El Paso Electric is building a 20 MW solar farm at Fort Bliss in Texas; a major step toward making the installation net zero – producing as much energy as it consumes. The solar farm is expected to be completed in 2015. Fort Bliss is already home to the U.S. Army’s second-largest, 1.4 MW solar array. It has also installed a 13.4 MW rooftop solar on housing posts. In addition, another 20 MW contract with El Paso Electric is being discussed, as well as a plan with the city of El Paso to convert waste to energy. Read more from the U.S. DoD website. 

For many Americans and foreign alumni who’ve passed through the American university system, the month of March is known as March Madness.  It is a month that basketball fans are glued to their televisions following the college basketball championship round-robin.    

Elsewhere around the world March Madness in 2014 took on a much more sinister character. Russia’s take-over of Crimea is only the latest in a long series of bullying incursions that the world’s largest country has taken over smaller regional ones.  Abkhazia in Georgia and Transnistria in Moldova jump to mind as the manifestation of Russian mingling in the affairs of states under former Soviet and now Russian influence. 

In the past disputes between Russian nationalists, lead by Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, and its Ukrainian neighbor have been obscured through the fish-eyed lens of energy issues where Russia’s displeasure of Ukrainian independence was blurred and marginalized along the lens’ convex periphery allowing energy disputes to dominate the main field of vision.  Russia’s march into Crimea has dispelled this vision once and for all.  The Russian President aka Emperor has been portrayed  in the past as a shirtless fly-fisherman the image of which is presumably to his liking.  This time Vladimir may lose his pants, and if he is not careful he and his country will lose their shorts, and will be left standing before the international community as a naked and brazen symbol of brutality.    

Energy in Ukraine
Ukraine's geographic position and proximity to Russia explain its importance as a natural gas and petroleum liquids transit country both for Russia as well as for Ukraine’s downstream neighbors across Europe.  The configuration of Ukraine’s pipeline infrastructure and its dependence on the Russian Federation for the majority of gas that traverses the country east to west (and the gas it consumes domestically) is attributable to its legacy as part of the former Soviet Union’s pipeline network.   Since Ukraine’s Orange Revolution in 2004 and the election of Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko (who was poisoned incidentally during the election campaign) over his Russian-backed opponent (the recently ousted Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych) the price the Ukraine has paid for its gas has been proportionally higher than the more distant Germany pays for its own Russian gas (the Baltic nations are in largely the same unenviable position as Ukraine). 

While a subsidy agreement had been struck by Russian backed Yanukovych that gave temporary reprieve to the troubled Ukrainian economy,  on April 1st (and this is no April fool’s joke) Russia’s Gazprom again jacked up prices by 40% to some $385 per thousand cubic meters.  In deference to an EU loan bailout package of some $27 billion and to a pending loan package from the IMF,  the Ukrainian government has stated it will increase by 50% the cost of gas to its residential consumers.  Presumably Gazprom will be pleased with a portion of the EU loan proceeds that will go towards retiring what it claims is $1.7 in arrears for 2013 gas deliveries.  It sees such arm twisting as righteous and effective in further economically destabilizing a Ukraine it supposedly longs after.  By weakening the Ukraine economically through the energy subterfuge, Putin & Co. hope to maximize their influence over those in the Ukrainian public who find or feel themselves disenfranchised and who long for the good ole-bad ole days. 

To be realistic  there is very little in the short term that Ukraine can do to break away from dependence on Russian gas.  In fact, the Ukraine has been trying to buy cheaper gas on the European market which raised the ire of Russian gas lobbyists in Brussels but due to a lack of west-east pipeline capacity there simply isn’t enough throughput capacity to supplant Russian gas deliveries today.  Regardless, the bottom line in Ukraine-Russia relations is that the legacy and current disputes in this bilateral relationship are not energy driven.  This is about a revengeful Russian power grab.

The Emperor has no clothes
For years Vladimir Putin’s Russia has put on a dog-and-pony show to depict itself as a modern state worthy of equal treatment and respect by countries of a greater economic or military magnitude than itself.  Russia’s procession of kennel-events from its hosting a G-8 summit back in 2006 to the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics has been window-dressing for a state swimming upstream to create a stable middle-class against the flow of its own internal corruption.  What Putin has put to the test is the loyalty of Russia’s own middle class to continue to support him as Western sanctions begin to bite.  On top of this is the fact that the Russian banana-republic’s economy, as dependent as ever on its oil and gas commodity exports for funding its national budget, its military build-up (which lead to the departure of the respected Russian Finance Minister Alexander Kudrin back in 2011) and its corrupt kleptocracy has a weakening economic base to pillar-on. 

The Russian economy was barely growing before the imposition of sanctions (1.3% in 2013 reportedly its lowest growth rate in 13 years barring a downturn in 2009) and it continues to deteriorate.  Capital outflows are accelerating (more in the first 3 months of 2014 than in all of 2013), the currency has taken a 10% devaluation hit since its Ukrainian incursion leading to higher capital costs for lenders and borrowers alike.  If the crisis worsens, the World Bank estimates the economy could move into negative growth territory in 2014 and beyond.  Already the World Bank notes, Russia’s recent growth-holding cetiris paribus oil and gas prices - have been consumer driven and consumer spending is down.  In the immediate short term Emperor Putin can probably bank on continued middle class support but we are only at the beginning and not at the end of Russia’s devolution backwards to some vain and imaginary glorious past.  How long his bread-and-butter contingency will tolerate the economic costs of expansionism at the price of the Russian empire he already controls is anyone’s guess.  One thing for certain is that further Russian incursions into the Ukraine and elsewhere can only lead to furthering damaging the nascent Russian economy and plunge it backwards towards a recession, or worse, that Russians themselves do not want.  The other side of this coin is how much the rest of the world, particularly Russia’s biggest EU trade partners, are willing to sacrifice to make a point about justice for Ukraine and Russia’s unprecedented modern military build-up adjacent to the EU’s and NATO’s eastern European border.  

In the end, Russia has again shot itself in the foot.  Mr. Putin’s leadership is as starkly threatening as past Soviet regimes which should come to no one’s surprise.  Russia’s foreign and energy policy behavior further signal the extent to which it is willing to return to its former glory days at any price.  European policy makers could accelerate decoupling the EU from Russian energy supplies; American policy makers have already called on the EU to energize moves towards their own shale oil and gas revolution, which if launched, could further nibble-away at Gazprom’s European market share; a middle-to-long term decline in Gazprom’s export position could lead to a gas-rich but market dry Russian gas industry.  In the meantime, world observers will necessarily re-assess Russia as an upstanding and predictable state worthy of respect in global affairs.  The G8 is now the G7 (Mr. Putin says he could careless), NATO will reassess its posture vis-à-vis its old-new adversary (probably the biggest unforeseen favor Mr. Putin has given the Alliance in many a day) and trade agreements and regimes may be reviewed which can’t be good for inward Russian foreign investment and trade.  In the end, the Ukraine-Russia crisis is not about energy.  This is about power.  US President Obama correctly downgraded Russia as a ‘regional’ power over its smaller or weaker regional neighbors.  Once again the Russian emperor has no clothes. A half naked Putin is hard enough to look at.  Don’t make things worse Vlad.  We don’t want to go there. 

The U.S. Army Natick Soldier Research, Development and Engineering Center (NSRDEC), also known as Natick Labs, embarked on an energy efficient shelter system that provides full-living capability for military personnel at base camps. The Self-sustaining Living Module (SLiM) concept developed by Leidos Inc. is designed to enhance self-sufficiency and habitability to support expeditionary bases. According to Leidos, the rigid-walled, modular shelter system can be set up by soldiers without material handling equipment and includes energy efficiency systems that reduce water and fuel resupply needs. Specifically, the SLiM system has several features that alleviate expeditionary basing challenges including solar energy collection and microgrid power management, rainwater collection, water purification systems, and easy onsite setup and teardown. In addition, with the capability of energy water and waste management subsystems, each SLiM system can accommodate squad size units in remote combat outpost/patrol base environments. Read more directly from the Leidos website. Similarly, in 2013 the U.S. Army ordered energy-efficient combat outposts with Berg Co. These mobile outposts fielded in operations in Afghanistan, Africa, and Turkey include soldier housing shelters, tactical operations centers, kitchens and hygiene centers. Combined with other efficient basecamp components, the shelters reduce between 30-50% of daily fuel use and over 70% of water use. Read more at the U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense for Operational Energy Plans and Programs website.

The Office of the U.S. Secretary of Defense for Operational Energy created a web page featuring a list of open, operational energy-related solicitations announced by the U.S. Department of Defense. The most recent 2014 solicitations call for technologies to reduce the power and weight demands placed on dismounted soldiers, technologies that could be used to reduce energy and water consumption at expeditionary bases, and technologies that can harvest energy from Marines on patrol and from generator waste heat. The full list, which continues to be updated as new solicitations emerge, can be accessed HERE.

The office of the U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense for Operational Energy Plans and Programs issued the third annual call for proposals for U.S. DoD's Operational Energy Capabilities Improvement Fund (OECIF) which funds science and technology programs to enhance the energy performance of U.S. military forces in the field. This year's topic is "Analytic Methods for Considering Operational Energy." For this particular program, proposals should come from DoD components and not from non-governmental organizations. Read more directly from a cover memo HERE.

While approximately one thousand U.S. military domestic non-tactical vehicles run on natural gas, when it comes to the U.S. tactical fleet abroad, there exist several barriers to switching from traditional liquid fuels to natural gas as a direct fuel, observes Bret Strogen, AAAS Science and Technology Policy Fellow on the Innovation Team within the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Operational Energy. These barriers revolve around availability, compatibility, energy density, safety, and economics. Read more about each of these factors HERE.

As a part of its National Defense and Security Initiative, the American Council on Renewable Energy (ACORE) released a new report entitled "Renewable Energy for Military Installations: 2014 Industry Review" in which a variety of renewable energy stakeholders from the private sector share industry perspective related to renewable energy installations at military facilities. The report provides an insight into state regulatory hurdles for military use of renewables, best practices in collaboration with state energy offices, and an overview of the existing procurement landscape among others. The February 2014 report can be accessed HERE.

The U.S. Department of Defense opened its biggest solar array. This 16.4 megawatt solar farm located at David-Monthan Air Force Base in Tuscon, Arizona, will deliver 35% of the base's electricity needs and is projected to cut energy costs by $500,000 a year. The project is part of the U.S. Air Force effort to acquire 25% of its electricity from renewable sources by 2025. The Air Force spends over $9 billion annually on electricity and fuel costs, making it the largest consumer of energy in the U.S. federal government. The project, which includes a 25-year power purchase agreement with SunEdison, demonstrates benefits of public-private partnerships which were vital to financing construction of the array, allowing the air force base to acquire solar power at little or no upfront cost. Pew Charitable Trusts' recent research found that around 80% of future DoD renewable energy projects will be conducted through power purchase agreements similar to the one at David-Monthan. In other words, projects "that rely on private developers to finance, build, and maintain projects while saving military bases money over the life of the contract." Read more directly from the Pew website.