Sustainability and the Army

What with shrapnel, abandoned equipment and the general detritus of war, the U.S. Army is probably the last place you'd expect to see a sustainability focus. However, perhaps because of its profound effect on the environment and the economy, the Army indeed has embraced sustainability.

The Army has adopted a strategy called “Triple Bottom Line—Plus.” The three bottom lines are: mission, environment and community. The "plus" stands for economic benefits that sustainability proffers, including reduced costs and impacts and accelerated innovation.

On March 6, I was invited to participate in a conference call with Tad Davis, the Army's Deputy Assistant Secretary of Environment, Safety and Occupational Health.


Davis helped start Army sustainability in 2001 at Fort Bragg. Since then, he's progressively been working to develop an Army-wide sustainability concept.

"Our Army, your Army, is building green, buying green and going green," Davis said.

"A challenge for us has been to define sustainability in a context that resonates for folks in the Pentagon. We need to look 30 years down the road so we have programs in place," Davis said.

A lot of emphasis goes into how to dispose of hazardous wastes, as well as maintaining water quality and quantity, he said.

The Army is embracing new technology and processes at base installations. For constructing permanent structures, in 2008 the Army established a rule that buildings must adhere to the Silver LEED standard.

Going forward, 50% of every building that is deconstructed will be reused or recycled instead of being sent to a landfill, he said.

"We are a global corporation, for all intents and purposes," Davis said. "We're looking at our size and scale, and how we can be more sustainable by what we purchase."

About 40,000 of 68,000 non-tactical vehicles, which include sedans or other vehicles for general transport, are alternative-fuel capable, he said.

Currently, Davis is trying to put a number on the total savings by Army sustainability efforts. "It's part of our strategy to get military and civilian leaders to embrace sustainability. If we can say that we'll reduce waste by three percent, then we can show a big-picture view," he said.

As a localized example, a project two years ago at West Point reduced energy consumption by nearly $1 million a year, he said. "When we started sustainability, the way we sold it up the chain was economics and savings. We were able to reduce consumption of water and electricity significantly, then use the savings for other projects."

To comply with recent EPA standards on carbon emissions, Davis said the Army is conducting a study to learn how to reduce Army's greenhouse gas emissions. "We want to be part of the solution," he said.

Davis gave a battlefield example of how the Army has been more sustainable.

The Army was losing 80% efficiency in air conditioning of temporary structures, such as those that house computer servers and command posts. Now it is using spray foaming on these temporary structures to cut efficiency loss by half, he said.

The Army is using some hydro and wind power in Afghanistan and it is considering solar applications in Iraq and Djibouti.

"If we can reduce the power requirement by using smart grids, we'll reduce the amount of power needed," Davis said.

In some permanent structures at Fort Knox, the Army is using thermal-exchange programs to pipe water well below the surface, to be cooled or warmed depending on the season, then return the water to the facilities to aid in climate control, Davis said.

To make soldiers more sustainable on an individual basis, the Army goes back to the method of training. At every base they're given instructions specific to the area they're in or the task they're doing, whether that involves consideration of endangered species or general recycling and reduction of resources, Davis said.

Here are some interesting facts about the Army and sustainability, as taken from its 2007 Sustainability Report.

• About 78% of FY07 Army Military Construction projects were designed to at least U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED certification standards for new construction.
• Since FY03, the Army achieved an 8.4% reduction in facility energy use intensity (KBtu/gross square foot/per year).
• While there was an 11% increase in absolute Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) releases from CY03 to CY06, the Army achieved a 13% decrease in pounds TRI released per $1000 net Army cost of operations.

Whatever you believe about war and peace, it's comforting to know that the Army is looking at its environmental impact. In the big picture, wars will happen and people will die. If we can reduce the ancillary suffering and harm, we'll be better for it.