[R-G] Oil prices hit military budgets hard

[Anthony Fenton]

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-militaryoil13-2008jul13,0,4522206.story

Oil prices hit military budgets hard
Soaring fuel prices have the armed services scrambling for ways to  
economize. So far, the added costs are surpassing savings from  
conservation efforts.
By Julian E. Barnes, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
July 13, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Across the oil-thirsty U.S. military, commanders are  
scrambling for ways to offset the ever-rising cost of fuel. But their  
best efforts so far have fallen short.

The military services have found ways to save millions of dollars  
through conservation, but the price of oil has outpaced the cost- 
cutting efforts. The Navy, for example, estimates that it is saving  
$300 million a year through conservation. That sounds impressive until  
the oil price jump is taken into consideration.

"From July through Sept. 30, we will see a $400-million increase in  
our fuel bill," said Navy Capt. Arthur Cotton, head of the Fleet  
Training and Readiness reporting branch. "So all of those energy  
savings we have done are wiped out, and then some, just over the  
period of 90 days."

Overall, the Pentagon will spend $16.4 billion on fuel this year, up  
from $5.2 billion in 2003.

The increase has made the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan more expensive,  
adding $140 million to the cost of operations in Afghanistan and $565  
million in Iraq. The wars combined are costing $12.1 billion a month.  
Military officials emphasize that the increases have not affected how  
combat operations are being conducted.

The Defense Department's biggest fuel users are the Air Force, which  
accounts for 52% of the fuel bill, and the Navy, which uses 32%.  
Within those branches, conservation efforts are wide-ranging.

A decades-old initiative to scrub the hulls of Navy ships, reducing  
drag and making them faster and more efficient, is gaining new  
importance.

The Navy also is stepping up efforts to replace live exercises with  
virtual maneuvers that allow sailors to train while keeping the ships  
in port. This year the Navy will conduct 124 "synthetic exercises," up  
from 84 last year. A study last year showed that the initiative saved  
$160 million.

The Air Force and the Navy also are considering increases in flight  
simulator training, although a large-scale shift is likely to wait  
until after a Defense Department study is completed by late next year.

For its part, the Air Force is attempting to reduce planes' taxiing  
and idling time. It is working to reduce aircraft weight, lower the  
amount of excess fuel some planes carry, and make flight paths more  
efficient. And on Air Force bases, the service is beginning to replace  
pickup trucks with souped-up golf carts.

William C. Anderson, an assistant Air Force secretary who oversees  
energy issues, said commanders were trying to encourage a culture  
change, giving fuel efficiency higher priority.

"We are getting our teams to think about saving energy while still  
doing the mission," he said.

The skyrocketing fuel cost has been particularly difficult for the Air  
Force. In recent years the Air Force, the largest user of fuel in the  
federal government, had intended to pay for new planes by reducing the  
number of airmen. But the increase in fuel prices ate up those savings.

Soon, other services may face the same squeeze and suffer the  
cancellation or delay of significant equipment programs as a result of  
fuel price increases.

Each military branch must present a draft of its next budget to the  
secretary of Defense by early August. And the comptroller's office has  
warned the services that they must accommodate fuel price increases in  
their budgets. Top military officials are mum on what spending  
programs might be in line for cutbacks.

For now, the officials are predicting that fuel prices will decline  
4.8% next year. But the Pentagon has not been especially accurate with  
its projections. The Defense Department originally estimated that oil  
this year would cost $91 a barrel; military services are currently  
paying nearly $171 a barrel. Much of the price hike this year was  
covered by Congress in the recently enacted emergency war funding  
measure. Because of its heavy use of jet fuel, the Air Force has taken  
perhaps the most aggressive steps toward conservation and alternatives  
to petroleum fuel.

Air Force officials hope that liquid coal becomes a viable alternative  
to petroleum, and they are working to ensure that all their aircraft  
can use synthetic fuels. Over the long term, the Air Force is trying  
to develop more efficient engines and airframe designs.

"We are trying to look all the way down the road," Anderson said. "We  
are trying to run the gamut in terms of looking for alternatives and  
new ideas."

For the military, this represents a marked change from years past,  
when fuel efficiency was scarcely considered in the development of new  
weapons systems.

"We fully expect that in the future it will become a bigger part of  
that decision process," Anderson said.

julian.barnes at latimes.com