The military is very aware of the havoc that the end of cheap oil and the end of a relatively stable climate pose to civilization, and are ahead of the rest of society in planning for the disruptions. Renewable energy does not necessarily mean that it will power a democratic, more egalitarian society. The concentration camp at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, run by the United States, is partially wind powered, since there is lots of wind and the Cuban government is not obligated to sell electricity to the US compound still occupying a small part of Cuba.
Perhaps the primary reason for the resource grab marketed as "The War on Terror" and the related "Homeland Security" surveillance system is an elite understanding that Peak Oil and Climate Change will reduce food and water supplies with tremendous consequences for billions of people dependent on industrial agriculture. Humanity is at the precipice of either allowing a global totalitarian approach to manage the crisis, or converting the military industrial complex, transnational corporations, the financial markets, media, etc. toward a planetary scale "global permaculture" response. The scale of the crisis is the largest in the history of civilization, so the response to these interconnected problems also needs to be the largest in the history of our species.
link to Google Earth photos of wind farm at Guanatamo concentration camp in the United States occupied sector of Cuba.
Cuba is stuck with the US base for the duration of the "lease" signed by the previous dictatorship, since Cuba lacks the military power to void the bogus lease. However, the Castro government was not obliged to sell electricity from the Cuba power grid to the Yanquis. Therefore, wind generated power is used to partially run the Guatanamo camp (it is cheaper than runnng diesel generators).
National Security and the Threat of Climate Change
Peak Oil, Climate Change and civil liberties
An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security
By Peter Schwartz and Doug Randall
The mass media, politicians and most environmental groups do not want to ask why our society largely ignored the warnings about climate change. Few of them also consider how Peak Oil and global warming are two ways of looking at the same problem of overconsumption, since our monetary system is predicated on ever increasing growth.
The best analyses of Peak Oil and of global warming each conclude that the problem would have to be addressed a decade or two before it manifests at full strength - yet both problems are here, now. Perhaps the truth is that the shadow government (corporations and the military industrial complex) did not want to deal with these problems because the solutions are inherently decentralized and would require relaxation of centralized power control systems. Since we missed the opportunity to solve these issues as gently as possible, governments are instituting a global surveillance police state to suppress dissent as the oil that runs the show becomes more scarce and expensive, and climate change reduces available food and water supplies.
Climate Change: time's up!
Warnings such as Al Gore's admonition in his 2006 film An Inconvenient Truth that humanity has perhaps a decade to address the climate crisis ignore previous warnings around 1990 from numerous eminent authorities (including Senator Al Gore) that the 1990s would be the decade of decision on the environment. Since industrial civilization did not make a serious effort to shift course a few decades ago when the warnings of the environmental movement became prominent, now we are facing the consequences of collective inaction.
Few people warning about climate change have the nerve to point out how Al Gore promoted numerous policies that made the environmental crises worse when he was Vice President - including the NAFTA treaty, the World Trade Organization, abolition of the strongest food safety laws, hazardous waste incineration, massive expansion of the interstate highway system, more oil drilling in northern Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico, and energy deregulation schemes that resulted in reduction of utility efficiency programs.
Space based solar power is not only an energy system
There are still efforts to promote the old NASA science fiction promotion of putting giant mirrors in space to focus sunlight to terrestrial collectors to power the US electric grid
Would anyone want to give Dick Cheney the controls for aiming this giant mirror -- imagine the military implications for this technology (or the risk of accident if the mirror became mis-focused onto a city). It's just another variation on bogus claims for energy solutions like the "abiotic" oil claims -- we will be getting more and more of them as energy becomes even more important as an issue.
Military bases installing solar panels and wind farms
largest solar array in the US at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada
(view link above for all links that don't work below)
over the edge
Renewable Destruction - Solar Energy for the Military
B26888 / Sun, 27 Jan 2008 11:54:45 / Sci-Tech
Military surrounding Cheyenne Mountain with Renewable Energy
The above article reports on the largest solar array built by the military to date – 2 megawatts of power at maximum output – at Fort Carson. The goal is to have Fort Carson run entirely on renewable energy by 2027.
Fort Carson is just a few miles away from the Cheyenne Mountain Air Force base. Cheyenne Mountain is where the US Air Force/NORTHCOM/NORAD headquarters are located. It is also where one of the most elaborate underground cities (that we know of) operated by the military is located.
Get some very basic info on this here. Search the Internet for more info.
The military is installing renewables on military bases and mapping where all big renewable projects are in proximity to their installations. They are preparing for fuel shortages that will impact the entire U.S.
*IMPORTANT* See The Military is Planning for THE END of the GRID and THE RENEWABLE WAR MACHINE
For more info on Fort Carson’s exploitation of renewables, click here
The Military is Planning for THE END of the GRID
Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:21:34 -0600
By Michael Kane
Pentagon Documents Reveal
Important note – As I have recently written at my blog, this report was purged from the FTW archives at some unknown time for unknown reasons . This is one of two reports that have gone missing from the FTW archives. As geopolitical events continue to unfold exactly as Mike Ruppert predicted they would in Crossing the Rubicon, it is crucial that this report remains on the net; it is very relevant to current energy news. – MK]
From the purged FTW archives, I proudly present to you:
The Military is Planning for THE END of the GRID.
With the eagerness and drive of a baseball player on steroids, the largest financial powerhouses in the nation have been gobbling up publicly owned utilities since George W. Bush signed the new energy bill last fall … These privately owned giants will be able to arbitrage (grid) energy to the highest bidder.
Michael Ruppert, THE END of the GRID, January 4, 2006
In some cases, (a military) installation can depend on nearby generation, including renewable energy for its backup energy supply where the utility has the capability of segregating its service area from outside influences. This creates self-sustaining regional “islands” which should not be overlooked as installations engage in emergency planning to serve critical installation functions. Planning must necessarily be coordinated with regional energy suppliers, transmission companies, and major energy users. [emphasis added]
If local utilities and the Services work together to develop resources across installation boundaries or adjacent to an installation, local energy security and reliability may be significantly improved, benefiting utility providers, military customers, and the surrounding community. [emphasis added]
Efficiency improvements in renewable technologies, rising prices in electricity markets, and additional utility deregulation will create increased opportunities in the future. [emphasis added]
Office of the Secretary of Defense, Report to Congress, Department of Defense, DoD Renewable Energy Assessment, Final Report (selected excerpts)
Originally published on May 30, 2006 1000 PST (FTW) – New York – As Peak Oil & Gas drive energy prices through the roof, the military sees an opportunity to effectively monopolize grid energy when they need to by taking advantage of a deregulating energy industry preparing to sell energy to the highest bidder. Such a scenario will benefit the military above all else because no one could possibly outbid them.
With America’s commercial manufacturing sector packing up shop and relocating primarily in Mexico and China to cut costs, military installations and private-sector military-industrial-complex manufacturers in America are sure to have the deepest pockets to pay for grid energy with little competition as hydrocarbon supplies start to dwindle.
People will be priced off of the grid.
In THE END of the GRID, Mike Ruppert writes:
The term “merchant power plants” has come up in several stories. It suggests, though I have not been able to confirm it yet, that power companies will now be operating dedicated generating stations for industrial and corporate users with the best ability to pay. Weaker corporations, not on the “A” list would be allowed to die-off leaving more energy for the rest. That would mean that a Boeing plant might have plenty of power sitting right next to a neighborhood that gets none at all due to selective service i nterruptions designed to “curb demand.” As if any residential user would voluntarily have their heat and power shut off during a cold winter. 1
The above thesis, presented by Mike Ruppert, is exactly what the military is anticipating.
A close read of the DoD’s Renewable Energy Assessment from March of 2005 reveals the Pentagon fully supports additional deregulation measures for the privatization of public utilities. They believe privatization will promote future opportunities benefiting the military.
The DoD plans to act in consort with utilities to implement “islanding strategies” for their domestic installations to deal with emergencies and fuel shortages. Think of this as an “energy island” that the military is on and you are not. And it stands to reason that the more renewable energy infrastructure on-site at a given base or nearby (within 100 miles), the more energy security that island possesses.
Recent major grid failures and the vulnerability of the grid to terrorist actions have caused an increase in interest in energy security for DoD installations. One way to reduce the effect on an installation is the development of micro-grids. A micro-grid is the interconnection of modular generation sources to a distribution system serving a specific set of loads. The micro-grid is part of the main power network that can be operated autonomously when the main grid is down to continue to provide uninterrupted power to critical interconnected loads. 2
One way DoD facilities can address increased reliability needs is through micro-grids that include both on-installation and, in some cases, near-installation generation resources, including renewable resources.
If local utilities and the Services work together to develop resources across installation boundaries or adjacent to an installation, local energy security and reliability may be significantly improved, benefiting utility providers, military customers, and the surrounding community.
Communities near critical infrastructure will have access to grid power. This won’t always be the case, since PROMIS progeny software running a micro-grid could allow for very specific transmissions of grid energy, thereby bypassing select communities. But communities surrounding critical infrastructure are usually filled with people who run, operate and service it. These people will have power in their homes until the very last possible moment because they are necessary servants to the Empire.
A worst-case scenario could entail the American economy downscaling over time to the point of servicing military interests almost exclusively as competition for energy intensifies within our borders. One has to wonder if the increasing American military presence on the Mexican border is just an election year ploy or the beginning of a long-term strategy for resource scarcity. 3 The border will never be adequately secured as long as big business needs excessive cheap labor in America, but once that need vanishes due to Peak Oil, climate change, and economic turmoil, we will see an entirely different immigration paradigm.
Connecting the Dots
Back in the summer of 2004, Mike Ruppert assigned me to closely monitoring the booming wind energy industry. His initial hunch was that the elite were strategically planning wind projects to feed electricity into their homes as hydrocarbon scarcity rocked the rest of the industrial world. Whoever is closest to where the energy is produced, gets it.
His instincts were correct: proximity is king. The military was starting to wonder where domestic renewable energy installations were located in proximity to their installations. In March of 2005 FTW published Renewables Part 1 just as Rumsfeld’s DoD published their final Renewable Energy Assessment report.
The DoD created the Renewable Energy Working Group (RWG), headed by the Air Force, which is documenting all renewable infrastructure within 100 miles of their installations both on- and off-base. They are mapping out the future energy security for their domestic installations and installing as many on-base wind and solar projects as they possibly can.
The variables surrounding renewable energy generation make it impossible to build viable large-scale renewable energy projects exclusively near elites, but to some extent it is happening. The CEO of Lands End Corp., John C. Pennie, was planning to build wind turbines on the same property as his home, one mile away from his private residence. That project fell through for multiple reasons. Now Lands End is hoping to build a bigger wind farm just a few miles west of where the original project was to be erected.
Then there is Cape Wind, set to be America’s first offshore wind farm in Cape Cod, Massachusetts. If completed, it will be providing electricity to the wealthy residents of Martha’s Vineyard. The project is largely contested by local elites including “liberal” Senator Ted Kennedy, yet it is wholeheartedly supported by at least one “conservative” resident of Martha’s Vineyard, Theodore Roosevelt IV, the great grandson of America’s 26th President. Roosevelt is the Managing Director of Lehman Brothers, which is the investment bank that Cape Wind has hired for financial advisory services.
In December of 2004 – right after Bush was re-“elected” – James Woolsey and other military luminaries spoke at a Washington D.C. conference sponsored by the American Council On Renewable Energy (ACORE), where they endorsed renewable energy for national security reasons.
Those who blindly advocate for big renewable energy infrastructure know not what they do. When big wind and solar farms supported by environmentalists come online they are placed on the Pentagon’s map, and when that energy is eventually needed for one of their installations or industrial producers they will simply take it through a well-orchestrated alliance with gigantic private energy firms. This is yet another reason why the only sustainable energy motto for this century is think small, think local. All of the big stuff is already on the Pentagon’s radar and will ultimately be exploited to their benefit, not yours.
1. Michael Ruppert, “THE END of the GRID,” FTW, January 4, 2006, www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/010306_end_grid.shtml
2. Office of the Secretary of Defense, Report to Congress, Department of Defense, “DoD Renewable Energy Assessment, Final Report,” March 14, 2005
“Turning inward, the U.S. effectively seeks to build a fortress around itself to preserve resources. Borders are strengthened to hold back starving immigrants from Mexico, South America, and the Caribbean islands—waves of boat people pose especially grim problems. Tension between the U.S. and Mexico rises as the U.S. reneges on a 1944 treaty that guarantees water flow from the Colorado River into Mexico. America is forced to meet its rising energy demand with options that are costly both economically and politically, including nuclear power and onerous Middle Eastern contracts.”