit.
Yet
th
e gr
oup
of
coun
trie
s w
ith
the
wor
ld's
bi
gges
t cu
rren
t-ac
coun
t su
rplu
ses
is
no
long
er
emer
ging
A
sia,
bu
t ex
port
ers
of
oil.
As
the
pric
e of
th
eir
chie
f re
sour
ce
has
clim
bed—
this
wee
k it
hit
a ne
w n
omin
al r
ecor
d pr
ice
of m
ore
than
$7
0 a
barr
el—
thes
e ec
onom
ies
have
en
joye
d a
huge
w
indf
all.
From
an
Am
eric
an p
oint
of
view
, th
e ri
se i
n oi
l pr
ices
ha
s ex
plai
ned
half
of
the
wid
enin
g of
the
cur
rent
-acc
ount
def
icit
si
nce
2003
, a
bigg
er s
hare
tha
n th
at a
ccou
nted
for
by
Chi
na.
[ita
lics
our
s] …
Am
eric
a ga
ins
little
, in
term
s of
its
curr
ent-
acco
unt b
alan
ce, e
ven
from
the
im
port
s th
at o
il ex
port
ers
do b
uy.
It n
ow a
ccou
nts
for
only
8%
of
OPE
C c
ount
ries
' tot
al i
mpo
rts;
the
Eur
opea
n U
nion
ha
s 32
%.
So e
ven
if t
he e
xpor
ters
spe
nt a
ll th
eir
extr
a re
venu
e,
Am
eric
a's
curr
ent-
acco
unt
defi
cit
wou
ld i
ncre
ase
as o
il pr
ices
ri
se.
Thi
s pa
rtly
exp
lain
s w
hy i
n re
cent
yea
rs t
he E
U's
tra
de
bala
nce
with
th
e oi
l ex
port
ers
has
bare
ly
chan
ged
even
as
A
mer
ica'
s de
fici
t has
gro
wn
shar
ply.
”
It i
s si
gnif
ican
t th
at t
he p
repo
nder
ant
frac
tion
(51.
1%)
of c
rude
oi
l and
ref
ined
oil
prod
ucts
impo
rted
into
the
U.S
. der
ives
fro
m
the
(rem
aind
er)
of t
he A
mer
ican
con
tinen
t (S
outh
and
Cen
tral
A
mer
ica,
Mex
ico,
and
Can
ada)
. W
est
and
Nor
th A
fric
a co
me
seco
nd w
ith a
tot
al o
f 19
.1%
of
U.S
. oi
l im
port
s, a
nd t
he
Mid
dle
Eas
t, w
hile
it
is t
he w
orld
’s m
ajor
oil
supp
lier
to b
e su
re, i
t is
thi
rd i
n im
port
ance
as
a U
.S. s
uppl
ier,
acc
ount
ing
for
18%
of
U.S
. oi
l im
port
s. T
hese
dat
a in
dica
te t
hat
unde
r th
e as
sum
ptio
n th
at U
.S. a
nd n
on-M
iddl
e-E
aste
rn p
rodu
ctio
n co
uld
be h
eld
(app
roxi
mat
ely)
con
stan
t, it
wou
ld s
uffi
ce t
o de
crea
se
U.S
. fos
sil-
fuel
con
sum
ptio
n by
12%
, at p
rese
nt, f
or th
e U
.S. t
o be
in
a po
sitio
n to
wea
n its
elf
free
fro
m M
iddl
e E
ast
oil,
in t
he
shor
t te
rm,
shou
ld
the
need
ar
ise.
As
disc
usse
d ea
rlie
r,
how
ever
, th
e w
orld
fun
gibi
lity
of o
il th
roug
h th
e w
orld
oil
supp
ly m
arke
ts w
ould
res
pond
to th
is d
ecre
ase
by a
djus
ting
the
supp
ly-d
eman
d ba
lanc
e.
Such
a g
oal
mig
ht b
e ac
hiev
ed w
ithou
t de
lete
riou
s ef
fect
s to
th
e U
.S.
econ
omy
by
any
of
a nu
mbe
r of
m
eans
in
co
mbi
natio
n.
Thi
s w
ould
pr
oduc
e,
at
leas
t te
mpo
rari
ly,
a w
orld
-wid
e ex
cess
pro
duct
ion
capa
city
and
a d
ecre
ase
in o
il pr
ices
, im
prov
ing
both
the
nat
iona
l ec
onom
y an
d th
e na
tiona
l de
fens
e po
stur
e.
Reg
ardi
ng o
il pr
ices
, it’
s w
orth
not
ing
that
the
y ar
e no
t at
hi
stor
ical
ly h
igh
leve
ls w
hen
adju
sted
for
inf
latio
n.
As
the
char
t on
pag
e 61
ind
icat
es,
pric
es a
roun
d th
e 19
80 t
ime
peri
od
peak
ed
at
$36/
bbl
in
then
-yea
r m
oney
, co
rres
pond
ing
to
76
FY05
$ 85
/bbl
. T
he r
apid
dec
reas
e in
pri
cing
fol
low
ing
that
pe
ak a
nd t
he d
ata
depi
cted
in
the
figu
res
on p
age
6 ca
n on
ly
indu
ce a
con
serv
ativ
e st
ance
in
the
oil
indu
stry
, di
scou
ragi
ng
inve
stm
ents
tha
t re
quir
e th
at t
he p
rese
nt h
igh
pric
es m
ust
be
sust
aine
d to
be
just
ifie
d.
Fina
lly, a
ddin
g to
the
gene
ral c
avea
t of
a fo
ggy
futu
re, v
is-à
-vis
in
stab
ility
in
th
e M
iddl
e E
ast,
cons
eque
nces
on
w
orld
pr
oduc
tion
from
ine
ffic
ienc
ies
and
dam
age
from
the
ris
e of
(m
ost)
nat
iona
l oil
com
pani
es,4,
27 a
nd th
e co
nseq
uenc
es o
f po
or
gove
rnan
ce a
nd h
ostil
ity t
owar
ds t
he U
.S.
in m
any
of t
he
wor
ld’s
oil-
prod
ucin
g na
tions
, str
ongl
y ar
gue
for
cons
erva
tion.
B. C
onsi
dera
tion
s fo
r th
e D
oD
Thi
s st
udy
find
s th
at t
he g
reat
est
leve
rage
on
DoD
fos
sil-
fuel
us
e is
exe
rted
by
patte
rns
of D
oD f
ossi
l-fu
el u
se.
Rec
ent
and
pres
ent
doct
rine
, ta
ctic
s, a
nd p
ract
ices
evo
lved
dur
ing
a tim
e w
hen
fuel
cos
ts r
epre
sent
ed a
n in
sign
ific
ant f
ract
ion
of th
e U
.S.
natio
nal-
defe
nse
budg
et,
with
fue
l co
sts
entir
ely
dom
inat
ed b
y th
e as
soci
ated
O&
M l
ogis
tical
sup
ply
chai
n co
sts
and
not
by
thos
e of
th
e fu
el
itsel
f.
W
hile
O
&M
co
sts
cont
inue
to
do
min
ate,
ac
tual
fu
el
cost
s ha
ve
rece
ntly
ri
sen
rapi
dly,
at
tain
ing
a si
gnif
ican
t re
cent
vis
ibili
ty. A
t pr
esen
t, fu
el b
udge
ts
are
in c
ompe
titio
n w
ith o
ther
DoD
non
-fix
ed c
osts
, su
ch a
s re
sear
ch,
deve
lopm
ent,
and
engi
neer
ing
(RD
&E
), a
nd o
ther
di
scre
tiona
ry f
undi
ng, o
f w
hich
they
are
a m
uch
larg
er p
art.28
27
Ind
ones
ia,
an i
mpo
rtan
t oi
l pr
oduc
er w
ith s
igni
fica
nt (
prov
en)
rese
rves
, re
cent
ly b
ecam
e a
net o
il im
port
er. [
Eco
nom
ist,
12A
ug06
] 28
Al S
haff
er [
OD
DR
E]
24Ju
l06
priv
ate
com
mun
icat
ion.
With
in t
he D
oD, t
he l
arge
st f
uel
cons
umer
is
the
Air
For
ce (
cf.
page
s 14
and
21)
. C
ontin
uous
eff
orts
and
mon
itori
ng b
y th
e A
ir F
orce
and
oth
er s
ervi
ces
have
res
ulte
d in
dec
reas
es i
n fu
el
use
over
the
last
few
yea
rs,29
des
pite
the
pros
ecut
ion
of th
e w
ar
in I
raq.
T
his
can
only
be
appl
aude
d.
As
the
data
and
ana
lysi
s ab
ove
indi
cate
, ho
wev
er,
cons
ider
ably
gre
ater
ben
efits
can
be
expe
cted
fro
m a
mor
e-ag
gres
sive
sta
nce
as r
egar
ds f
uel
use
acro
ss a
ll D
oD s
ervi
ces.
Ave
rage
age
of
U.S
. Air
For
ce a
ircr
aft.30
Som
e, p
erha
ps s
igni
fica
nt,
futu
re r
educ
tions
in
fuel
use
will
oc
cur
of
thei
r ow
n ac
cord
, as
in
th
e U
.S.
Air
Fo
rce,
fo
r ex
ampl
e, w
here
the
airc
raft
inve
ntor
y is
exp
ecte
d to
dec
line,
as
the
figu
re o
n pa
ge 7
6 su
gges
ts, d
espi
te a
n ag
ing
U.S
. Air
For
ce
29
P.E
. M
ike
Aim
one
[Ass
t. D
ep.
Chi
ef o
f St
aff,
Log
istic
s, I
nsta
llatio
ns &
M
issi
on S
uppo
rt]
5Jun
06 p
rese
ntat
ion:
The
Air
For
ce E
nerg
y St
rate
gy fo
r th
e 21
st C
entu
ry.
77
flee
t (c
f. f
igur
e ab
ove)
.30
Whi
le n
ew a
ircr
aft
will
be
plac
ed i
n se
rvic
e du
ring
the
nex
t de
cade
, it
is u
nlik
ely
they
will
rep
lace
th
e nu
mbe
r th
at w
ill r
etir
e (c
f. f
igur
e be
low
).30
,31
In c
oncl
usio
n, w
hile
the
re m
ay b
e no
sin
gle
silv
er b
ulle
t to
re
duce
the
dep
ende
nce
of t
he D
oD o
n fo
ssil-
fuel
s, m
any
step
s,
in t
he a
ggre
gate
, m
any
of w
hich
hav
e be
en d
iscu
ssed
and
ad
dres
sed
by a
naly
sis
on t
he s
ubje
ct i
n th
e pa
st,
shou
ld b
e un
dert
aken
.
30
B
rig.
G
en.
"And
y"
Dic
hter
[D
ep.
Dir
., A
F O
pera
tiona
l C
apab
ility
R
equi
rem
ents
(A
F/X
OR
)]
20
Oct
ober
20
05
pres
enta
tion:
Fo
rce
Mul
tiplie
rs
for
the
Join
t B
attl
espa
ce:
Issu
es,
Cha
lleng
es
and
Opp
ortu
nitie
s.
31
The
re
tirem
ent
of
the
F-11
7 w
as
rece
ntly
an
noun
ced,
de
spite
th
e pr
ojec
tion
depi
cted
in
the
figu
re o
n th
is p
age
that
it
wou
ld r
emai
n in
se
rvic
e fo
r so
me
time.
As
with
sai
ling
raci
ng,
one
can
win
(bi
g) b
y no
t lo
sing
in
lots
of
littl
e w
ays.
78
79
VII.
F
ind
ing
s
In t
his
sect
ion
we
sum
mar
ize
the
key
find
ings
of
the
JASO
N
stud
y, b
roke
n do
wn
into
key
cat
egor
ies:
A
. G
loba
l, do
mes
tic,
and
DoD
fos
sil-
fuel
sup
plie
s
Oil
is a
wor
ldw
ide-
fung
ible
com
mod
ity. C
onsi
sten
t with
glo
bal
prov
en
rese
rves
, no
D
oD
foss
il-fu
el
supp
ly
shor
tage
s ar
e ex
pect
ed
in
the
next
25
ye
ars.
Alth
ough
as
m
uch
oil
is
proj
ecte
d to
be
need
ed i
n th
e ne
xt 2
5 ye
ars
as t
he t
otal
alr
eady
pr
oduc
ed
to
date
, w
orld
pr
oven
re
serv
es
are
capa
ble
of
acco
mm
odat
ing
this
dem
and
at l
ess
than
$30
/bbl
pro
duct
ion
cost
.
JASO
N
emph
asiz
es
that
th
is
find
ing
is
prem
ised
on
th
e as
sum
ptio
n of
no
maj
or w
orld
-wid
e up
heav
als,
or
polit
ical
and
ot
her
chan
ges
in t
he p
rim
ary
oil
and
natu
ral-
gas
prod
uctio
n re
gion
s of
the
wor
ld t
hat
supp
ly t
he U
.S.,
nota
bly,
the
Mid
dle
Eas
t, V
enez
uela
, and
Rus
sia,
or
othe
r ev
ents
and
dev
elop
men
ts
that
m
ay
com
prom
ise
the
secu
rity
of
m
ajor
fo
ssil-
fuel
fe
edst
ock
rout
es a
nd t
rans
port
atio
n co
rrid
ors
(cf.
fig
ure
on
page
iv
of t
his
repo
rt).
Suc
h up
heav
als
have
occ
urre
d in
the
pa
st p
rodu
cing
maj
or c
hang
es i
n th
e w
orld
-wid
e av
aila
bilit
y an
d pr
icin
g of
fos
sil-
fuel
res
ourc
es,
as d
ocum
ente
d fo
r th
e pe
riod
ar
ound
19
80
in
the
grap
hics
on
pa
ges
10
and
61,
follo
win
g th
e Ir
ania
n re
volu
tion
and
its c
onse
quen
ces
on t
he
Mid
dle
Eas
t and
the
wor
ld.
Pres
ent
oil
pric
es
on
the
spot
m
arke
t ar
e hi
gh
rela
tive
to
prod
uctio
n co
sts.
Pro
duct
ion
cost
s ar
e co
mpo
unde
d w
ith o
ther
fa
ctor
s to
yie
ld th
ese
high
mar
ket p
rice
s, th
e di
ffer
ence
ref
lect
s th
e m
arke
t’s
conf
iden
ce i
n as
sure
d fu
ture
sup
plie
s, i
mba
lanc
es
betw
een
supp
ly a
nd d
eman
d, a
nd, n
ot l
east
, the
pro
fits
tha
t th
e m
arke
t is
will
ing
to b
ear.
O
n th
e ot
her
side
of
the
fulc
rum
, ho
wev
er,
JASO
N n
otes
tha
t w
hile
sho
rt-t
erm
res
pons
e op
tions
to
oil
pric
e in
crea
ses
are
limite
d, l
onge
r-te
rm o
ptio
ns a
re n
ot
inco
nsid
erab
le, a
s ev
ery
dolla
r in
crea
se i
n w
orld
mar
ket
pric
es
invi
te a
dditi
onal
fos
sil-
fuel
sou
rces
to
join
the
wor
ld m
ix,
as
wel
l as
non
-fos
sil
ener
gy s
ourc
es t
o be
com
e ec
onom
ical
. T
he
oil-
prod
ucin
g na
tions
are
qui
te c
onsc
ious
of
this
bal
ance
. Sau
di
Ara
bia,
in
part
icul
ar,
has
used
its
res
erve
pro
duct
ion
capa
city
fo
r th
e la
st f
ew d
ecad
es t
o da
mpe
n bo
th r
apid
inc
reas
es a
nd
decr
ease
s in
oil
pric
es.
Futu
re o
il pr
ices
are
dif
ficu
lt to
pre
dict
, es
peci
ally
in
dolla
r-de
nom
inat
ed t
erm
s, t
he l
atte
r he
dge
as a
con
sequ
ence
of
the
sign
ific
ant U
.S. c
urre
nt-a
ccou
nt im
bala
nce
depi
cted
in th
e in
set
grap
hic
on p
age
78.
At
pres
ent,
the
wor
king
ass
umpt
ion
of t
he e
nerg
y in
dust
ry,
as
docu
men
ted
in E
IA a
sses
smen
ts, i
s th
at t
he m
arke
t pr
ice
of o
il w
ill r
etur
n to
a $
40-4
5/bb
l ra
nge
in t
he n
ext
five
yea
rs,
as
incr
ease
d pr
oduc
tion
faci
litie
s co
me
on l
ine,
acc
omm
odat
ing
incr
ease
s in
dem
and.
Thu
s, i
ncre
asin
g U
.S. i
mpo
rts
rela
tive
to d
omes
tic s
uppl
y ha
ve
no d
irec
t na
tiona
l-de
fens
e im
plic
atio
ns,
othe
r th
an f
inan
cial
. T
hey
do,
how
ever
, im
pose
cl
ear
bala
nce-
of-p
aym
ents
an
d na
tiona
l-ec
onom
y co
nseq
uenc
es,
and
sign
ific
ant
indi
rect
na
tiona
l-se
curi
ty i
mpl
icat
ions
the
reby
. S
tron
g de
fens
e is
and
ha
s hi
stor
ical
ly a
lway
s be
en p
redi
cate
d on
a s
tron
g ec
onom
y.
80
81
The
st
udy
note
s th
at
a re
duct
ion
of
12%
in
U
.S.
oil
cons
umpt
ion,
at
pr
esen
t, w
ould
re
lax
the
wor
ld-w
ide
tight
su
pply
-dem
and
situ
atio
n, a
t le
ast
for
a w
hile
, an
d al
low
the
U
.S.
the
optio
n of
for
egoi
ng a
ll o
il im
port
s fr
om t
he M
iddl
e E
ast
and
avoi
danc
e of
the
dep
ende
ncie
s an
d vu
lner
abili
ties
impo
sed
by th
is s
ensi
tive
impo
rt s
trea
m, s
houl
d th
e ne
ed a
rise
. B
. D
oD f
uel c
osts
DoD
fue
l co
sts
have
bec
ome
visi
ble
only
rel
ativ
ely
rece
ntly
. E
ven
at p
rese
nt,
they
rep
rese
nt o
nly
2.5-
3% o
f th
e na
tiona
l-de
fens
e bu
dget
, the
spr
ead
depe
ndin
g on
wha
t is
cho
sen
as t
he
deno
min
ator
fo
r to
tal
natio
nal-
defe
nse
cost
s.
Whi
le
unce
rtai
ntie
s an
d th
e re
cent
lar
ge i
ncre
ase
in f
uel
cost
s pr
esen
t D
oD b
udge
t pl
anne
rs w
ith f
orm
idab
le c
halle
nges
, re
pres
entin
g a
(muc
h-la
rger
) fr
actio
n of
no
n-fi
xed
(“di
scre
tiona
ry”)
sp
endi
ng,
JASO
N m
ust
conc
lude
tha
t fu
el c
osts
, pe
r se
, w
hile
no
t neg
ligib
le, c
anno
t be
rega
rded
as
a pr
imar
y de
cisi
on d
rive
r,
at p
rese
nt.
The
lar
gest
fra
ctio
n (~
62%
) of
DoD
fue
l us
e is
exp
ende
d in
C
ON
US.
C
ontin
uous
pro
gres
s ha
s be
en m
ade
by D
oD i
n re
cent
ye
ars
to
decr
ease
en
ergy
an
d fu
el
use.
How
ever
, be
caus
e w
eapo
ns
syst
ems
have
ve
ry
long
lif
e-cy
cles
, fu
el
repr
esen
ts a
sig
nifi
cant
fra
ctio
n of
lif
e-cy
cle
cost
s fo
r U
.S.
Air
Fo
rce
mob
ility
ca
rrie
rs
(~ 4
0%)
and
conv
entio
nally
fu
eled
N
avy
ship
s (~
30%
).
JASO
N
also
no
tes
that
ex
pect
ed
redu
ctio
ns in
the
U.S
. Air
For
ce ta
ctic
al in
vent
ory
(num
ber
and
type
of
airc
raft
on
activ
e du
ty),
as
disc
usse
d on
pag
es 7
6 an
d 77
, w
ill,
perf
orce
, de
crea
se f
utur
e co
nsum
ptio
n of
avi
atio
n fu
el,
whi
ch
repr
esen
ts
the
larg
est
sing
le
DoD
fu
el-u
se
com
pone
nt.
DoD
fue
l us
e is
sub
ject
to
com
plex
int
erre
late
d go
vern
men
tal
and
cong
ress
iona
l re
gula
tions
, as
wel
l as
for
eign
and
dom
estic
po
licie
s an
d di
rect
ives
. T
hese
in
ject
ex
tern
aliti
es
that
co
mpl
icat
e bo
okke
epin
g an
d of
ten
ham
per
prop
er D
oD f
uel-
use
optim
izat
ion.
JASO
N f
inds
com
pelli
ng r
easo
ns f
or th
e D
oD to
min
imiz
e fu
el
use,
bot
h ov
eral
l an
d in
ind
ivid
ual
vehi
cles
and
car
rier
s.
Fuel
, ev
en i
f it
is c
urre
ntly
a r
elat
ivel
y sm
all
port
ion
of t
he o
vera
ll bu
dget
is
acco
mpa
nied
by
larg
e m
ultip
liers
– i
t ta
kes
fuel
to
deliv
er
fuel
–
and
is
acco
mpa
nied
by
hi
gh
cost
s in
bo
th
infr
astr
uctu
re (
O&
M)
and,
in th
e ba
ttlef
ield
, in
lives
.
Pric
e un
cert
aint
ies
com
poun
d bu
dget
pla
nnin
g, a
nd f
uel
cost
s m
ay r
ise
to r
epre
sent
a m
ore-
sign
ific
ant
fact
or f
or t
he D
oD i
n th
e fu
ture
, ev
en
thou
gh
curr
ent
proj
ectio
ns
may
in
dica
te
othe
rwis
e. M
ore
impo
rtan
tly, t
he im
pact
s of
del
iver
ing
fuel
are
ev
iden
t in
dict
atin
g ta
ctic
s, o
pera
tions
cos
ts, m
aint
enan
ce c
osts
, an
d m
ilita
ry c
apab
ilitie
s.
82
83
C.
Dec
reas
ing
Do
D f
uel
use
Hyb
rid
vehi
cles
are
opt
imiz
ed f
or i
nter
mitt
ent/s
top
and
go u
se
patte
rns
with
fue
l-co
nsum
ptio
n be
nefi
ts t
hat
are
antic
ipat
ed i
n th
at d
rivi
ng e
nvir
onm
ent.
Hyb
rid
vehi
cles
off
er l
ittle
or
no
fuel
-eco
nom
y be
nefi
ts i
f th
e av
erag
e po
wer
exp
ende
d is
clo
se
to th
e pe
ak-p
ower
cap
abili
ty o
f th
e po
wer
plan
t. H
ence
, hyb
rids
of
fer
muc
h m
ore
fuel
con
sum
ptio
n sa
ving
s in
the
com
mer
cial
se
ctor
than
in th
e ty
pica
l DoD
(A
rmy)
pat
tern
of
vehi
cle
use.
JASO
N
find
s no
si
gnif
ican
t fo
rese
eabl
e D
oD
role
fo
r al
l-el
ectr
ic v
ehic
les.
T
hese
veh
icle
s ha
ve p
ossi
ble
appl
icat
ions
in
the
limit
of s
hort
-ran
ge, l
ow-f
rict
ion
terr
ain,
if
the
vehi
cles
are
ve
ry l
ight
wei
ght,
and
for
spec
ial-
purp
ose
mis
sion
s su
ch a
s ro
botic
ve
hicl
es.
M
ost
of
thes
e ap
plic
atio
ns
are
outs
ide
(cur
rent
) D
oD p
atte
rns
of u
se.
Sim
ilarl
y, J
ASO
N s
ees
no s
igni
fica
nt D
oD u
se f
or f
uel-
cell
vehi
cles
on
any
reas
onab
le t
ime
hori
zon.
T
hese
veh
icle
s ar
e ve
ry c
ostly
and
the
tec
hnol
ogy
is n
ot m
atur
e.
We
also
do
not
see
a go
od m
echa
nism
by
whi
ch t
he f
uel
to p
ower
the
m c
ould
be
sup
plie
d to
the
ater
. A
s su
ch,
JASO
N d
oes
not
antic
ipat
e th
at t
hey
will
pla
y a
role
in
DoD
tac
tical
or
com
bat
vehi
cles
in
the
fore
seea
ble
futu
re.
JASO
N b
elie
ves
that
the
re c
an b
e re
volu
tiona
ry c
hang
es i
n th
e us
e of
unm
anne
d ve
hicl
es,
espe
cial
ly a
ircr
aft,
if t
he d
esig
n sp
ace
is e
xplo
red
to o
ptim
ize
fuel
eff
icie
ncy
and
endu
ranc
e.
Such
veh
icle
s w
ould
im
prov
e fu
el e
ffic
ienc
y an
d ad
d ne
w
capa
bilit
ies,
pot
entia
lly o
bvia
ting
air-
to-a
ir r
efue
ling
in m
any
inst
ance
s.
Futu
re s
peci
al-u
se r
obot
ic v
ehic
les
can
play
an
impo
rtan
t ro
le
by s
avin
g liv
es a
nd f
uel.
Thi
s is
tru
e fo
r ai
r, s
ea,
and
for
land
(c
f. J
SR-0
1-22
5).
In g
ener
al, l
ight
-wei
ghtin
g co
sts
mon
ey, b
ut c
an i
n re
turn
sav
e fu
el a
nd w
ill e
nhan
ce m
ilita
ry c
apab
ility
.
Fina
lly,
mod
ern
dies
el e
ngin
es o
ffer
lar
ge i
ncre
ases
in
fuel
co
nsum
ptio
n re
lativ
e to
turb
ines
or
olde
r di
esel
eng
ines
that
are
ve
ry in
effi
cien
t, es
peci
ally
at i
dle,
or
near
-idl
e co
nditi
ons.
84
85
D.
Liq
uid
fu
els
fro
m c
oal
or
nat
ura
l gas
DoD
is n
ot a
larg
e en
ough
cus
tom
er to
dri
ve th
e fu
el m
arke
t or
to d
rive
fut
ure
deve
lopm
ents
in
alte
rnat
ive
fuel
s.
Acc
ount
ing
for
less
tha
n 2%
of
U.S
. fu
el c
onsu
mpt
ion,
DoD
is
likel
y to
de
pend
on
th
e w
orld
-wid
e an
d co
mm
erci
al
sect
ors
for
its
supp
lies
and
alte
rnat
ive
fuel
s ar
e a
wor
ld-w
ide
issu
e.
Liq
uid
fuel
s fr
om
stra
nded
na
tura
l ga
s pr
ovid
e th
e ec
onom
ical
ly a
nd e
nvir
onm
enta
lly m
ost-
favo
rabl
e al
tern
ativ
e to
fue
ls f
rom
cru
de o
il.
Und
ergr
ound
coa
l ga
sifi
catio
n (U
CG
) pr
ovid
es
the
next
-bes
t al
tern
ativ
e fr
om
an
econ
omic
pe
rspe
ctiv
e,
but
is
only
ac
cept
able
fr
om
an
envi
ronm
enta
l pe
rspe
ctiv
e if
GH
G e
mis
sion
s (m
ostl
y C
O2)
fro
m t
he f
uel
prod
uctio
n pr
oces
s ar
e se
ques
tere
d.
86
87
E.
Bio
fuel
s
Pres
ently
, liq
uid
fuel
fro
m b
iom
ass
proc
esse
s do
not
com
pete
ec
onom
ical
ly w
ith p
rodu
ctio
n of
fue
l fro
m c
rude
oil.
Bio
fuel
s pr
ovid
e lit
tle,
if a
ny,
net
ener
gy b
enef
it, e
spec
ially
if
the
com
plet
e pr
oces
s is
ta
ken
into
ac
coun
t, an
d ar
e no
t ec
onom
ical
ly c
ompe
titiv
e (w
ithou
t su
bsid
ies)
with
oth
er u
ses
of a
gric
ultu
ral l
and,
e.g
., gr
owin
g fo
od.
Cur
rent
bi
omas
s-to
-fue
l m
etho
ds
of
prod
uctio
n pr
esen
t a
sign
ific
ant
envi
ronm
enta
l bu
rden
(G
HG
s, s
oil
depl
etio
n an
d er
osio
n, w
aste
wat
er, e
tc.)
.
Fuel
pro
cess
es b
ased
on
cellu
losi
c et
hano
l, bu
tano
l, et
c. c
ould
ev
entu
ally
pro
vide
a s
igni
fica
nt f
ract
ion
of th
e fu
el d
eman
ds o
f th
e U
.S.,
if
they
ar
e pr
oven
ec
onom
ical
ly
viab
le
and
if
asso
ciat
ed
envi
ronm
enta
l bu
rden
s ar
e ac
cept
able
.
Such
pr
oces
ses
do n
ot e
xist
at
pres
ent,
how
ever
, an
d ne
ither
the
y,
nor
othe
r no
n-et
hano
l bi
ofue
ls a
nd b
iofu
els
proc
esse
s ca
n be
as
sess
ed,
eith
er i
n te
rms
of t
heir
eco
nom
ics
or e
nvir
onm
enta
l ra
mif
icat
ions
, at t
his
time.
The
bio
fuel
s co
mm
unity
mus
t de
mon
stra
te s
usta
inab
ility
with
re
spec
t to
soi
l de
plet
ion/
eros
ion,
was
te w
ater
, and
oth
er r
elat
ed
cons
ider
atio
ns,
and
they
mus
t de
mon
stra
te t
hat
such
met
hods
ar
e al
so p
refe
rred
env
iron
men
tally
, i.e
., th
roug
h a
Wel
l-T
o-W
heel
s an
alys
is,
if i
t is
to
be a
rgue
d th
at t
hey
can
prov
ide
a se
nsib
le a
ltern
ativ
e to
fos
sil-
deri
ved
fuel
s.
Eth
anol
’s
low
en
ergy
de
nsity
, hi
gh
flam
mab
ility
, an
d tr
ansp
orta
tion
diff
icul
ties,
re
lativ
e to
di
esel
an
d JP
-8,
for
exam
ple,
ren
der
it un
suita
ble
as a
DoD
fue
l. T
he p
rim
ary
cons
ider
atio
ns
that
en
ter
this
fi
ndin
g ar
e lo
gist
ics,
en
ergy
de
nsity
(hi
gh v
olum
e pe
r un
it en
ergy
con
tent
), a
nd s
afet
y.
88
[Thi
s pa
ge in
tent
iona
lly le
ft b
lank
.]
89
VIII. Recommendations and path forward
1. Consider buffers against future crude-oil and fuel price increases:
a. inventory timing, e.g., seasonal buying choices,
b. investing in long-term contracts, and
c. diversifying sources and supplies.
2. Make long-term planning for future fuel sources, production, and use. Be aware of present and anticipated environmental (GHG, etc.) regulations.
3. Optimize exploitation of commercial aviation fuels. Consider distributed and OCONUS local production of military fuels (JP-5, JP-8, JP-8 +100) from commercial aviation fuels.
4. Review and minimize CONUS fuel use; most DoD fuel is used in CONUS.
a. Increase reliance on simulator training programs
b. Devise fuel-use optimization tools for gaming, planning, and in-situ field use with an eye to fuel consumption (vehicle mix, tactics, operational choices) and logistical requirements.
c. Optimize vehicles to DoD patterns of use.
5. Track the pattern of use for vehicles and fuels.
a. Track fuel use and different vehicle patterns of use (idling vs. in-motion engine use time fractions) across the DoD to develop a database for use in optimizing fuel efficiency, and designing/selecting future vehicles.
b. Optimize platforms, powerplants, with respect to DoD-relevant patterns of use, in each case. Include fuel in vehicle/platform life-cycle costs as a (strong) factor in the optimization.
6. Develop the necessary accounting and tracking tools to determine fuel delivery and logistics burdens and multipliers, so that it is possible to know what has been saved throughout the logistics chain when a gallon of fuel consumption is reduced at any point in the fuel demand chain.
7. Determine fuel delivery/use logistics burdens and multipliers.
a. Gallons required per gallon delivered.
b. Cost per gallon delivered to the field, in the air, at sea, etc.
8. Reengine the M1 tank, the B-52 bomber, etc., to exploit modern engine technology and engines designed for the purpose, in each case.
9. Lightweight armored and tactical vehicles, leveraging modern design, structural, and materials developments. Exploit new armor technologies for increased effectiveness for the same mass. We recommend that DoD resist down-armoring. Weight reductions are more likely achievable without loss in functionality in other parts of the vehicle.
10. Manned vs. unmanned vehicles: Reexamine and extend UAV, UUV, and robotic land vehicle uses. Consider new designs that can only be realized in unmanned vehicles and platforms.
90
Appendix I: Energy glossary AAFC Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
AAV Amphibious Assault Vehicle
ARMS Agricultural Resources Management Survey
bagasse (sometimes spelled bagass): biomass remaining after crushing sugarcane stalks to extract their juice. A sugar factory produces nearly 30% of bagasse out of its total crushing that is often used as a primary fuel source for sugar mills. When burned in quantity, it produces sufficient heat energy to supply all the needs of a typical sugar mill, with energy to spare. A secondary use for this waste product is in cogeneration to provide both heat energy, used in the mill, and electricity, which is typically sold to the grid. [Wikipedia, 13Aug06]
BL Black Liquor. By-product of paper pulping that contains the lignin part of the wood, commonly used as an internal fuel source to power the paper mills. Through gasification, one can generate syngas and synfuels
boe barrel of oil equivalent = 5.8 MBTU = 6.12 MJ
BTL Biomass-To-Liquid (fuel)
BTU British Thermal Unit = (heat) energy needed to raise the temperature of one pound (lbm) of water by one oF = 1.055056 kJ
BTU/ft3 = 37.258946 kJ/m3
BTU/gal = 0.278716 kJ/liter
BTU/lbm = 2.326 kJ/kg
CAA Clean Air Act Amendments
CCGT Combined-cycle gas turbine: refers to a power plant that utilizes both the Brayton (gas-turbine) cycle and the Rankine (steam) cycle. The exhaust from the gas turbine is used to generate the energy for the Rankine cycle.
CCS Carbon capture and storage, aka, carbon sequestration
CGF Corn gluten feed (21 percent protein)
CGM Corn gluten meal (60 percent protein)
CHP Combined heat and power: the simultaneous and high-efficiency production of heat and electrical power in a single process.
CO Carbon monoxide. Constituent, along with H2, of the first step(s) of the Fischer-Tropsch process
CO2 Carbon dioxide: a gas produced by many organic processes, including human respiration and the decay or combustion of animal and vegetable matter. Greenhouse gas with strong absorption bands at the thermal-emission spectrum.
CTL Coal to Liquid (fuel), as via the Fisher-Tropsch process.
DB Dry basis, i.e., w/o water, for starch content in grains
DDGS Distiller’s dried grains with solubles
91
DICI Direct Injection Compression Ignition (engine)
DME Dimethyl ether. Surrogate for diesel.
DOE Department of Energy. The federal agency that oversees the production and distribution of electricity and other forms of energy.
DPF Diesel Particulate Filter (emissions mitigation). Decreases diesel-engine power output if installed.
E85 A fuel mixture of 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline
EIA Energy Information Administration: the statistical and data-gathering arm of the Department of Energy.
EOR Enhanced oil recovery
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: the agency that oversees and regulates the impact of, among other things, the production of energy on the environment of the United States.
ERRATA Energy Regulatory Reform and Tax Act: a plan to deregulate the production and distribution of electricity, to update environmental laws regarding energy production, and to alter the existing tax structures.
Ethanol C2H5OH: Next-lightest alcohol, after methanol.
FC Fuel Cell
FCRS Farm Costs and Returns Survey
GHG Greenhouse gas.
GREET Greenhouse gases, regulated emissions, and energy use in transportation
GTL Gas To Liquid (conversion)
GW Gigawatt = 109 Watts.
GWh Gigawatt-hour: the amount of energy available from one gigawatt in one hour.
HFCS High-fructose corn syrup
HHV High-heat value HICE Hydrogen internal combustion engine
ICE Internal combustion engine
IEA International Energy Agency: a twenty-six member union of national governments with the goal of securing global power supplies.
IED Improvised explosive device
IPP Independent power producers: companies that generate electrical power and provide it wholesale to the power market. IPPs own and operate their stations as non-utilities and do not own the transmission lines.
Joule The (kinetic) energy acquired by a mass of one kilogram moving at a speed of one meter per second
kJ kilojoule = 103 Joules
kW, KW kilowatt = 103 Watts = 1.341 HP
kWh, KWh = energy available from one kilowatt in one hour = 3.6 MJ
LHV Low-heat value
92
LNG Liquified Natural Gas
LPG Liquefied petroleum gas
M85 a fuel mixture of 85% methanol and 15% gasoline
Methane CH4: Main constituent of natural gas. Also, important greenhouse gas.
Methanol CH3OH: Lightest alcohol. Toxic, causing nerve and eye damage.
MJ Megajoule = 106 Joules = 0.2778 kWh
MTBE Methyl tertiary-butyl ether. Fuel oxygenate additive. Being phased out (toxic) in favor of ethanol.
MW Megawatt = 106 Watts = 1 MJ/s
MWh Megawatt hour: energy available from one megawatt in one hour.
NASS National Agricultural Statistics Service
NEDC New European Driving Cycle (standard)
NEV Net energy value
NOX, NOx Nitrogen oxide(s): assorted oxides of nitrogen, generally considered pollutants, that are commonly produced by combustion reactions.
PISI Port Injection Spark Ignition (engine)
PM10 Particulate matter in the atmosphere that is between 2.5 and 10 μm in size.
PTW Pump-To-Wheels (analysis)
PURPA Public Utility Regulatory Policy Act: act of Congress targeting the reduction of American dependence on foreign oil through the encouragement of the development of alternative energy sources and the diversification of the power industry.
stover (corn): the leaves and stalks of corn (maize), sorghum or soybean plants left in a field after harvest. It can be directly grazed by cattle or dried for use as fodder (forage). It is similar to straw, the residue left after any cereal grain or grass has been harvested at maturiry for its seed. [Wikipedia, 13Aug06]
TW Terawatt = 1012 Watts
UAV Unmanned/Unpiloted Air Vehicle
UCG Underground coal gasification
USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture
UUV Unmanned Underwater Vehicle
Watt = one Joule per second.
WEO World energy outlook: a projection analysis made by the IEA
WTP Well-To-Pump (analysis)
WTW Well-To-Wheels (analysis)
93
Appendix II: Air-to-air jet-fuel delivery costs
As part of this study, an estimate was made of the cost per gallon delivered in mid-air using one of the 530 KC-135s or one of the 59 KC-10s in the U.S. Air Force tanker fleet. The resulting estimates are depicted in the figure on page 30.
An earlier study [DSB2001] reported that, “the fully burdened cost per gallon delivered in midair” was $17.50/gal in FY1999 (then-year dollars). This cost is shown in the figure on page 30, brought forward to FY2005 dollars. The present study’s estimates of FY05$22/gal and FY06$23/gal are consistent with the previous (DSB2001) estimate reported for FY99.
The present study considered the per-gallon cost breakdown for the mid-air refueling enterprise into infrastructure capital costs; operations and maintenance (O&M); and the DESC wholesale cost of fuel carried by the tankers. Costs to fuel and fly the tankers themselves are captured in the O&M costs for the tankers. The wholesale fuel costs cover only the cost of the fuel delivered to tanker customers in mid-air.
To normalize the per-gallon estimates, the total volume of AVFUEL (JP-8, F-76 and Jet-A) delivered to tanker customers was used in the denominator: 207 million gallons in FY05 and 213 million gallons in FY06 estimated based on figures through May of 2006.
These include fuel delivered mid-air via tanker to non-USAF customers (~ 20% of tanker deliveries). Excluding non-USAF mid-air deliveries, the fraction of USAF fuel consumption delivered to USAF aircraft in midair was about 6.3%. This is similar to the percentage previously reported [DSB2001].
The wholesale price per gallon of AVFUEL was obtained from the DESC Fact Book for 2005 and 2006, while the 1999 figure was taken from the earlier study [DSB2001]. If the DESC price changed during the fiscal year, then the time-weighted average of the various per-gallon prices was calculated and used for that year.
Because the acquisition history of the tanker fleet was not available for this study, the annual cost of midair fuel delivery infrastructure (i.e., the KC-135 tanker fleet) was based on a reported $40M (FY1998 dollars) unit cost, amortized over a 40 year aircraft life, brought forward to current-year dollars. A fleet of 516 KC-135s was used for this calculation as an equivalent to the actual current fleet, based on reported capabilities of KC-135Rs versus KC-135Es versus KC10s.
O&M costs were obtained for FY05 from the USAF directly [L. Klapper, AFCAA, pvte. Comm.], and were reported as $3.7B for the operation of 112 KC135Es, 418 KC135Rs, and 59 KC10s. Based on separate cost figures also provided by the USAF, the variable cost per gallon delivered by aircraft was calculated and summed over the fleet to get the component of O&M costs that scale with the amount of fuel delivered. This was ~30% of total O&M costs. Using these figures the 2006 O&M per-gallon costs were estimated by scaling the variable costs by the estimated volume delivered in midair in 2006, keeping the fixed O&M costs the same as 2005. These calculations were done in FY05 dollars.
The results of this cost analysis, shown in the figure on page 30, illustrate how infrastructure, and operations (O&M, here) multiply the cost of fuel delivered to a front-end user. A numerical estimate of the fuel-multiplier in this case can be estimated by
94
assuming, conservatively, that 20% of the O&M costs result from mobility fuel to fly the tankers themselves. This assumption yields the estimate that tankers burned 482 million gallons (20% of $O&M / [$/gal at wholesale]) of fuel to deliver 207 million gallons of fuel in FY2005. This yields a fuel-delivery multiplier of 3.3 . This multiplier leads to corresponding overhead and logistics costs, in both dollars and tactical/operational terms.
At least 37% of the $20-$25 /gal cost, i.e., ~$8.45/gal, is estimated to scale with fuel consumption, illustrating the potential benefit of improved fuel efficiency.
DISTRIBUTION LIST Director of Space and SDI Programs SAF/AQSC 1060 Air Force Pentagon Washington, DC 20330-1060 CMDR & Program Executive Officer U S Army/CSSD-ZA Strategic Defense Command PO Box 15280 Arlington, VA 22215-0150 DARPA Library 3701 North Fairfax Drive Arlington, VA 22203-1714 Department of Homeland Security Attn: Dr. Maureen McCarthy Science and Technology Directorate Washington, DC 20528 Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Research, Development & Acquisition) 1000 Navy Pentagon Washington, DC 20350-1000 Principal Deputy for Military Application Defense Programs, DP-12 National Nuclear Security Administration U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20585 Superintendent Code 1424 Attn: Documents Librarian Naval Postgraduate School Monterey, CA 93943 Strategic Systems Program Nebraska Avenue Complex 287 Somers Court Suite 10041 Washington, DC 20393-5446 Headquarters Air Force XON 4A870 1480 Air Force Pentagon Washington, DC 20330-1480
Defense Threat Reduction Agency [6] Attn: Dr. Mark Byers 8725 John J. Kingman Rd Mail Stop 6201 Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6201 IC JASON Program [2] Chief Technical Officer, IC/ITIC 2P0104 NHB Central Intelligence Agency Washington, DC 20505-0001 JASON Library [5] The MITRE Corporation 3550 General Atomics Court Building 29 San Diego, CA 92121-1122 U. S. Department of Energy Chicago Operations Office Acquisition and Assistance Group 9800 South Cass Avenue Argonne, IL 60439 Dr. Jane Alexander Homeland Security: Advanced Research Projects Agency, Room 4318-23 7th & D Streets, SW Washington, DC 20407 Dr. William O. Berry Director, Basic Research ODUSD(ST/BR) 4015 Wilson Blvd Suite 209 Arlington, VA 22203 Dr. Albert Brandenstein Chief Scientist Office of Nat'l Drug Control Policy Executive Office of the President Washington, DC 20500 Ambassador Linton F. Brooks Under Secretary for Nuclear Security/ Administrator for Nuclear Security 1000 Independence Avenue, SW NA-1, Room 7A-049 Washington, DC 20585
Dr. James F. Decker Principal Deputy Director Office of Science SC-2/Forrestal Building U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20585 Ms. Shirley A. Derflinger Management Analysis Office of Biological & Environmental Research Office of Science SC-23/Germantown Building U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, D.C. 20585-1290 Dr. Martin C. Faga President and Chief Exec Officer The MITRE Corporation Mail Stop N640 7515 Colshire Drive McLean, VA 22102-7508 Mr. Dan Flynn [5] Program Manager DI/OTI/SAG 5S49 OHB Washington, DC 20505 Dr. Paris Genalis Deputy Director OUSD(A&T)/S&TS/NW The Pentagon, Room 3D1048 Washington, DC 20301 Mr. Bradley E. Gernand Institute for Defense Analyses Technical Information Services, Room 8701 4850 Mark Center Drive Alexandria, VA 22311-1882 Dr. Lawrence K. Gershwin NIC/NIO/S&T 2E42, OHB Washington, DC 20505
Brigadier General Ronald Haeckel U.S. Dept of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration 1000 Independence Avenue, SW NA-10 FORS Bldg Washington, DC 20585 Mr. Hal Hagemeir Operations Manager National Security Space Office (NSSO) PO Box 222310 Chantilly, VA 20153-2310 Dr. Robert G. Henderson Staff Director The MITRE Corporation Mailstop MDA/ Rm 5H305 7515 Colshire Drive McLean, VA 22102-7508 Dr. Charles J. Holland Deputy Under Secretary of Defense Science & Technology 3040 Defense Pentagon Washington, DC 20301-3040 Dr. Bobby R. Junker Office of Naval Research Code 31 800 North Quincy Street Arlington, VA 22217-5660 Dr. Andrew F. Kirby DO/IOC/FO 6Q32 NHB Central Intelligence Agency Washington, DC 20505-0001 Dr. Anne Matsuura Army Research Office 4015 Wilson Blvd Tower 3, Suite 216 Arlington, VA 22203-21939 Dr. Daniel J. McMorrow Director, JASON Program Office The MITRE Corporation Mailstop T130 7515 Colshire Drive McLean, VA 22102-7508
Dr. Julian C. Nall Institute for Defense Analyses 4850 Mark Center Drive Alexandria, VA 22311-1882 Mr. Thomas A. Pagan Deputy Chief Scientist U.S. Army Space & Missile Defense Command PO Box 15280 Arlington, Virginia 22215-0280 Dr. John R. Phillips Chief Scientist, DST/CS 2P0104 NHB Central Intelligence Agency Washington, DC 20505-0001 Records Resource The MITRE Corporation Mail Stop D460 202 Burlington Road, Rte 62 Bedford, MA 01730-1420 Dr. John Schuster Submarine Warfare Division Submarine, Security & Tech Head (N775) 2000 Navy Pentagon, Room 4D534 Washington, DC 20350-2000 Dr. Ronald M. Sega Under Secretary of Air Force SAF/US 1670 Air Force Pentagon Room 4E886 Washington, DC 20330-1670
Dr. Alan R. Shaffer Office of the Defense Research and Engineering Director, Plans and Program 3040 Defense Pentagon, Room 3D108 Washington, DC 20301-3040 Dr. Frank Spagnolo Advanced Systems & Technology National Reconnaissance Office 14675 Lee Road Chantilly, Virginia 20151 Mr. Anthony J. Tether DIRO/DARPA 3701 N. Fairfax Drive Arlington, VA 22203-1714 Dr. David Thomassen Acting Associate Director of Science for Biological and Environmental Research Germantown Building / SC-23 U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20585-1290 Dr. Bruce J. West FAPS - Senior Research Scientist Army Research Office P. O. Box 12211 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2211 Dr. Linda Zall Central Intelligence Agency DS&T/OTS 3Q14, NHB Washington, DC 20505-00
![THESIS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHYpublications.lib.chalmers.se/records/fulltext/253260/... · 2017. 11. 23. · current dependence on fossil fuels [1-3]. In this process,](https://static.documents.pub/doc/80x56/5fbb6331e6f5c730e620d382/thesis-for-the-degree-of-doctor-of-ph-2017-11-23-current-dependence-on-fossil.jpg)
