Greening The Military
Russia’s war in Ukraine showcases the military advantage of moving beyond fossil fuels. While fossil fuels power our heaviest equipment, their presence leaves armies vulnerable. We all should remember the daring raid that Ukraine may or may not have commenced in Belgorod to attack a Russian fuel depot.
To lesson the military’s need for fossil fuels, the civilian auto market offers a compelling solution. The electric vehicle named Sono Sion includes built in solar panels which allows the vehicle to operate using solar power, and to charge other devices as well. With a price of nearly $30,000 this vehicle demonstrates that the cost efficiency of solar technology continues to improve.
Using solar power for vehicles presents other benefits as well. Oshkosh Defense, producer of the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV), announced that they will create a hybrid electric version of the vehicle called the eJLTV. The hybrid engine of the eJLTV offers a silent drive mode, which will prove invaluable to the warfighter.
Despite the benefits of greening up the fleet, The US Army’s plans for electric vehicles strikes me as too conservative. Breaking Defense reports
The Army’s climate strategy, released last month, stated that the service planned to field “purpose-built” hybrid tactical vehicles by 2035 and fully electric tactical vehicles by 2050, in addition to developing a charging capability for those fully electric vehicles by 2050.
In addition to greening up the vehicle fleet the US military experimented with powering its bases with the sun.
a 2012 Marine Corps case study conducted in Afghanistan found that solar panels reduced diesel demand by 50% at forward operating bases. This is an absolutely remarkable reduction to comprehend when you consider the logistical footprint of moving that much fuel to these forward positions.
Solar power may not offer the military enough power for the full range of operations. Remote bases, like the ones I discussed in this previous article, will struggle to find consistent fuel supplies. This prodded the US Air Force to choose Alaska’s Eielson Air Force Base for the installation of nuclear micro-reactors to power the base. US law stipulates that this installation must finish by 2027. The combination of solar power and nuclear micro-reactors may prove game-changing to the task of managing fuel supply lines.
Needing More Ammo
Warfare presents timeless lessons, including this powerful quote from Julius Caesar
Ut est rerum omnium magister usus (Experience is the teacher of all things)
Russia’s war in Ukraine represents our latest teacher. I believe this teacher taught us that one never possesses enough ammunition. To demonstrate this, let’s examine the current fight in The Donbas. Vadym Skibitsky, deputy head of Ukraine’s military intelligence recently told The Guardian
This is an artillery war now and we are losing in terms of artillery… Ukraine has one artillery piece to 10 to 15 Russian artillery pieces… We have almost used up all of our [artillery] ammunition and are now using 155-calibre Nato standard shells
Skibitsky also stated that Ukraine uses between 5,000 and 6,000 artillery shells per day. This output pales in comparison to Russian artillery output which Oleksandr V. Danylyuk, a Ukrainian defense advisor, estimates at around 50,000 artillery shells per day. Even if estimates were overstated by a factor of two, the high usage of artillery shells comes at a surprise to US officials.
I believe this because of the intense pace that Ukraine employed anti-air and anti-tank shoulder fired missiles. The American military ended up sending Ukraine about one third of its total stockpile of Stinger anti-air missiles and Javelin anti-tank missiles. We must remember that the Ukrainians also used other shoulder fired missiles in addition to America’s Stingers and Javelins.
In March, the US Congress allocated $13 Billion to the Ukrainian war effort with $3.5 billion earmarked to replenish US weapons. From that $3.5 billion the Pentagon used over $1.5 Billion, 40% of the total earmark for US weapons restocks, to replenish American stocks of Stingers and Javelins. While this represents good news for the US, a few details darken the skies ahead.
It will take a long time to replace the Stingers and Javelins that the US sent to Ukraine, both of which are produced by Raytheon. Raytheon’s CEO, Greg Hayes, told the US Congress
We’re going to ramp up production this year, but I expect this is going to be ‘23-’24 where we actually see orders come in for the larger replenishments, both on Stinger as well as on Javelin
Bill LaPlante, The US Department of Defense (DOD) Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, stated that the DOD intends to replenish Stinger missiles sent to Ukraine on a one-to-one basis. I believe this is mistaken, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine should have taught the DOD that the US military does not possess enough Stinger and Javelin missiles for a protracted war with a peer competitor like Russia and China.
This concludes our debrief