From Defense News comes word that the United States Army is purchasing 4,000 neighborhood electric vehicles(NEVs) for use as on-base transport. Six of Chrysler’s Global Electric Motors (GEM) NEVs were delivered in a ceremony at Fort Meyer which was probably intended to highlight the army’s long-term efficiency goals. But something must have been lost in the bureaucratic translation. “We hope by showing the rest of the country what we can do with electric vehicles we can potentially drive the technology and the market, including the Chevy Volt [and] the Tesla that are out there now, and show a greater demand,” said Paul Bollinger, deputy assistant secretary of the Army for Energy and Partnerships. I’m sorry sir, but what does the military have to do with a car that doesn’t exist and a $100k sportstoy? The NEVs probably make a lot of sense for on-base, especially if they can give it a sweet military nickname to wipe out memories of the cutesy GEM moniker. But seriously, Volt and Tesla? Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? Once the military reaches for its wallet though, there’s no knowing what might happen.
The army is serious about energy efficiency for a vast number of reasons. But according to Bollinger, “it is all about the battery technology.” And the specter of “foreign battery dependence” has clearly troubled the professionally paranoid. “One of the things we are looking at in the Army and spending millions of dollars on is enhancing battery technology not only for our vehicles but for our installations. If we put large amounts of renewable energy on our installations, be it solar or wind, it needs to be able to store that power when the sun is not up or the wind is not blowing.”
And by “spending millions,” he means that the military is (among other things) holding an EV contest. “A notice of intent to lease is on the street now. GSA [General Services Administration] will take all the responses and make a selection. We hope to have vehicles no later than April,” says Bollinger. “This is the first part of showing the industry that we are serious about electric vehicles and that we are going to buy more.” And probably not from BYD. No word on who is applying, but one imagines that few things would be more welcome in Detroit right now than a nice big military contract.
These GEMs should be popular on the base golf courses.
They need a cool sounding name like the Humvee. Perhaps TTAC should have a contest.
The US military has been very active in funding battery research. The modern warfighter runs on batteries.
But the military has not been very interested in electric vehicles. Hard enough to get gasoline to move the troops. Getting electricity to the battlefield when needed would be even more of a logistical challenge.
I think this is more just politicking. A few neighborhood electric vehicles here, a few electric bicycles there. Some officers and men with an assignment that they try to make into something important. But nowhere a sign that the military will adopt electric vehicles in any but the most cosmetic of ways.
Interestingly, World War I saw the world’s militaries turn to gasoline vehicles in a major way, shunning electric cars and probably contributing to their demise. By World War II, the only competition to the internal combustion engine was the horse.
With the horse’s disappearance from the battlefield, I don’t see internal combustion engines having any competition.
If having homegrown battery makers is so important to the military, then why would they buy Volts with batteries made by LG in South Korea?
I hope somebody does their homework on this one.
The Army is very interested in EV’s in combat situations, because of the lack of an infrared signature. They have had numerous experiments in that field, and are very serious about the electrification of vehicles and remote bases, for good logistical and strategic reasons.
Let’s get up to date, shall we?
“The Soldier UGV (SUGV) is a man-packable small robot system, weighing less than 30 lbs, used for Urban Operations environments and subterranean features to remotely investigate the threat obstacles, structures and the structural integrity of facilities and utilities. SUGV systems will be highly mobile for dismounted forces and will be capable of being re-configured for other missions by adding or removing sensors, modules, mission payloads, and/or subsystems.
“Combined Operations Battlefield Robotic Asset [COBRA] is coincident with the Soldier UGV (SUGV) component of the FCS and will be an integrated node on FCS network of systems. COBRA is a Soldier UGV (SUGV) system small enough to be carried by one man over long distances and provide significant increase in effectiveness for small unit operations. The COBRA program is coincident with and supports the Army Future Combat System SUGV. Building on both TMR and other UGV/S JPO efforts, COBRA will provide a significant increase in operational effectiveness for many different mission areas. The Urban Robot (URBOT) and the Urban Warrior MATILDA are two examples of these prototypes.
“Man Transportable Robotic System [MTRS] consists primarily of an operator control unit (OCU) and a teleoperated vehicle. The system components will be small and light enough to be carried as a single load by a two-person team for 500 meters over semi-rugged terrain. The primary mission is reconnaissance, and the system will be enhanced to perform other EOD tasks. “
Actually, I’ve seen a number of these EVs at Fort Huachuca, AZ. They seem to be used by post maintenance personnel.
When you think about it, this use makes a good deal of sense. After all, most military installations have quite a few roads with speed limits of 25 MPH or lower; at Fort Huachuca, there are very few roads with speed limits over 35 MPH. The fairly low speed limits on most military installations helps keep the 25 MPH max speed of GEM vehicles from being too much of a problem. If these EVs are used by civilian contract workers (who generally work during normal business hours [around 8-5]), the EVs can be parked and recharged nightly, thus ensuring a full charge by the beginning of the next work day.
Actually the US military uses diesel to fuel most of their vehicles.
As mentioned in the previous post, the GEM will most likely be used for post maintenance personnel.
The ones I’ve seen have a longer wheelbase for a short cargo box. The GEM sells for $9,000 and is nothing more than a plastic bodied golf cart with some accouterments like front disc brakes, but they are in no way as durable or crash worthy as an $11,000 Ford Ranger.
Sorry, but the GEM is not my cup of tea.
The best military electric vehicle I have seen is a prototype made by BluWav Systems, now part of Magna. (Apologies for linking to Autoblog, but http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/04/14/sae-congress-08-watch-out-mexico-the-militarys-got-the-hy-d/)
Fuel can cost $50-200+/gal. delivered to a remote base.
Using a GEM fueled by locally generated electricity from renewable sources has zero supply chain costs once the PV array or wind turbine is set up. Contrast this with using a 8mpg H1 for routine chores.
Now the US Army can employ TESLA coils for real, just not in Command & Conquer pc games :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_coil
Fuel can cost $50-200+/gal. delivered to a remote base.
Please name the remote base where this is true (military procurement issues aside). With fuel cost at approximately $1.00/gal prior to delivery I would think that almost any supplier could deliver bulk supplies for much less than $50/gal to any point on the earth. If the delivery is to an active combat zone then prices would certainly be higher but I don’t think these GEMs would serve much purpose there.
What size wind turbine or PV array would be needed to provide mission ready energy for a fleet of 5 GEMs?
Gasbuddy.com says that gas is $1.69/gal just outside the gate of Ft Huachuca today.
Fairbanks, Ak $2.39
Minot, ND $1.79
I did find a billing cost of $5.18/gal for diesel at McMurdo Base Antarctica but I am not sure how accurate that is.
As an aside there is a Wind Turbine facility being constructed at McMurdo scheduled for completion in 2010 (the construction season is relatively short).
volvo:
As an aside there is a Wind Turbine facility being constructed at McMurdo scheduled for completion in 2010 (the construction season is relatively short).
That’ll make sense IF they can keep in running in that climate. I have my doubts.
I did find a billing cost of $5.18/gal for diesel at McMurdo Base Antarctica but I am not sure how accurate that is.
That sounds low. It’s probably subsidized – given C-130 transport costs.
If enviros were really concerned about the footprint in Antarctica, they’d support a small nuke plant down there. Japan/Chinese should try… they still kill whales.
Ed,
You missed the important part of the story. This is a quid pro quo that is part of a much larger deal that will eventually get the Army something they actually need. You know, the winner will be the one in Congressmen X’s district, and then they will give the contract for the bullets to Congressman Y’s district, and Congressman Z’s guys will get the order to build the new mortar (or whatever basic but not sexy thing) that they really want, but that no one on the hill gives a crap about.
Not to keep repeating but the military spend more time on base than out fighting wars. On base, speed limits are posted very low (25/35 mph usually) and are strictly enforced. One thing I have noticed in the years since I retired is more use of micro cars/trucks for base flightline and maintenance personnel. The Civil Engineering (CE) Squadron has a fleet of Piaggio pickups and vans. Additionally, I see more and more golf cars being used as well.
Of course these vehicles will not be deployed to Iraq or Afganistan were our troops need need 6L armored and armed Hummers to do the same job.
It is just another way for them to save your tax dollars (or spend them somewhere else).
“We hope by showing the rest of the country what we can do with electric vehicles we can potentially drive the technology and the market, including the Chevy Volt [and] the Tesla that are out there now, and show a greater demand,” said Paul Bollinger, deputy assistant secretary of the Army for Energy and Partnerships.
The military’s doing product placements now? I wonder how many NASCAR-type stickers you could fit on an aircraft carrier.
Echo the fact that these make sense on base as utility vehicles. On most of the bases that I was assigned to, I could ride my bicycle faster than most cars could drive! And if it cuts down on fuel consumption, why not? Who says that all of the maintenance folk or service groups need to drive trucks? I’d be happy to be assigned one of these little buggers for light duty around base.