Previous post
Wind power is GREAT! Unless it affects our national security as the Department of Defense has suddenly realized.
Keep in mind, the DoD has been virtue signaling about climate change and wind power for a few years now.
That is one reason why Houchens, along with collaborators at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and Idaho National Laboratory, spent the last four years exploring how wind energy could power both military and disaster relief efforts—both of which need fast and reliable power to succeed. Funded by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Wind Energy Technologies Office, the Defense and Disaster Deployable Turbine project brought technology developers and researchers together with military and disaster response organizations to learn what kind of wind turbine system could best serve their needs.
“It needs to be portable, assemble quickly, and get to work,” said Brent Summerville, a distributed wind energy systems engineer at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and a collaborator on the project. “That’s a whole different challenge than the wind energy industry was used to.”
All of which is, quite frankly, detrimental to our battle readiness. Wind doesn’t blow constantly, as Germany is finding out now that the gov’t shut down the last three nuclear power plants. Moreover, contrary to their expectations, wind can’t power any of the military bases on a consistent basis let alone a FOB (forward operating base) for any reasonable amount of time.
I can just imagine it. A soldier in the midst of reporting about major troop movements or insurgent activities goes radio silent and can’t get back online to finish reporting critical information. Why? The wind quit and the power went POOF.
Now, suddenly, the Dept of Defense in all their virtue signaling madness is realizing that not all wind is good. In fact, it can be bad …for our national security and their ability to defend this country.
The Department of Defense is raising warnings over the Biden administration’s planned offshore wind development sites on the East Coast, threatening to imperil President Joe Biden’s goal of reaching 30 gigawatts of offshore wind power by 2030.
The DOD said Monday that its initial assessment of areas the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management has earmarked for new offshore wind development has revealed “compatibility challenges” with existing Navy and Air Force training facilities nearby.
Oh, but there’s more.
The maps reportedly show massive acreage blocked off in federal waters near North Carolina, Virginia, Maryland and Delaware. Overall, four offshore wind lease areas proposed by the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) are characterized as “highly problematic” while another two are identified as “requiring further study,” per Bloomberg.
~Snip
The Pentagon’s warning late last year, meanwhile, came years after it similarly warned in 2019 that much of the North Atlantic wind lease planning area was an “exclusion zone.” And a DoD map obtained by Fox News Digital that was published in 2018 identified nearly the entire East Coast as “highly problematic” for leasing.
Can you just picture it? Wind turbines scattered all over the Atlantic and our Navy is supposed to be not only monitoring but ready to defend the area while dodging in between wind turbines.
Oh, and while our defense is navigating those wind turbines, the return on investment is stellar. Just amazing in fact.
Congress should require a grid penetration/energy audit and cost analysis for the Block Island turbines. They just might find out this 30 year offshore project might pay for itself in about 800 years. pic.twitter.com/5hFJ5G8TVA
— JimWiegand (@deadturbines) April 17, 2023
Oh, wait. There’s a LOT within that statement to unpack! You mean to tell me that wind turbines in the ocean not only don’t have a decent (if at all) return on investment, those fabulous windmills won’t save us from climate change? Wow. If you need to, please clutch your pearls and head for your fainting couch.
Evidently, there’s been warnings for months if not the last couple of years on this.
The Pentagon warned that Atlantic sites where Biden wants offshore wind energy are "highly problematic" 4 military operations https://t.co/Cq0N2DMl5i Been screaming about this since 2019 yet deaf ears for US nat’l security. ARSR-4 ASR-8 Not just training https://t.co/YZ6EC2fo7z
— Bonnie Brady (@mtkblb) April 17, 2023
Not only that, but the studying and potential build out of wind turbines in the ocean DOES affect sea life.
You can’t tell me that ocean life and the migration/feeding grounds of various ocean species won’t be affected by the push for climate change, because it has and it will be.
That said, while the Dept of Defense tries to push for doing all the right things with climate change and diversity, isn’t it interesting that suddenly wind farms in the ocean are a problem for their ability to keep us safe?
We saw that coming from MILES away.
Welcome Instapundit Readers!
Feature Photo Credit: Windmill turbines via Pixabay, cropped and modified
GWB says: All of which is, quite frankly, detrimental to our battle readiness.
When you’re just looking at the deployable turbine project, I wouldn’t say so. I’m ok with people looking outside the box* for possible innovations. There are issues with it for a military defense situation, but I can see potential for a disaster response (primarily that you don’t require fuel, which is ‘dangerous’ and requires yet more infrastructure to store). Is it good enough? Maybe not. But looking into it is not a cause for alarm.
(* I realize it’s very much IN the box for progs. But it’s outside the box for military planning. And, of course, it’s always dangerous entertaining fad ideas.)
(BTW, biggest problem with it as a response in a defense situation is it is a really big and somewhat fragile target for the enemy. Better to have stuff that’s discreet and doesn’t stick up above the treetops to say “Here I am!”)
A soldier in the midst of reporting about major troop movements
Ummmm, he’s going to be on a battery-operated device. If battalion HQ is eyeballing major troop movements, they’re in a world of hurt, and losing comms will be the least of their worries.
“compatibility challenges” with existing Navy and Air Force training facilities nearby
Well, yeah, dropping bombs in the ocean might knock a few over. Then there’s the whole driving an aircraft carrier through them. And flying airplanes fast and very low. Oh, and cruise missiles. (I don’t know; that one might be a pretty good exercise for the software in recognizing and avoiding objects along the flight path.)
Our entire eastern seaboard (western, too, really) are off and on training grounds for the Navy and sometimes the Air Force. Clogging it up with a bunch of giant albatross killers is, yeah, “problematic”.
Personally? I think we should put them out far enough to form a little underwater fence against Russian and Chinese subs. Oh sure, they could blow them up or sabotage them. But I wouldn’t be using them for necessary energy – just as a fence and sort of a tripwire for bad things. And definitely make sure you regularly knock some down and put more up so the underwater landscape keeps changing for our adversaries.
BTW, if I were looking at deployable power sources for disasters and quick response defense situations? Totally nuclear. A hardened, modular, self-contained, pebble bed reactor. You’d have plenty of power for a command post, and enough to spare for a big laser for air defense. Go nuke or go home! 😉
GWB says: Let me re-iterate, to be clear:
If the guy calling in positions of enemy forces for fires and maneuver on his portable radio run off a battery (or a vehicle alternator) loses said comms, everyone is in a world of hurt.
If the folks running their radios off of something static enough they would consider putting up a windmill are eyeball to eyeball with the enemy, they have a lot bigger immediate problems than their comms going out because of power.
Inconsistent power for radios is a problem. But the guy identified in the original post is not going to be bothered by intermittent power in his radio because it is running on batteries. Unless there’s a wholly different issue involved.
Hominem Humilem says: The windmills also play havoc with radar (spinning blades)…providing nice avenues of approach for our adversaries by obscuring our observation tools (often available, sporadically operating chaff dispensers).
GWB says: While simultaneously providing a nice radar signature for the enemy’s targeting systems.
NTSOG says: In the news this morning “‘Ghost Ships’: Is Russia Secretly Preparing For Conflict With Scandinavia In North Sea?”
“A recent investigation reveals that Russia’s “ghost ships” are surveying offshore wind turbines, underwater data cables, and other vital infrastructure in the North Sea, potentially planning sabotage tactics in the event of a conflict with the West, reported UK-based media outlets.
Reportedly, Moscow has dispatched ships to conduct underwater surveillance and map crucial locations that could potentially disrupt communication and energy supplies in Europe – some of which are shared with Britain. The findings were presented in a report by public broadcasters in Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and Finland.”
Such large and fixed structures would clearly be sitting ducks for modern armaments. If there is no power available, then all sorts of services fail to operate and no amount of giant batteries will be sufficient backup. [I’m reminded of the raid in 1943 by RAF 617 Squadron to destroy dams in the Ruhr and thus disrupt hydro-electric power supplies and flood industrial areas.]
Fen says: “If battalion HQ is eyeballing major troop movements, they’re in a world of hurt, and losing comms will be the least of their worries.”
As a Marine 0313 (LAV-25), I find the above remark to be ignorant. Our mission (3D LAR BN) is to locate the main body of enemy forces (via sight), attack to “fix” them in place (ie they stop advancing and pivot to engage us) and report via comms so that the Battalion Fwd CP can call in arty and air to obliterate them.
Please keep your energy delusions away from my battlefield and my men. Thanks
GWB says: Ummm, sorry, dude, but I was an Air Liaison Officer for 2 1/2 years, I know EXACTLY what I’m talking about. If the battalion CP is actually eyeballing enemy troops from their position – NOT people out forward, part of the maneuvering force, but the people in tents with maps and papers strewn about tables and holding meetings – then they’re in trouble. Because it means the enemy is inside their lines.
You even said it yourself:
report via comms so that the Battalion Fwd CP
It’s not the CP itself engaging the enemy.
I will give you that if your entire CP fits in a M113 and you’re mobile, there might be some of that. But, 1) again, the HQ is not supposed to be directly engaging the enemy, and 2) THE POINT was that we’re talking about your radios being hooked up to SOMETHING LIKE A FREAKING WINDMILL.
You’re a Marine, so I know reading comprehension might be difficult if there’s no pictures.
But, please, keep your ignorance away from my tactics and strategy. Thanks.
Bill says: Ummm, no. You don’t seem to understand what you are saying at all. 2-1/2 years, uh, you didn’t learn very much during your snapshot in time, and obviously never spent time at a FOB. FOBs are often eyeball to eyeball with the enemy.
Fen says: “losing comms will be the least of their worries”
I’m sorry, again I don’t mean to be rude, but clear comms is our most important weapon. Please stop talking
If I had intermittent comms in a Victor Unit, my first actions returning stateside (assuming I survived) would be to 1) 1) 1) purchase a nail gun (as per The Equalizer)
2) identify the individuals responsible
GWB says: Again, reading comprehension is important:
I said if the battalion CP is losing comms AND IS DIRECTLY EYEBALLING THE ENEMY – meaning they are in direct contact with said enemy – then comms (in the context of this post – because their windmill is not generating power) is the least of their worries. Killing bad guys so they can survive to call anyone is a slightly higher priority.
Again, CONTEXT: the guy in the field is NOT using his radio hooked up to a generator (unless it’s a vehicle – if you’re running THAT off a windmill, then, yeah, you’re so stupid as to not be able to operate the radio to start with) to call back to the HQ. Only a slightly static HQ is doing that.
(And, honestly, if you weren’t so da** cocksure about how stupid I was and throwing crap at me like “You stay away from my battlefield” I wouldn’t be hammering so hard at this.)
Bill G says: “… isn’t it interesting that suddenly wind farms in the ocean are a problem for their ability to keep us safe?”
Why, it’s almost as if they’re not interested in keeping us safe.
Then again, these are the people, or descendants of the people, who insist that the only reason we aren’t safe is because we insist on having all these nasty weapons and military types. That if we’d just disarm, the rest of the world would suddenly love us and be prepared to join us in endless drum circles to sing Kumbaya.
11 Comments