Teddy Roosevelt Would Have Said, "Bully"

Big ships on the sea

A number of months back, I heard a radio program PolitiFact feature that reports the truthfulness of political debate topics the previous week. The PolitiFact truthfulness ratings range across: True – The statement is accurate and there’s nothing significant missing; Mostly True – The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information; Half True – The statement is partially accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context; Mostly False – The statement contains some element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression; False – The statement is not accurate; Pants on Fire – The statement is not accurate and makes a ridiculous claim.

Navy ship refueling at sea

Most of the time, I may know something about the subject, but rarely would I even attempt to make believe that I have extensive first-hand knowledge - know for sure with some degree of certainty that my competency exceeds my confidence. For the past couple of years my work has been focused on biofuels, and in particular, an emphasis on the development of drop-in fuels for the commercial air transportation industry and the military. The realization of widespread use of biofuels is coming closer to reality, and it is satisfying to have a front-row seat to history as it unfolds. United Airlines, Boeing, and others recently announced an initiative to create a source of aviation fuel from Midwest U.S. farms, and earlier this week the Navy continued preparations for the demonstration of biofuels by a strike group during the upcoming RIMPAC exercises in July.

F76 renewable diesel fuel

The past month or so there have also been political challenges to government-sponsored activities, particularly the Navy, to help push the emerging advanced biofuel industry forward. It is interesting to read the accounts of the arguments made for and against biofuels, and to check the facts against what is said. It has also been fascinating to see the press responses that are being printed in a wide range of publications: The Wall Street Journal, Forbes Magazine, Wired, and others - quite a cross section of the political spectrum. I checked PolitiFact earlier in the week, but hadn't found any scoring on the matter of recent developments regarding biofuels - maybe soon there will be some.

Following are excerpts with links to full reports from a recent smattering of articles about moves to block the Navy from testing biofuels. I will leave it up to you to make your judgments about the facts - maybe a PolitiFact score could be used to keep track of the debate. 

Airforce And Navy Turn To Biofuels. The Pentagon's hunt for an alternative to petroleum has turned a lowly weed and animal fat into something indistinguishable from jet fuel, and now the military is trying to kick-start a new biofuel industry. [Continue reading here.]

Navy Sails To Greener Future. Next month, in naval exercises off the coast of Hawaii, five U.S. warships will make history: They will be the first to use biofuels to power their huge turbines, as well as the jet planes screaming off a carrier's deck and helicopters hovering overhead. The flotilla—powered by a mixture of cooking grease and algae oil—is the centerpiece of the U.S. Navy's efforts to shake off its centurylong dependence on petroleum. But now it has become the center of a political storm. Lawmakers in both houses of Congress last month voted to stop the Navy from buying any more of the still-pricey alternative fuel and to keep the Pentagon from investing $170 million in new biofuel refineries. [Continue reading here.]

Don't Scuttle The U.S. Navy's Biofuels Program. Last month, the Senate Armed Services Committee voted to restrict the Department of Defense’s biofuels buying power. Jointly the Department of Energy, Department of Defense and U.S. Department of Agriculture have committed to investing $510 million during the next three years to advance biofuels production. Now, as a part of the Defense Department’s fiscal budget review, the House and now Senate Armed Services Committee have banned it from buying alternative fuels priced higher than fossil fuels. If the budget passes in the full Senate, early biofuels investment and testing by the Defense Department will be effectively squashed. [Continue reading here.]

United, Boeing, Honeywell UOP Join Big Push For Biofuels. If there are still any doubts that biofuels are ready for the big time, last week’s announcement by United Airlines, Boeing, and UOP (a Honeywell company) should put them to rest. The three industry heavyweights have joined with the Chicago Department of Aviation and the Clean Energy Trust to form the Midwest Aviation Sustainable Biofuels Initiative. [Continue reading here.]

Biofuels Could Bolster Nation Security, Leaders Say. A top British envoy says the U.S. and the U.K. could collaborate more on the development and use of biofuels in the military to boost both nations’ security and energy interests and cut greenhouse gas emissions. [Continue reading here.]

The Navy Plays An Important Role In Biofuel Procurement. The military’s FY2013 budget is playing out to be a hot-bed of debate over the role of government in supporting clean energy innovation. Both the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate Armed Services Committee passed Department of Defense (DOD) budgets that bans the department from developing or purchasing advanced alternative energy fuels that cost more than traditional fossil fuels. While most of the resulting media focus has been on weighing the possible advantages associated with biofuel use relative to its cost, too little attention has been paid to the important role the DOD can play as a technology-first adopter. [Continue reading here.]

Senate Cuts Off Navy's Biofuel Buys. The Navy’s ambitious renewable-energy plans aren’t sunk quite yet. But they took a major hit Thursday, when the Senate Armed Services Committee voted to all-but-ban the military from buying alternative fuels. [Continue reading here.]

McCain Sees Another Solyndra In Navy Biofuels Spending. The Navy’s push to develop biofuels to run its fleet of planes and warships could devolve into a “Solyndra situation” for the Pentagon, a top Republican senator said today. During Tuesday’s hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee, ranking member John McCain (R-Ariz.) compared the now-bankrupt solar energy company, into which the White House sank $535 million in loan guarantees, to Navy-led efforts in alternative energy. [Continue reading here.] 

Hands Off Biofuels, Panetta Tells Congress. In yet another Washington fight over energy policy, U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta pushed back Wednesday against Congressional efforts to curtail the military push into alternative fuels. [Continue reading here.] 

USDA's Vilsack Criticizes Senate Panel Biofuels Vote. This week an Obama administration official criticized a U.S. Senate panel for voting to block the Pentagon from buying more costly alternative fuels, saying a military biofuels program announced last year could help revitalize rural America. [Continue reading here.]

Why We Need A Greener Military. Killing a $12 million military program may seem like a paltry matter. The sum amounts to a mere 0.002 percent of the total defense budget. But the elimination of one such program this week by the House Armed Services Committee reveals—more brazenly than many larger tamperings—just how shortsighted, hypocritical, and beholden to special interests the custodians of national security can be. [Continue reading here.]
___________________________
The Navy's Greet Green Fleet is a contemporary throw back to the world tour by the Great White Fleet in the early 1900's that President Theodore Roosevelt used to demonstrate the U.S. military power, only now, demonstrating the modern capacity using renewable fuels that are technically the equivalent of petroleum-based ones and that will not be subject to price fluctuations.