Solar on military bases to circumvent greens?

Green energy’s customer of last resort — i.e., the military — has a way around enviro efforts to block solar projects in the Mojave desert.

Below is the Department of Defense media release for the new DoD report.

The report notes,

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the California state-level counterpart to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), is similar in that it requires a comprehensive review of the environmental impacts that may result from a proposed project. However, CEQA is more extensive than NEPA, mandating the adoption of mitigation and avoidance and minimization measures. CEQA does not apply to Federal actions on Federal lands. [Emphasis added]

###

DoD Study Finds 7,000 Megawatts of Solar Energy Potential on DoD Installations in Mojave Desert

01/13/2012
The Department of Defense (DoD) could generate 7,000 megawatts (MW) of solar energy—equivalent to the output of seven nuclear power plants—on four military bases located in the California desert, according to a study released today by DoD’s Office of Installations and Environment. The year-long study, conducted by the consultancy ICF International, looked at seven military bases in California and two in Nevada. It finds that, even though 96 percent of the surface area of the nine bases is unsuited for solar development because of military use, endangered species and other factors, the solar-compatible area is nevertheless large enough to generate more than 30 times the electricity consumed by the California bases, or about 25 percent of the renewable energy that the State of California is requiring utilities to use by 2015.

DoD is seeking to develop solar, wind, geothermal and other distributed energy sources on its bases both to reduce their $4 billion-a-year energy bill and to make them less dependent on the commercial electricity grid. Such on-site energy generation, together with energy storage and so-called smart-microgrid technology, would allow a military base to maintain its critical operations “off-grid” for weeks or months if the grid is disrupted.

The ICF study looks in detail at the seven DoD installations that are located in California’s Mojave and Colorado deserts: Fort Irwin, Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, the Marine Corps’ Chocolate Mountain Aerial Gunnery Range, Edwards Air Force Base, Marine Corps Logistics Base Barstow, Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center Twentynine Palms and Naval Air Facility El Centro. The study also looks at two Air Force bases located in the Nevada desert, Creech and Nellis.

Most of the surface area of the installations consists of undeveloped ranges used for training and other military activities that the study finds are incompatible with solar facilities. In addition, using detailed Geographic Information System data, ICF ruled out large portions of the bases’ developed areas because of the presence of cultural and biological resources, flash flood hazards and other conflicts. For each area that survived the geographic screening process, ICF looked at the technical feasibility of six alternative solar technologies and at the economic viability under private versus military ownership.

The study concludes that 25,000 acres are “suitable” for solar development and another 100,000 acres are “likely” or “questionably” suitable for solar. ICF assumed that 100 percent of the “suitable” land and 25 percent of the “likely” or “questionably” suitable land would be developed for solar energy. According to the study, the largest amount of economically viable acreage is found at Edwards Air Force Base (24,327 acres), followed by Fort Irwin (18,728 acres), China Lake (6,777) and Twentynine Palms (553 acres). ICF found little or no economically viable acreage on the other California bases (Barstow, El Centro and Chocolate Mountain) or the two Nevada bases, principally because the military’s use of the land is incompatible with solar development.

Finally, the study finds that private developers can tap the solar potential on these installations with no capital investment requirement from DoD, and that the development could yield the federal government up to $100 million a year in revenue or other benefits such as discounted power.

5 thoughts on “Solar on military bases to circumvent greens?”

  1. I have lived in the high desert. The efficiency of the PV panels will be reduced because of the high heat.
    Settling on the collectors will furhter reduce thier efficiency. Water in the high desert is highly calcified, so even after cleaning they will be “spotty.” Then there are those wonderful dust storms. Nothing like 60 mph sand to affect a collectors surface.

  2. Those readers who haven’t gone through the entire 500-plus page Defense Department report might be interested in knowing the last two sentences of the paragraph quoted in the post above. They are: “However, DoD installations often coordinate with state resource agencies to ensure compliance with CEQA. The CEQA and NEPA processes are typically done simultaneously when both apply.”

  3. On California’s hottest days, electricity use peaks between 2 p.m. and 6 p.m., according to Pacific Gas & Electric. PV in the Mojave desert would be producing at or very close to full capacity in that time frame, no?

  4. In these times when the U. S. is going broke, is there any hope of saving the country from the idiots that do these studies. The 7000 Mw solar plants would not produce the amount of electricity from one nuclear plant. The could produce 7000 Mw at noon when demand is not at a peak and produce nothing past 7 in the evening. The cost of plants of this size woulb be $40 billion and they would be junk in 20-25 years. Your nuclear plant would cost about $8 billion and be around for 50 years.

    DOD’s budgets are going to have to be cut. Get this nonsense out now.

    I am FOIA

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.