Fossil fuels, including coal, oil, and natural gas, have been dominant sources of energy for the past 150 years, supplanting whale oil in the late 19th century as the top energy industry. Their widespread adoption occurred because of their high energy density, accessibility, and relatively low cost compared to alternative energy sources. Since the implementation of combustible fuel engines in military equipment, petroleum has been heavily relied on by the DoD. During World War II, with the revolution of armored warfare involving trucks, tanks, warships, and planes, maintaining a steady supply chain of petroleum in a contested environment proved difficult. These difficulties were also seen at the beginning of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts, where 80% of the tonnage delivered was fuel and water.
Jet petroleum (JP-8) has been the primary operational energy (OE) source used on the battlefield since 1986 when NATO reached an agreement for a common fuel. As the times have progressed, different means of OE have also progressed. Transitioning toward cleaner and more sustainable energy sources, such as renewables like solar, wind, hydroelectric power, and nuclear energy, and advancements in energy storage technology, not only addresses tactical and environmental concerns but also enhances energy security by diversifying the energy mix and reducing reliance on centralized fossil fuel infrastructure. This shift can help mitigate the risks associated with disruptions to the fossil fuel supply chain and potentially shape the battlefield for the Army of 2030 and beyond.
What Is Operational Energy?
Before we dive into how OE can help shape the battlefield, we must first understand what exactly OE is. 10 U.S. Code Section 2924 defines OE as “the energy required for training, moving, and sustaining military forces and weapons platforms for military operations. The term includes energy used by tactical power systems and generators and weapons platforms.” What this means is that everything we use to provide power is considered OE, not just fuel. OE sources come in different forms.
A primary goal is to harness those products, capabilities, and concepts that decrease demand and reduce movement of energy in the supply chain. Examples are generators that power tactical operation centers or command posts. These generators are considered OE sources since they provide the energy to power systems. DoD has over 3,000 stock-numbered batteries in the system in all shapes and sizes. Units often purchase off-the-shelf capability to power up night-vision goggles or laser sights. All the above are part of OE in a military context. Using solar energy to charge equipment or power generators is OE. Hydro-electric sources are also OE. Energy sources directly influencing the training, moving, and sustaining of military forces and platforms are all considered OE.
2022 National Defense Strategy
We need Soldiers and leaders across the force to understand what OE is and is not. The 2022 National Defense Strategy (NDS) talks about how China and Russia are the DoD’s primary focus, since these two near-peer adversaries bring strategic competition to the battlefield. China and Russia are both armed with long-range weapons, significant anti-access/area-denial systems, and substantial cyber capabilities to degrade the ability of the DoD to provide energy to forces and facilities. These adversarial capabilities threaten to undermine the DoD’s ability to deploy, operate, and sustain joint forces. The 2022 NDS also states a future force must “provide logistics and sustainment to continue operations in a contested and degraded environment,” and that DoD will make “reducing energy demand a priority and seek to adopt more efficient and clean-energy technologies that reduce logistics requirements in contested or austere environments.” The question is, how can we achieve the goal of the 2022 NDS?
Army Efforts to Accomplish NDS Goals
Each Service is focused on its own way of accomplishing the goal of the 2022 NDS. Progress is continuously being made toward reducing energy consumption and extending range capabilities. Analyzing the four OE focus areas, the Army is focused on ways to mitigate battlefield impacts within the contested logistics environment. One example of progress is the vehicle-centric microgrid (VCM) prototype unveiled in 2021. As David Vergun writes in his article, “DoD Demonstrates Mobile Microgrid Technology,” on defense.gov, the VCM integrates generation of power directly on tactical vehicle platforms. With this concept of VCM, power can become mobile, providing on-the-go OE to mobile command-and-control assets as far forward on the battlefield as possible. Features include generating up to 100 kilowatts per vehicle or supporting static or on-the-move operations. The VCM enhances lethality and survivability in a near-peer contested environment. By combining multiple VCMs, a tactical microgrid can be established between vehicles and keep operational nodes running, while also connecting to power generating, storage, or distribution systems and minimizing the heat signature. This reduces vulnerabilities to threats while maintaining capability and reducing fuel requirements.
The Army is also experimenting with tactical fighting vehicles. The first hybrid optionally manned fighting vehicle is being designed to supersede the long-serving and reliable M2 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle platform. A key aspect of this new design is to reduce the liquid logistics demand of armored brigade combat teams. This reduces the number of fuel tankers and the fuel supply point capacity required forward, increasing survivability and reducing targeting opportunities for the enemy along the supply chain. Vehicle enhancements to on-board diagnostics reduce maintenance burdens and increase vehicle readiness.
Two companies are developing prototypes and looking across the platform to develop other demand-reducing capabilities while enhancing subsystems within the hybrid concept. These advances will also reduce the logistical burden in fuel, repair parts, and logistics supply chains. Hybrid electric powertrain designs reduce power consumption, lessening the need for high quantities of fuel required for traversing longer distances.
Industry Partners and TRISO Particle Fuel
The DoD is not alone in finding ways to reduce energy demand. Industry partners are constantly finding ways to improve energy demand reduction and sustainability. One such innovation is Project Pele, which is a revolution in nuclear power. A new ground-breaking nuclear fuel has been developed by the Department of Energy called the Tristructural Isotropic (TRISO) particle fuel. It is the safest way to capture nuclear energy at minimal risk. Each TRISO fuel kernel is the size of a poppy seed and consists of uranium, carbon, and oxygen encapsulated by three layers of carbon and ceramic-based material that prevent the release of radioactive fission products. Each particle acts as its own containment, making it safe for the battlefield.
TRISO particles do not melt down in high-temperature reactors and can withstand high temperatures in a kinetic explosion, like an artillery strike. The ability to withstand up to 3,100 degrees Fahrenheit makes TRISO a suitable fuel source in a contested environment. This micro-reactor can provide 1 megawatt of electrical power (1 MWe) for three consecutive years at 100% power utilization. Production of 1 to 5 MWe can easily power a division/theater rear area in a deployed environment with almost no heat signature. The transportation is relatively simple because the micro-reactor consists of four 20-foot containers. Fuel pellets are located within the system itself, so deployment and redeployment are fast and leave no nuclear waste.
Thoughts on the Way Ahead
The days of petroleum as the single source of OE on the battlefield are slowly and steadily transforming. As OE evolves, demand reduction paired with new sources of energy, mechanical advances, and distribution methods will transform the DoD to agile, range-extended, demand-reduced, and survivable capabilities the force needs to maintain our edge over competitors. The Army continues to adapt to an ever-changing battlefield. OE transformation requires fully analyzed planning across Army organization, training, leadership, personnel, facilities, and policy, and especially in materiel, logistics, doctrine, and education. The use of varied energy sources potentially affects the way the battlespace unfolds, both kinetically and non-kinetically. Changes in equipment and supply chains require changes in asset visibility, data analysis, and decision making. These changes must be addressed via the development of energy literacy and education. Understanding energy sources, consumption patterns, efficiency measures, and strategic implementation of energy gives us the edge over competitors, ensuring we can sustain the force in the next large-scale combat operation.
--------------------
SSG Joshua R. Charles currently serves as the senior instructor for the Petroleum and Water Officer Course, Petroleum and Water Department, at Fort Gregg-Adams, Virginia. His military education includes the Basic Leaders Course, Advanced Leader Course with Distinguished Leader, and Senior Leaders Course with Commandant’s List. He has earned a Bachelor of Science degree in criminal justice with a concentration in forensic science from American Intercontinental University and is working on his Master of Science degree in criminal justice with a concentration in criminal psychology from Liberty University.
--------------------
This article was published in the winter 2025 issue of Army Sustainment.
RELATED LINKS
The Current issue of Army Sustainment in pdf format
Current Army Sustainment Online Articles
Connect with Army Sustainment on LinkedIn
Connect with Army Sustainment on Facebook
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Social Sharing