GasBuddy Blog

GasBuddy News Article

votes

Senate panel reins in Pentagon on clean energy

Yahoo News -- The Pentagon's investment in green energy requires too much green paper for some in Congress.

A sharply divided Senate Armed Services Committee voted this week to prohibit the military from spending money on alternative fuels if the cost exceeds traditional fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas and oil. The move underscores congressional concern about the greater expense of clean energy sources such as biofuels as the Pentagon wrestles with smaller budgets. The committee, in crafting a sweeping defense budget for next year, also voted to block Pentagon construction of a biofuels refinery or any other facility to refine biofuels.

Both efforts passed on 13-12 votes that were disclosed Friday.

"In a tough budget climate for the Defense Department, we need every dollar to protect our troop

Read the Full Article

Submitted May 28, 2012 By: dgerst

Back To News

Category: Daily News Article Discussions > Topics	Add to favorite topics

Author	Topic: Senate panel reins in Pentagon on clean energy	Post a Reply Back to Topics

REPLIES (newest first)Ignore Short Messages

jrs4125 Champion Author Indiana Posts:2,743 Points:588,820 Joined:Sep 2011	Message Posted: May 29, 2012 7:30:48 AM Ignore jrs4125 Report Abuse doooh
LilRedWagonIN Champion Author Indiana Posts:7,761 Points:1,551,460 Joined:Oct 2008	Message Posted: May 28, 2012 11:30:23 PM Ignore LilRedWagonIN Report Abuse How dare a Senate committee try to be rational and block the commander-in-chief's social agenda!
NHLiveFree Champion Author New Hampshire Posts:11,070 Points:1,619,180 Joined:Jun 2008	Message Posted: May 28, 2012 10:38:40 PM Ignore NHLiveFree Report Abuse The Senate Armed Services Committee should be much more worried about billion dollar fighters that are dysfunctional, and start realizing that the full life cycle costs of any weapons system is and always has been the largest expense in our defense budget. Get these major weapons systems to work properly from the start and then you shall really begin saving some real money! Every major defense contract should have penalty clauses for the contractors that don't deliver a fully functional system that works from day one of deliveries. Both the Senate and House Armed Services Committees are only interested in how much of the DoD budget they can skim off the top for the defense contractors in their own states! It is the same old game that will likely never end in our Congress.
aquarinut Champion Author British Columbia Posts:1,628 Points:436,005 Joined:Jul 2011	Message Posted: May 28, 2012 10:36:41 PM Ignore aquarinut Report Abuse Good! Was worried about non-lethal bullets, plastic armoured vehicles, solar night vision, pop can thick combat ships, elastic band launched missels, toilet paper parachutes, potato gun howitzers, water soluble assault boats, screen doors in submarines, dissolving rain gear, fire retardant napalm, herbs and grasses for surgery, self deflating life rafts, etc, etc, etc..... would be following... Sounds pretty extreme, but dumber things have happened!!! [Edited by: aquarinut at 5/28/2012 11:39:49 PM EST]
carranco Champion Author Georgia Posts:1,027 Points:267,390 Joined:Dec 2008	Message Posted: May 28, 2012 9:16:52 PM Ignore carranco Report Abuse There is no money to waste, period.
mikaye Champion Author Cleveland Posts:3,814 Points:861,410 Joined:Jun 2010	Message Posted: May 28, 2012 5:57:17 PM Ignore mikaye Report Abuse clean energy does not mean cheaper or better for the enviroment. some alternate fuels do worse than regular gasoline for the enviroment
YaBassa Champion Author Michigan Posts:2,415 Points:513,425 Joined:Nov 2011	Message Posted: May 28, 2012 3:56:11 PM Ignore YaBassa Report Abuse Big Oil owns and runs Washington DC. Good comment OrphanCarGuyPE [Edited by: YaBassa at 5/28/2012 5:01:16 PM EST]
GasFreeLeaf Champion Author Orange County Posts:1,242 Points:474,100 Joined:Oct 2010	Message Posted: May 28, 2012 1:03:34 PM Ignore GasFreeLeaf Report Abuse Don't let the military mess with oil independence at any time, especially in an election year. Message received loud and clear.
md11capt Champion Author Denver Posts:3,553 Points:707,555 Joined:Mar 2011	Message Posted: May 28, 2012 12:54:48 PM Ignore md11capt Report Abuse Reign in Tea Partiers.
BuckyTJones Champion Author Salt Lake City Posts:4,932 Points:967,950 Joined:Mar 2010	Message Posted: May 28, 2012 12:37:31 PM Ignore BuckyTJones Report Abuse Lets "Rein" in our Senate and all others this November.
GasPriceHelp4u Champion Author Dayton Posts:2,672 Points:565,875 Joined:Jul 2008	Message Posted: May 28, 2012 12:25:04 PM Ignore GasPriceHelp4u Report Abuse Reasonable thing to expect of armed forces under current situation!!!
dh0770 Champion Author Colorado Posts:6,987 Points:672,460 Joined:Jun 2011	Message Posted: May 28, 2012 12:11:43 PM Ignore dh0770 Report Abuse The decisions should be based on National Security, not politics! Not the liberal force it down their thoughts at whatever cost, or the anti position by conservatives just because!
evowner Champion Author Salem Posts:2,162 Points:355,355 Joined:May 2012	Message Posted: May 28, 2012 11:23:11 AM Ignore evowner Report Abuse Shows the strength of the oil lobby.
bar1035 Champion Author Charlotte Posts:9,135 Points:1,294,445 Joined:Aug 2006	Message Posted: May 28, 2012 10:39:09 AM Ignore bar1035 Report Abuse what? no more $26 a gallon bio-diesel ? For the 3 or 4 time in the past week?
orphancarguyPE Champion Author PEI Posts:3,832 Points:731,965 Joined:Jan 2011	Message Posted: May 28, 2012 10:37:00 AM Ignore orphancarguyPE Report Abuse It seems that the party that was formerly known as the Republican Party has gone completely over the edge in Tea Bagger partisan craziness. The US military is no rose petals and ginseng zen yoga organization. If they know in their heart of hearts that for purposes of US national security that they have to develop non-crude oil alternatives to power and move them from a (let me repeat this) US NATIONAL SECURITY standpoint, and that they have to do it RIGHT NOW, then might I suggest that they just might know about what is really coming down the pike in the near (less than 5 years) and slightly further away future (less than a decade) than anyone else ie a politician who has to get re-elected, is willing to say publicly? I would give Mr Chu brownie points for attempting to put the idea out there that sudden conservation from sharply higher prices ASAP before there is a real crisis 'might be a good thing in the long run'. See how he got burned by attempting to tell an inconvenient truth. Actions speak louder than words, folks. I've spent about 50 years pondering what politicians and their advisers are NOT saying when they move their jaws. When I first heard that the US military was investing heavily in solar, biofuels for jets and tanks, and hybrid vehicles, I started making my own moves to get off oil once and for all. If they were doing this, and the politicians were still saying that 'there is no crisis' then the time to worry about the coming crisis is now. Maybe its time to consider everything. Like, there is no safety margin in oil production left. 89 million barrels a day being used, 89 million being produced and the Saudis seem to the the last country in the world with any spare, 'turn the tap on' unused capacity left of perhaps 1-1.5 million bbls a day. Perhaps. That is less than TWO percent margin. Iran produces about 4 million bpd. Iranian oil embargo means what, math wizards? Fracking or new discoveries would take years/decades to get to market. North Dakota? HA! 500,000 barrels a day climbing to an estimated 1.3 Million bpd by 2025, at the current fast pace of scaling up production. The entire world is ONE revolution or ONE war or ONE oilfield wearout/sudden collapse from permanent shortages. One oilfield in Saudi Arabia, Ghawar, produces 6.25% of the entire world daily supply of oil, and it has been producing for over 60 years. When an oilfield collapse, the end can come quickly, and sometimes with little warning--months or a year or two, and not decades. It might not cease entirely, and might continue for years--at a sharply reduced output. For your own information, investigate what happened to Britain's energy security when their giant North Sea oilfield suddenly collapsed. They went from producing 1,915,000 barrels a day in 1993 to 92,000 barrels a day in 1994. In 2010, the United Kingdom was down to 19,510 barrels a day. http://www.indexmundi.com/energy.aspx?country=gb&product=oil&graph=production+consumption There was a near forgotten oil shortage in 1979-1980. It was only a 'technical' oil shortage due to the sudden Iranian Revolution disrupting supplies for a few months, followed by the the Iran-Iraq war making Iraqi oil plunge in production as well. It was made up by OPEC and non-OPEC increases in production over a few months, and the North Sea and Alaska coming on stream. However, that about 4% oil shortage sent prices soaring 50%, and in some cases up to 250% like for Texas crude, between 78 and 80. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_energy_crisis We no longer have those huge rabbits of Alaska, North Sea and Russia to pop out of the hat.
HorizonChaser Champion Author Montgomery Posts:1,968 Points:452,885 Joined:Dec 2011	Message Posted: May 28, 2012 10:05:46 AM Ignore HorizonChaser Report Abuse Protecting Troops and saving their lives should be the most important consideration, not some environmental point.
lou30 Sophomore Author Miami Posts:185 Points:317,550 Joined:Mar 2011	Message Posted: May 28, 2012 9:57:01 AM Ignore lou30 Report Abuse I understand that in the short term it can hurt more on the bottom dollar than anything, but in the long term it's necessary and costs will only continue to rise, so when it has to get done in the future, it'll cost more money. It's kind of like cities that didn't plan for population growth and now have horribly congested streets and little to no public transportation. Now they're in trouble because it'll bankrupt them to install those service as needed.
grammamNV Champion Author Nevada Posts:2,335 Points:372,425 Joined:Mar 2011	Message Posted: May 28, 2012 9:46:15 AM Ignore grammamNV Report Abuse GOOD!! All this wasteful, government, spending on clean-green energy must be reined in. ENUF ALREADY!!
humblepie Champion Author Toledo Posts:34,087 Points:2,368,445 Joined:Mar 2006	Message Posted: May 28, 2012 9:35:18 AM Ignore humblepie Report Abuse whats next ? bullets made of rose petals ?
n3tbc Veteran Author Wilmington Posts:355 Points:332,825 Joined:Sep 2011	Message Posted: May 28, 2012 9:31:30 AM Ignore n3tbc Report Abuse Solar should still be considered... it is aligned with equipment rather than fuel. It provides electricity at forward bases and for equipment such as computers that can be charged directly. Many areas of new technology can benefit from recent battery breakthroughs and solar power combinations.
bigt61 All-Star Author Virginia Posts:652 Points:203,015 Joined:Jul 2008	Message Posted: May 28, 2012 9:16:16 AM Ignore bigt61 Report Abuse Oh no................ a glimmer of common sense. Liberal condemnation headlines coming.
dgerst Champion Author South Carolina Posts:2,691 Points:552,250 Joined:Aug 2008	Message Posted: May 28, 2012 9:09:36 AM Ignore dgerst Report Abuse We need every dollar to protect our troops, why allow ourselves the possibility of running out of fuel or being cut off from fuel sources.
hornet17 Champion Author Vancouver Posts:1,323 Points:440,865 Joined:Aug 2011	Message Posted: May 28, 2012 9:09:34 AM Ignore hornet17 Report Abuse Protect the environment.... as long as we don't spend any extra money doing so. Guess it's not all that important.