Stakeholders in the nascent alternative-fuels sector are up in arms about an independent analysis issued last week that casts doubt on the US military's drive to introduce new fuels into its energy mix. The Rand study focuses on alternative fuels that could provide viable military candidates within 10 years - a time frame which excludes most of the new fuels now under development. To address specific congressional concerns, the Rand report recommends that the US Defense Department reassess its strategy for alternative-fuels development to focus on energy efficiency, rather than deployment of new technologies. Along with efficiency measures, it cites Fischer-Tropsch (FT) fuels as the best means to lessen military reliance on petroleum and achieve the Air Force's goal of having alternative fuels meet 50% of its domestic needs by 2016 (JFI Jun.14,p1). The Rand study said FT fuels derived from coal, natural gas or biomass could curb the military's greenhouse gas footprint more readily than use of seed crops as feedstock for new jet fuels (JFI Mar.29,p1). The US Defense Department commissioned the Rand National Defense Research Institute to conduct the review, in line with a congressional directive laid out in the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act of 2009.
展开▼
