A significant portion of war casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan was taken by convoys providing oil to the military, according to a report released by a consulting firm yesterday.

Deloitte LLP's study found a tenfold increase in the Defense Department's oil consumption since the start of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. That is a 175 percent increase in oil use per day, per soldier, since the Vietnam War.

The number of trucks traveling rough roads in remote areas, whose primary cargo is fuel, has "skyrocketed" in Iraq and Afghanistan, along with the rate of exposure of military personnel to "improvised explosive devices (IEDs)," the report says. IEDs accounted for about 43 percent of U.S. casualties in Iraq between July 2003 and May 2009, the study found.

IEDs also accounted for 38 percent of fatalities in Afghanistan between 2005 and 2008 and will likely account for more than half of military personnel deaths in fiscal 2009, Deloitte reported.

"Energy security is essential to reduce war time casualties," the report concludes. "With the significant numbers of U.S. soldiers supporting the transport, logistics, and deployment of fossil fuel to the front lines, there is a call to action to reduce dependence on oil in war."

Along with military lives lost, DOD's heavy reliance on oil incurs a significant financial cost, the study notes.

In 2008, the Pentagon spent $16 billion to purchase 120 million barrels of petroleum, 20 percent of which supplied vehicles, planes and other equipment in Iraq and Afghanistan, Deloitte said.

But in June of 2008 alone, the military lost 44 trucks and 220,000 gallons of fuel as long fuel convoys were waylaid by IEDs, weather, traffic and stealing, the study says. While the military purchases fuel at about $2 to $3 per gallon, the additional expense of air and ground protection and transportation pushes the price of each gallon to $45, Deloitte said.

"This study demonstrates that the development and use of alternative energy can be a direct cause for reductions in wartime casualties and may rank on par with the business cases for development of ever more effective offensive weapons, sophisticated fuel transport tankers, mine resistant armored vehicles and net-centric sensing technologies," the report says.

While the Pentagon and Congress have made progress in including energy-related planning into military bureaucracy, "significant progress is still required in consolidating its energy-related bureaucracy and formulating an all inclusive energy policy," the study says.

Push for alternative energy

DOD needs to accelerate its support and focus on the research and deployment of alternative energy technologies.

The Pentagon is currently researching the creation of affordable biofuel production for jet fuel alternatives, algae-based diesel, fuel cells, energy storage and "portable" nuclear fission, the study notes. It also was exploring the use of "coal to liquid" jet fuel, but the Air Force recently abandoned its efforts on that front (E&ENews PM, Oct. 21).

Congress mandates several energy initiatives in the fiscal 2010 Defense Appropriations bill, including giving preference to acquiring non-combat hybrid or electric vehicles, studying potential use of renewable energy and funding specifically for advanced battery development, wave energy technology and fuel-cell research (E&E Daily, Oct. 23).

However, DOD used about $500 million on energy efficiency and near-term energy technology research out of $7.4 billion given to the department by the economic stimulus law, according to the study.

But DOD should not face this energy challenge alone, Deloitte added.

"Aerospace and defense industry organizations are well placed to take leadership in the development of alternative energy through public-private partnerships, in order to increase America's defense, through the reduction of fossil fuel based energy supply requirements in war theaters," the study says.

Click here to read the study.