1. UNCLASSIFIED

2. 2 The Context: Strategic Environment Homeland DefenseCyber ThreatsRising PowersHumanitarian AssistanceWMD ProliferationCurrent Conflicts

3. 3 Sources: BP Statistical Review Year-End 2004 and Energy Information Administration; Environmental Action; BP Statistical Review of World Energy June 2011 Reserves-to-production ratios Dynamic energy markets have geopolitical, fiscal, and strategic implications The Context: Global Energy Supply and Demand

4. The Context: DoD Fiscal Challenges 4 $400B

5. Defense Energy Challenges 5  New capabilities with growing energy needs  Implications for sustainment  Legacy equipment  Energy Choke Points  High and Volatile Prices  Threats to fuel projection affect power projection  AirSea Battle  Complicated distribution networks  Tactical fuel logistics in contested battlespace  Inefficient equipment in theater adds to burden

6. Defense Energy Opportunities 6  Improved routing and flight profiles  Optimized cargo loading and center of gravity  Engine wash / less drag  Hybrid electric drives in LHDs, LHAs, and DDGs  Better hull and propeller coatings and stern flaps  UUVs  Centralized power generation  Energy-efficient shelters, lighting, and heating/air conditioning  Fielding of advanced power distribution  Tactical Solar

7.  GOAL: to assure that U.S. armed forces will have the energy they require for 21 st century military missions The DoD Operational Energy Strategy 7 Reduce Demand for Energy in Military Operations Expand and Secure the Supply of Energy to Military Operations Build Energy Security into the Future Force Capability More Fight, Less Fuel More Options, Less Risk More Capability, Less Cost Risk Cost

8. Operational Energy is Operational Capability 8 Gen James Mattis 12 July 2011 Gen John R. Allen 11 December 2011 Leadership stands behind capability improvements through operational energy

9.  Measure Operational Energy Consumption  Improve Energy Performance and Efficiency  Promote Operational Energy Innovation  Improve Operational Energy Security at Fixed Installations  Promote the Development of Alternative Fuels  Incorporate Energy Security Considerations into Requirements and Acquisition  Adapt Policy, Doctrine, PME, and CCMD Activities Implementation Plan 9 Near, Mid, and Long-Term Goals Energy Security for the Warfighter

10. Operational Energy Capability Improvement Fund PE 0604055D8Z Mission: Fund innovation to improve operational effectiveness via science & technology investments to improve energy performance of our forces. Incentivize long term change in line with OE Strategy.  Technical Goal – Develop or demonstrate and rapidly transition new operational energy technologies and practices that will improve military capabilities and reduce costs.  Institutional Goal – Establish within the Services a sustainable DoD capacity that will continue those innovations. This PE provides “seed funds” to establish/consolidate programs that will be sustained by the Services. The Operational Energy Capability Improvement Fund Complements OEPP’s oversight role

11. Operational Energy Capability Improvement Fund Basic Concept for FY 12  Programs to develop or demonstrate technologies or practices that will reduce the energy load of expeditionary outposts Load is the final use of energy that drives the entire demand FOBs, Combat Outposts and patrol bases for combat, stability and humanitarian operations  Key and unusual features Looking for Programs, not just a series of projects Strongly encourage leveraging and involving non-traditional innovators  Programs to be executed through RDT&E organizations, not OSD  OEPP will fund this set of programs for 3 fiscal years

12. Program Proposals Received  32 Program Proposals Received Via: 22 - Service Energy Offices (16 Army, 4 Navy, 2 Air Force) 9 - COCOMs (5- SOUTHCOM, 2 CENTCOM or CENTCOM/EUCOM,1 PACOM, 1 AFRICOM) 1 - DOD-DOE MOU Executive Committee  Considerable overlap and complementarities Combined 6 Army and AF proposals into one shelters program Combined PACOM testbed proposal with comprehensive expeditionary outpost proposal from DOE/Oak Ridge  Resulting in 5 Programs

13. Five OECIF Programs  Two focused on improving heating and air conditioning equipment for expeditionary outposts Innovative Cooling Equipment (ICE) Development/Demonstration Program; led by Army Communications Electronics Research, Development, and Engineering Center Navy Expeditionary Technology Transition Program; led by Naval Facilities Engineering Command Expeditionary Program Office  Two focused on energy efficient shelters Advanced, Energy Efficient Shelter Systems for Contingency Basing and Other Applications; led by Army Natick Soldier Research, Development, and Engineering Center Super Energy Efficient Containerized Living Unit (SuperCLU) Design and Development; led by Naval Facilities Engineering Command  One to identify and assess technology to reduce energy load of expeditionary outposts in tropical environments Transformative Reductions in Operational Energy Consumption (TROPEC); led by PACOM

14. Two Complementary Efforts  Project to establish a quantitative baseline for energy use in Afghanistan and test an array of energy related technology Led by Army Research Development and Engineering Command – Field Assistance in Science and Technology Center – Bagram Air Base  Program to develop efficient, deployable waste to energy systems Teamed with SERDP to fund four projects towards this goal.

15.  On July 22 nd, 2010, Deputy Secretary Poneman and Deputy Secretary Lynn signed an Energy Security MOU to better leverage the resources, expertise, and capabilities of both agencies to achieve our respective missions.  This partnership can help propel research, development, and deployment of new energy technologies that will assure DOD access to reliable supplies of energy to meet both operational and installation energy needs. It can also help DOE propel new technologies into the marketplace at a faster pace.  Joint activities under the MOU now cover a wide range of areas, including energy storage, microgrids, vehicle technologies, tactical renewable energy technologies, and systems to reduce overall fuel demand at our forward operating bases. DOE-DOD Energy Security MOU 15

16.  “Quick Wins” Operational Energy policy memo to commanders from USPACOM senior leadership Operational energy considerations in TERMINAL FURY 2012 Energy-efficient equipment in CRIMSON VIPER  USPACOM Action Plan to Implement Operational Energy Strategy and Improve Energy Security for Warfighters Governance Structure Analysis Planning Security Cooperation Exercises and Training USPACOM Operational Energy Summit March 6-7 2012 Outcomes 16

17. http://energy.defense.gov facebook.com/sharon.e.burke asd_sharonburke 17

18. BACKUP 18

19. Improved Heating And Air Conditioning Equipment For Expeditionary Outposts  Innovative Cooling Equipment (ICE) Development/Demonstration Program; led by Army Communications Electronics Research, Development, and Engineering Center  Navy Expeditionary Technology Transition Program; led by Naval Facilities Engineering Command Expeditionary Program Office

20.  Advanced, Energy Efficient Shelter Systems for Contingency Basing and Other Applications; led by Army Natick Soldier Research, Development, and Engineering Center  Super Energy Efficient Containerized Living Unit (SuperCLU) Design and Development; led by Naval Facilities Engineering Command Energy Efficient Shelters 20

21.  Transformative Reductions in Operational Energy Consumption (TROPEC); led by PACOM Reducing Demand for Tropical Expeditionary Outposts 21

22. Examples of Leveraging  ICE led by Army CERDEC, teamed with Navy ONR  Navy Expeditionary Technology Transition led by Navy NAVFAC, teamed with ARPA-E  Advanced Energy Efficient Shelters led by Army Natick, teamed with AFRL and Army Construction Engineering Research Lab  TROPEC led by PACOM, teamed with USMC Pacific Experimentation Center and DOE Oak Ridge and Lawrence Berkeley

23. Two Complementary Efforts  Project to establish a quantitative baseline for energy use in Afghanistan and test an array of energy related technology Led by Army Research Development and Engineering Command – Field Assistance in Science and Technology Center – Bagram Air Base  Program to develop efficient, deployable waste to energy systems Teamed with SERDP to fund four projects towards this goal. OECIF POC: john.jennings@osd.mil

24. Energy for a Globally Active Force 24 Afghanistan 76.2M Gallons $231.4M Vessels Afloat 168.6M Gallons $510M Germany 54.4M Gallons $164.4M Greenland 4.6M Gallons $14.1M Guam 18.4M Gallons $55.6M Italy 14.6M Gallons $44.4M Japan 55.9M Gallons $169.2M Kyrgyzstan 41.6M Gallons $126.1M Spain 40.6M Gallons $123.1M Iraq 94.5M Gallons $285.7M Qatar 93.1M Gallons $282.2M UAE 65.0M Gallons $199.0M Defense Fuel Supply Sales By Country (January-April 2011) 1,538,127,144 Gallons of Fuel in 4 months