The "Great Green Fleet"

[Browning151]

$26 a gallon?! Navy's 'Green Fleet' meets stiff headwinds - US news - Environment - msnbc.com

WASHINGTON — A U.S. Navy oiler slipped away from a fuel depot on the Puget Sound in Washington state one recent day, headed toward the central Pacific and into the storm over the Pentagon's controversial green fuels initiative.



In its tanks, the USNS Henry J. Kaiser carried nearly 900,000 gallons of biofuel blended with petroleum to power the cruisers, destroyers and fighter jets of what the Navy has taken to calling the "Great Green Fleet," the first carrier strike group to be powered largely by alternative fuels.


Conventionally powered ships and aircraft in the strike group will burn the blend in an operational setting for the first time this month during the 22-nation Rim of the Pacific exercise, the largest annual international maritime warfare maneuvers. The six-week exercise began on Friday.


The Pentagon hopes it can prove the Navy looks as impressive burning fuel squeezed from seeds, algae and chicken fat as it does using petroleum.
But the demonstration, years in the making, may be a Pyrrhic victory.
Some Republican lawmakers have seized on the fuel's $26-a-gallon price, compared to $3.60 for conventional fuel. They paint the program as a waste of precious funds at a time when the U.S. government's budget remains severely strained, the Pentagon is facing cuts and energy companies are finding big quantities of oil and gas in the United States.
Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, the program's biggest public booster, calls it vital for the military's energy security.......

$26 X 900,000 = $23,400,000

vs

$3.60 x 900,000 = $3,240,000

Total...................$20,160,000 waste.

Sounds like an excellent plan to me.

[Vteckidd]

deepnds what the MPG difference is.

If the ship is getting like 10,000 miles more per gallon, then the cost is probably worth it. somehow i doubt it

[bu villain]

It's definitely valid to debate how much we should spend on these new technologies but it's unfair to completely dismiss it as a waste in my opinion. I think of it as R&D. If we can improve these technology and get it down to a level competitive with oil, that would be a huge benefit to our national security which is definitely in the military's scope. But, you have to invest money upfront to develop these new technologies.

[BanginJimmy]

It's definitely valid to debate how much we should spend on these new technologies but it's unfair to completely dismiss it as a waste in my opinion. I think of it as R&D. If we can improve these technology and get it down to a level competitive with oil, that would be a huge benefit to our national security which is definitely in the military's scope. But, you have to invest money upfront to develop these new technologies.

I agree, but at 20 mil per test its a little steep. R&D can be done in MUCH smaller batches.

[RandomGuy]

With what we've learned from E85, the newer biofuels can have higher combustion ratings, but require more a lot more volume to go in.

If that's just $20M, i'm sure it'd be a good investment for the sheer research achieved, but surely there's waaay more than a single tanker needed. I'd investigate to see exactly who the suppliers/providers of this green fuel are who have secured this $23/gal contract.

Looks like waste to me, but then again for the R&D gains, maybe not.

[bu villain]

Good points. I would have to see some analysis of the potential gains along with the total costs for this program to make a meaningful decision on whether this is a good idea or not. Generally speaking though, I believe in the need to experiment and develop new technologies knowing that most of them will not succeed in their original goal.