Cutting the Tether: Waging War Without Oil
Printable Version
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
If the United States’
Department of Defense were a country unto
itself, its over $600 billion annual budget
would make it the world’s 17th largest
economy. And like all of the world’s
economies, the Department runs on fuel.
It is the single largest consumer of oil both
in the the United States and its total
petroleum purchases are greater than those of
Norway, Austria, the Philippines and
Colombia. And like any economy in recent
months, the Department of Defense is getting
hit by the increasingly high cost of
energy.
On May 14th, the Center for National Policy hosted a forum entitled “Cutting the Tether: Waging War Without Oil” with author and The Economist correspondent Vijay Vaitheeswaran and CNA Corp General Counsel and former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Environmental Sherri W. Goodman to map the Department’s energy challenge. Both Goodman and Vaitheeswaran argued that, at a national level and within the Department, the failure to assess the true costs of oil usage adversely affects the United States both militarily and economically.
Goodman urged that Defense Department acquisition decisions factor in the externalities of new systems’ energy requirements. In an era where asymmetric combat is expected to shape the modern battlefield, the logistical infrastructure required to fuel a weapon is likely to be just as much, if not more, of a target as the weapon itself. Taking stock of vulnerabilities “from tail to tooth,” Goodman argued, will better prepare America’s warriors for 21st century combat.
Vaitheeswaran warned against the concept of an “energy Apollo project.” Large federal subsidies delivered through the Congressional appropriations process, Vaitheeswaran argued, will align resources to solutions on the basis of politics rather than merit. Instead, Vaitheeswaran called for reflecting the true costs of carbon in its price through policies such as “cap and trade.” Once the strategic, environmental and political costs of oil are apparent in the end price consumers and producers pay, Vaitheeswaran said, the market will have the stimulus necessary to innovate its way around an entirely too expensive commodity.
On May 14th, the Center for National Policy hosted a forum entitled “Cutting the Tether: Waging War Without Oil” with author and The Economist correspondent Vijay Vaitheeswaran and CNA Corp General Counsel and former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Environmental Sherri W. Goodman to map the Department’s energy challenge. Both Goodman and Vaitheeswaran argued that, at a national level and within the Department, the failure to assess the true costs of oil usage adversely affects the United States both militarily and economically.
Goodman urged that Defense Department acquisition decisions factor in the externalities of new systems’ energy requirements. In an era where asymmetric combat is expected to shape the modern battlefield, the logistical infrastructure required to fuel a weapon is likely to be just as much, if not more, of a target as the weapon itself. Taking stock of vulnerabilities “from tail to tooth,” Goodman argued, will better prepare America’s warriors for 21st century combat.
Vaitheeswaran warned against the concept of an “energy Apollo project.” Large federal subsidies delivered through the Congressional appropriations process, Vaitheeswaran argued, will align resources to solutions on the basis of politics rather than merit. Instead, Vaitheeswaran called for reflecting the true costs of carbon in its price through policies such as “cap and trade.” Once the strategic, environmental and political costs of oil are apparent in the end price consumers and producers pay, Vaitheeswaran said, the market will have the stimulus necessary to innovate its way around an entirely too expensive commodity.
