• Privacy Policy
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
Climate Change Dispatch
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • 97% – Myth of the Climate Change Consensus
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • 97% – Myth of the Climate Change Consensus
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us
No Result
View All Result
Climate Change Dispatch
No Result
View All Result

Pentagon Moves Forward With Biofuel Boondoggle, A Byproduct Of The Obama Era

by Travis J. Tritten
March 13, 2018, 11:33 AM
in News and Opinion
Reading Time: 6 mins read
A A
2
Share on FacebookShare on XwitterShare on Linkedin

When then-Navy Secretary Ray Mabus went to the White House in 2014 to announce a major new initiative on biofuels, it was the culmination of years spent talking up the product as a way to make the fleet more secure and independent.

The Navy, along with two other Obama administration agencies, unveiled contracts with private companies to fund the construction of commercial biofuel refineries in the U.S.

The new facilities would turn animal fats, household garbage, and fallen timber from forest floors into more than 100 million gallons per year of military-grade fuel beginning around 2016, the White House said.

The alternative F-76 diesel and jet fuels would help power what Mabus dubbed the “Great Green Fleet” of Navy ships and aircraft, boost the domestic biofuels industry, and fight climate change.

Nearly four years later, the initiative has not produced a single drop of biofuel for the Navy or anyone else, at least not yet.

Mabus’ vision is, however, quietly moving forward under the Trump administration. The Pentagon has authorized $140 million to help build two biofuel refineries in recent months, a move that has agitated some top Republican lawmakers who have long opposed what they see as a waste of taxpayer money.

“I would be interested certainly in seeing if the government could get out of those contracts and certainly not spend additional money toward that end,” Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, told the Washington Examiner.

Fulcrum BioEnergy, a California company, was given access to $70 million in matching funds in October to build a refinery outside Reno, Nev., that will turn municipal waste into fuel, the Pentagon said.

In December, the department authorized another $70 million for a refinery project by Red Rock Biofuels in rural Oregon that aims to reduce the chances of forest fires by making biofuel from fallen trees and other potential tinder in forests.

“The biofuels contracts date back to 2013 and are still being executed due to legally binding contractual language,” said Adam Stump, a Pentagon spokesman.

The Nevada and Oregon plants are what is left of four original projects supported by the prior administration. Two other companies were given $10.8 million to design refineries, but those projects never panned out.

The money is being distributed through the Pentagon’s Defense Production Act program, which was created during the Korean War to stoke the defense industrial base.

It comes from the Navy and the departments of Energy and Agriculture as part of an Obama-era agreement to spend more than half a billion dollars to boost the biofuel industry, which Mabus and the administration deemed “essential” to sustain the military.

“I set out to change the energy culture of the Navy, revolutionizing what we used, how we used it, and how and where we got it,” Mabus said during a speech to the Environmental Defense Fund advocacy group in December. He was not available to comment for this story, according to a spokesman.

Mabus oversaw the testing of a Navy F/A-18 “Green Hornet” in 2010, which was the first supersonic jet to fly on a biofuel blend, and two years later, a demonstration showcasing Navy ships and aircraft operating on a biofuel blend during the multinational Rim of the Pacific exercise.

His efforts culminated in 2016 with the steaming of the Great Green Fleet, a blueprint for future fuel use. The strike group with the USS John C. Stennis aircraft carrier, which itself is nuclear-powered, was sent on a regular deployment to the Western Pacific using a biofuel blend.

But the nascent biofuels industry could supply only a small amount of fuel. So, as the Navy steamed around, Mabus and the administration set out to pump public funds into building it up.

Eric Pryor, the chief financial officer of Fulcrum BioEnergy, says the Reno biofuel plant will be a springboard to opening eight refineries across North America.

The Pentagon funding, he says, was crucial to closing a $175 million private bond offering in October that was backed by investors such as BP, United Airlines, and Waste Management.

“We’ve been able to put those pieces in place, and the Department of Defense grant was very helpful to us to get to that point that we are at today,” Pryor said. “We’re going to be creating a whole domestic manufacturing industry and infrastructure that will create jobs, and we know that is a priority for the Trump administration as well.”

The refinery will be operational in early 2020 and is expected to produce at least 10 million gallons per year of military-grade fuel, Pryor said.

The Red Rock project in Oregon, which just received state bond financing, is ready to begin construction and is also expected to achieve similar production, but the company did not return calls for comment.

The Navy uses more than 1 billion gallons of fuel per year and the entire Defense Department, the largest single consumer in the world, uses about 4 billion gallons.

Neither company is under any obligation or agreement to make or sell fuel to the military in the future. From the beginning, it was understood that the refineries would have to be cost-competitive with traditional petroleum-based fuels, said a former senior defense official, who asked to remain anonymous in order to discuss the negotiations that took place.

“Nobody is going to go and build one of these things knowing the other applications are very small unless they have a very steady customer, and the Department of Defense has been signalling that they would like to be that,” said Jim Lane, the editor and publisher of Biofuels Digest, a trade publication that has followed the projects for years.

Thornberry simply said, “No, period,” when asked whether the spending on construction of biofuel refineries was worthwhile.

“It is appropriate to make investments on innovations. If you make investments on better battery technology that can get your vehicles across the desert easier, faster, longer, I understand that. I don’t perceive that that is what’s going on here,” he said. “What’s going on here is a different kind of anti-fossil fuel agenda, which you can argue about from the environmental standpoint and all of those issues, but $140 million away from fixing planes and ships to promote that agenda is a bad result.”

The Defense Production Act funding is one of the few aspects of the Pentagon that does not fall under the authority of Thornberry’s House Armed Services Committee. Instead, the House Financial Services Committee and its chairman, Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, has oversight.

“I think it would be helpful to get legal opinions about other options” instead of paying out the $140 million under the contracts for biofuel refinery construction work, Thornberry said. “I’ll definitely talk to Jeb about seeing what we can do together.”

Hensarling said he shares Thornberry’s concerns about the refinery projects.

“Our committee will be taking a serious look at this to ensure taxpayer dollars are protected and being allocated appropriately,” he told the Washington Examiner.

The Pentagon has already moved to cut spending that is not under an Obama-era contract.

One of the projects that received $5.7 million for design and engineering in 2013 was recently cut loose, or “de-scoped,” said Stump, the Pentagon spokesman. It had been given four extensions over 34 months but could still not secure outside funding to meet the cost-share required by the contract.

The cancellation “allows $125 million to be directed toward other Department of Defense critical mission requirements,” Stump said.

The Trump administration also just nixed another source of taxpayer funding designed by Mabus and the Obama administration to “prime the pump” for the companies as they produce military-grade biofuels for the Navy.

The Department of Agriculture’s Farm-to-Fleet program pledged $50 million in per-gallon subsidies beginning in 2013 to companies that use domestic feedstocks.

The program has awarded a California company, which is currently the only producer of military-grade biofuel, $7.7 million for the Great Green Fleet deployment in 2016 and $15 million for providing up to 60 million gallons of F-76 biofuel to the Navy this year.

The agency canceled Farm-to-Fleet on Feb. 1, saying it “has reassessed how to best use limited available funds and has determined that the [funding] is no longer a priority.”

However, USDA may still pay out significant funding for biofuels. Two earlier solicitations worth up to $29 million will still be considered, a USDA spokesman said.

Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., a longtime foe of the Obama initiatives, was not pleased about the ongoing refinery work, but he applauded the Trump administration for re-evaluating the biofuel contracts, moving to pay only those that were legally obligated.

“I’m disappointed that Obama-era initiatives that put a social agenda ahead of military readiness are still being given resources because of an outstanding contract,” said Inhofe, who is the most senior Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee in Sen. John McCain’s absence.

Read rest at Washington Examiner

  • Truth
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Gettr
  • Threads
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Mastodon
  • Buffer
  • Telegram
  • Email
  • Copy Link
  • Share Using More Networks…
Share via
  • Facebook
  • Like
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • Tumblr
  • VKontakte
  • Print
  • Email
  • Reddit
  • Buffer
  • Love This
  • Weibo
  • Pocket
  • Xing
  • Odnoklassniki
  • WhatsApp
  • Meneame
  • Blogger
  • Amazon
  • Yahoo Mail
  • Gmail
  • AOL
  • Newsvine
  • HackerNews
  • Evernote
  • MySpace
  • Mail.ru
  • Viadeo
  • Line
  • Flipboard
  • Comments
  • SMS
  • Viber
  • Telegram
  • Subscribe
  • Skype
  • Facebook Messenger
  • Kakao
  • LiveJournal
  • Yammer
  • Edgar
  • Fintel
  • Mix
  • Instapaper
  • Copy Link
  • Truth
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Gettr
  • Baidu
  • Mastodon
  • Threads
  • Bluesky

Join our list

Subscribe to our mailing list and get interesting stuff and updates to your email inbox.

Thank you for subscribing.

Something went wrong.

We respect your privacy and take protecting it seriously

Related Posts

Electric Vehicles (EVs)

Gavin Newsom Is Seething After Congress Repealed California’s Gas Car Ban

May 27, 2025
Energy

Congress Resurrects Fight Against The Climate Cult’s Regulatory Assault

May 27, 2025
Health

No, Climate Change Isn’t Behind Britain’s Mosquito Fears

May 27, 2025

Comments 2

  1. MCPR says:
    7 years ago

    “The new facilities would turn animal fats, household garbage, and fallen timber from forest floors into more than 100 million gallons per year of military-grade fuel beginning around 2016, the White House said.”

    Idiots.

    The Earth has already done this. It’s called petroleum. All we need to do is pump it out of the ground.

  2. Spurwing Plover says:
    7 years ago

    Its time to purge our national defense of all of Obamas idiotic cow towing to the Greens

Stay Connected On Social Media

gab-logo

Donate Today

Beating back the alarmist narrative takes time and money. Please donate today to help!

Recent Posts

  • Gavin Newsom PresserGavin Newsom Is Seething After Congress Repealed California’s Gas Car Ban
    May 27, 2025
    Gov. Newsom is steamed after Congress repealed a Biden EPA waiver letting California ban gas-powered cars and said he'll fight back. […]
  • Capitol Hill DCCongress Resurrects Fight Against The Climate Cult’s Regulatory Assault
    May 27, 2025
    Congress eyes bills to rein in climate overreach, challenge secret science, and expose hypocrisy fueling the elite-driven climate change narrative. […]
  • mosquitoNo, Climate Change Isn’t Behind Britain’s Mosquito Fears
    May 27, 2025
    The Guardian asserts that climate change will make the UK more hospitable to mosquito-borne diseases, ignoring established drivers. […]
  • wind turbine blades landfill‘Green’ Waste Piles Up As Solar Panels And Wind Turbines Pollute Landfills
    May 27, 2025
    Solar and wind waste is piling up with no clear plan for disposal, raising new questions about the cost of going green and the myth of net zero. […]
  • new orleans blackoutMISO Ignored Warnings Before Holiday Blackout Left Blue City In The Dark
    May 27, 2025
    Nearly 100,000 lost power in New Orleans after MISO cut the grid, raising alarm over blackout risk tied to green energy replacing coal and gas. […]
  • protest FFF world on fire‘Doomed From Birth’: How Climate Alarmism Is Stoking An Epidemic Of Youth Anxiety
    May 26, 2025
    Hollywood heirs like Ramona Sarsgaard and Violet Affleck are spiraling into climate panic—fueled by activism, media hype, and elite institutions. […]
  • Biden touting green economyGOP’s Big, Beautiful Bill Would Rescind $500 Billion In Green Energy Handouts
    May 26, 2025
    The House-passed BBB would repeal $500B in green handouts, slash subsidies, and undo key parts of the inaptly named Inflation Reduction Act. […]
  • humpback whale ny coastHow Climate Buzzwords Hijacked The Language To Hide Environmental Harm
    May 26, 2025
    Climate buzzwords like ‘carbon footprint’ and ‘green energy’ mislead the public and mask real environmental damage. […]
  • north sea oil rigTrump Urges UK To Cut Sky-High Bills With More Drilling, Less Renewables
    May 23, 2025
    Trump urged the UK to slash sky-high energy bills by expanding oil and gas drilling, embracing fracking, and ditching costly renewables and imports. […]
  • Ocean waves near pierMeteorologist Slams CNN For Stoking Debunked Fears Of A Collapsing AMOC
    May 23, 2025
    CNN pushes debunked AMOC collapse claims to fuel coastal flooding and economic panic—ignoring data, expert doubts, and real insurance cost drivers. […]

Get Instant Email Notifications

Enter your email address to receive notifications of new posts by email either instantly or daily. Check your Junk folder for any verification emails upon subscribing.

Submit a tip

Please enter your email, so we know you're human.

Books We Like

very convenient warming

exposing great lie

Have a suggestion? Let us know! We swap out books based on your input. We participate in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program. See here.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact Us

© Portions copyright Climate Change Dispatch

Share via
  • Threads
  • gab-logo Gab
  • Mastodon
  • Buffer
  • Telegram
  • Email
  • Copy Link
  • Share Using More Networks…
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Videos
  • Who We Are
  • Facts Vs. Fearmongering
    • Real science vs Junk Science
      • 1100-plus Peer-Reviewed Studies
      • 97% – Myth of the Climate Change Consensus
      • Michael Crichton: Aliens Cause Global Warming
      • Climate change and its causes
      • Climate Science Primer
      • CO2 is not pollution
      • Deceptive Surface Temperature Records
      • Editorial: Great Global Warming Hoax
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 1
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 2
      • Rules for Climate Radicals: Part 3
      • Why CO2 Is A Minor Player In Global Climate
      • Why Politicized Science Is So Dangerous
    • Facts Not Fear
      • A Simple Question For Climate Alarmists
      • Climate Change – The Facts
      • Climate Change Fears Are Empirically Baseless
      • Global Warming 101
      • Global Warming Q&A
      • Understanding The Medieval Warm Period
      • Ocean Cycles and Climate
      • Overview of Plate Climatology Theory
      • Precautionary Principle
      • Should We Celebrate Carbon Dioxide?
      • The Skeptics Handbook
      • Weather Versus Climate
      • Why I’m a GW skeptic
      • Winning the climate debate with facts
      • Why Aliens Cause Global Warming
    • Greenhouse FAQs
      • CO2, Plants, & Industry
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • How much have temps changed?
      • Is global warming real?
      • Measuring temperature
      • Swimming in CO2?
      • Scientists urge caution?
      • Today’s warming trend
      • Variations in temperature
    • Gore’s Greatest Goofs
      • Deconstructing the Truth
      • Fact-Checking Al Gore’s Latest Predictions
      • How Gore Created The Global Warming Hoax
    • Inside Real Climate
      • Closer look at the 97% Consensus
      • GW’s Amazing Story
      • IPCC gets failing grade
      • Real Climate Exposed!
      • Truth about Real Climate
      • We’ve Been Conned
      • What is there a 97% consensus about?
    • Behind the IPCC
      • 1,000 Scientists Dissent
      • Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
      • Climategate Inquiries
      • Climategate Inquiries 2
      • NIPCC Report Now Available
      • Understanding the Climategate Inquiries
  • Submissions
  • Contact Us

© 2025 Climate Change Dispatch