Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

SecNav: Cut half of oil use by 2020

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
unhappycamper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-15-09 04:43 AM
Original message
SecNav: Cut half of oil use by 2020
SecNav: Cut half of oil use by 2020
By Philip Ewing - Staff writer
Posted : Wednesday Oct 14, 2009 18:33:12 EDT

Navy Department leaders issued a set of ambitious new plans to boost the Navy and Marine Corps’ energy efficiency Wednesday, including the goal of fielding a completely sustainable carrier strike group dubbed “the Great Green Fleet.”

Navy Secretary Ray Mabus cited the example of President Theodore Roosevelt’s Great White Fleet, which announced the arrival of American sea power by circling the globe in 1907, and said a new focus on energy would augur just as big a turning point for the service.

Mabus wants the Navy to demonstrate that it can sail a “Great Green Fleet” by 2012 and deploy it by 2016, he said, to prove the U.S. can exert influence at sea without the need for foreign oil. He compared the impact of an energy-friendly fleet of tomorrow with the Navy’s switch from sails to coal, and then from coal to oil.

The so-called green fleet’s carrier and submarines, already in the fleet, would be nuclear powered. Its surface escorts would either have hybrid power plants — as the Navy built aboard the amphibious assault ship Makin Island, and plans to test aboard Arleigh Burke-class destroyers — or use alternative bio-fuel in their original engine rooms. And the aircraft in the strike group, including fighter jets and helicopters, also would burn only alternative fuel, Mabus said.

(Although it would show the Navy could function without imported oil, the fleet wouldn’t be “green” as many environmental groups use the term: Its nuclear ships still would eventually produce radioactive waste, and its conventional ships and aircraft still would produce greenhouse gas emissions.)


Rest of article at: http://www.navytimes.com/news/2009/10/navy_energy_efficiency_101409w/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-15-09 08:13 AM
Response to Original message
1. I don't like the idea of increasing the use of nuclear fuel no matter where it is
why can't they deploy fewer ships? I mean why do we have to patrol the seas when we have a much better way of spying, keeping an eye on, paying attention too or whatever one likes to think for themselves, on the open seas and that's by satelite, I for the life of me can not understand why the big show of force we, the usa, feel we/they have to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 07:21 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC