Frequently Asked Questions

What is Powering America’s Defense: Energy and the Risks to National Security?

Powering America’s Defense: Energy and the Risks to National Security is a report by CNA's Military Advisory Board (MAB) that explores the impact of America’s energy choices on our national security policies. It builds on the MAB's groundbreaking 2007 report National Security and the Threat of Climate Change, which found that "climate change, national security, and energy dependence are a related set of global challenges."

This new volume builds on that finding by considering: the security risks inherent in our current energy posture; energy choices the nation can make to enhance our national security; the impact of climate change on our energy choices and our national security; and the role the Department of Defense can play in the nation's approach to energy security and climate change.

What is the Military Advisory Board?

The Military Advisory Board consists of eleven retired three- and four-star admirals and generals, representing all four branches of the U.S. Armed Forces. Gen. Gordon Sullivan, USA (ret), former Army Chief of Staff and current president of the Association of the United States Army, is the MAB Chairman.

Why was this report prepared?

Powering America’s Defense: Energy and the Risks to National Security was drafted to better inform U.S. policymakers and the public about the impact of America's energy choices on our national security policies. The issues explored were considered solely for their impact on America's national security as viewed through the lens of the extensive military experience of the Military Advisory Board.

What is the Military Advisory Board and who is on it?

CNA's Military Advisory Board is comprised of 12 retired generals and admirals from all four branches of the military who were asked to join the board based on their command and national security planning experience in the U.S. Armed Forces.

Who prepared the report?

The report was written by CNA analysts with expertise in areas of military affairs, energy use and climate change. Their work was directed and approved by all members of the MAB.

Where did they get their information?

Over the past year, the Military Advisory Board and its study team received briefings from energy experts, representatives of the U.S. intelligence community, scientists, engineers, policymakers, senior military officers, business leaders, legislators and their staff, regulators, and non-profit leaders. They met extensively with representatives of the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy, and visited the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colorado to meet with senior scientists and engineers and receive briefings on the latest energy technologies.

Board members also presented their own views, based on experience, of the impact energy choices have on our national security and on battlespace effectiveness, and on the technical, fiscal and policy challenges that shape these choices.

Who funded the study?

TThis effort was funded by the Bipartisan Policy Center, The Energy Foundation, and the Grace B. Kerr Foundation.

Is this an official military document?

No. Its production was an entirely independent effort. The Report’s findings will be presented to Pentagon leaders and to members of the appropriate House and Senate committees and subcommittees to help inform and shape policy.

What's the bottom line of the report?

TThat energy dependence and climate change pose serious threats to our national security, and must be met with a broad, conscientious commitment to resolve these threats though long-term planning, policy development, and program implementation.

What plans, policies and programs does the report call for?

The Report offers a "Roadmap for Energy Security" listing the following priorities:

  • Priority 1: Energy security and climate change goals should be clearly integrated into national security and military planning processes.
  • Priority 2: DoD should design and deploy systems to reduce the burden that inefficient energy use places on our troops as they engage overseas.
  • Priority 3: DoD should understand its use of energy at all levels of operations. DoD should know its carbon bootprint.
  • Priority 4: DoD should transform its use of energy at installations through aggressive pursuit of energy efficiency, smart grid technologies, and electrification of its vehicle fleet.
  • Priority 5: DoD should expand the adoption of distributed and renewable energy generation at its installations.
  • Priority 6: DoD should transform its long-term operational energy posture through investments in low-carbon liquid fuels that satisfy military performance requirements.

What is the estimated cost entailed in implementing the report's roadmap?

No cost estimates were undertaken. The report's focus was to identify the energy challenges that posed threats to our security. Certainly costs must be considered, but they must be weighed against the costs of inaction.