Sustainable Energy Pathways for Smart Urbanization and Off Grid Access: Options and Policies for Military Installations and Remote Communities

Conference paper
Part of the NATO Science for Peace and Security Series C: Environmental Security book series (NAPSC)


Civilian and military communities alike must pursue innovative approaches to provide resilient, sustainable energy and water sources in the face of global challenges such as climate change, increasing population density, and ever more complex and vulnerable infrastructure systems. Equally compelling is the need for reliable energy supply to remote locations – whether they are military bases, humanitarian refugee camps or communities that have no access to electricity.

We emphasize technological pathways and options that do not rely on a long supply chain and those less reliant upon fossil fuels. To the extent possible, it is ideal to focus initially on highly efficient building, equipment, and infrastructure systems to reduce energy demand, and to harvest energy available on site through energy recovery processes and renewable power generation before applying other power sources. Meeting the needs of these communities requires a focus on the development of next generation transmission and distribution infrastructure, in coordination with effective local distributed generation. The concept of a smart energy network that integrates and exploits the power of information and communication technologies with advanced decision-making tools will be an important aspect of developments. Systematically engaging and building understanding amongst stakeholders – from decision makers and regulators, to utility operators, community leaders, and ultimately to community citizens – will be critical to building and sustaining portfolios that meet the diverse acceptability criteria for these next generation energy systems and technologies.


Superconducting Magnetic Energy Storage (SMES) Flow Batteries Exergy Thermal Network Range Anxiety 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



The authors are grateful for the valuable discussion and insight gained from the participants of the Energy Working Group during the NATO Advanced Research Workshop “Sustainable Cities and Military Installations”, held in Hella, Iceland, 3–6 June, 2012. The authors would especially like to thank the workshop organizers, Dr. Igor Linkov and Dr. Abou Bakr Ramadan. Mental Modeling© was created at Decision Partners by leading cognitive scientists in 1990. Permission was granted by the USACE Chief of Engineers to publish this material. The views and opinions expressed in this paper are those of the individual authors and not those of the US Army, US Department of Defense, or other sponsor organizations.


  1. 1.
    Rinaldi S, Peerenboom J, Kelly T (2001) Identifying, understanding, and analyzing critical infrastructure interdependencies. IEEE Control Systems Magazine, IEEE, December 2001, pp 11–25Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tkachuk A, Collier Z, Linkov I, Travleev A, Levchenko V, Levchenko A, Kazansky Y, Parad S (2011) Energy security: using multicriteria decision analysis to select power supply alternatives for small settlements. In: Linkov I, Bridges TS (eds) Climate: global change and local adaptation. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007: synthesis report. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    WGSI (2012) Equinox blueprint: energy 2030. Waterloo Global Science Initiative, Perimeter Institute, University of Waterloo, WaterlooGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
  6. 6.
    Executive Order 13514 (2009) Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance, signed on 5 Oct 2009Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mihelcic JR, Crittenden JC, Small MJ, Shonnard DR, Hokanson DR, Zhang Q, Chen H, Sorby SA, James VU, Sutherland JW, Schnoor JL (2003) Sustainability science and engineering: the emergence of a new metadiscipline. Environ Sci Technol 37(23):5314–5324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Elkington J (1998) Partnerships from cannibals with forks: the triple bottom line of 21st-century business. Environ Qual Manage 8(1):37–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dyllick T, Hockerts K (2002) Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Bus Strategy Environ 11:130–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Figge F, Hahn T, Schaltegger S, Wagner M (2002) The sustainability balanced scorecard – linking sustainability management to business strategy. Bus Strategy Environ 11:269–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Subcommittee on Disaster Reduction (2005) Grand challenges for disaster reduction. National Science and Technology Council, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Howard RA (1988) Decision analysis: practice and promise. Manage Sci 34(6):679–695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Keisler J (2011) Portfolio decision quality. In: Salo A, Keisler J, Morton A (eds) Portfolio decision analysis. Springer, pp 29–51.
  14. 14.
    Markowitz HM (1952) Portfolio selection. J Health Care Finance 7(1):77–91Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Modigliani F, Miller MH (1958) The cost of capital, corporation finance and the theory of investment. Am Econ Rev 48(3):261–297Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sharpe WF (1963) A simplified model for portfolio analysis. Manage Sci 9(2):277–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sharpe WF (1964) Capital asset prices: a theory of market equilibrium under conditions of risk. J Health Care Finance 19(3):425–442Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    NRC (2011) Sustainability and the U.S. EPA. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Greening LA, Bernow S (2004) Design of coordinated energy and environmental policies: use of multi-criteria decision-making. Energy Policy 32:721–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    McDaniels TL, Gregory RS, Fields D (1999) Democratizing risk management: successful public involvement in local water management decisions. Risk Anal 19(3):497–510Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Belton V, Stewart T (2002) Multiple criteria dcision analysis: an integrated approach. Springer, New York CityGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Huang JP, Poh KL, Ang BW (1995) Decision analysis in energy and environmental modeling. Energy 20(9):843–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Linkov I, Moberg E (2011) Multi-criteria decision analysis: environmental applications and case studies. CRC Press, London, UKGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Merkhofer MW, Keeney RL (1987) A multiattribute utility analysis of alternative sites for the disposal of nuclear waste. Decis Anal 7(2):173–194Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Karvetski C, Lambert J, Linkov I (2010) Scenario and multiple criteria decision analysis for energy and environmental security of military and industrial installations. Integr Environ Assess Manag 7(2):228–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Karvetski C, Lambert J, Linkov I (2010) Emergent conditions and multiple criteria analysis in infrastructure prioritization for developing countries. J Multi-Criteria Decis Anal 16:125–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wilkens I, Schmuck P (2012) Transdisciplinary evaluation of energy scenarios for a German village using multi-criteria decision analysis. Sustainability 4:604–629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Løken E (2007) Use of multicriteria decision analysis methods for energy planning problems. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 11:1584–1595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hobbs BF, Meierm P (2000) Energy decision and the environment: a guide to the use of multicriteria methods. Kluwer, BostonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Polatidis H, Haralambopoulos DA, Munda G, Vreeker R (2006) Selecting an appropriate multi-criteria decision analysis technique for renewable energy planning. Energy Sour Part B 1:181–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rant Z (1956) Exergie, ein neues Wort fur Technische Arbeitsfahigkeit, Forschung Ing. Wes., pp 22–36Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hermann W (2006) Quantifying global exergy resources. Energy 31(12):1349–1366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    US Army (2009) Army energy security implementation strategy.–09.pdf
  34. 34.
    Sverdrup HU, Koca D, Ragnarsdóttir KV (2012) The World 5 model; peak metals, minerals, energy, wealth, food and population; urgent policy considerations for a sustainable society.
  35. 35.
    Brown LB (2009) Plan B 4.0. Mobilizing to save civilization. Earth Policy Institute, Norton and Company, LondonGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Brown LB (2009) Could food shortages bring down civilization? Sci Am 301:38–45Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ehrlich P, Daily G, Goulder L (1992) Population growth, economic growth and market economics. Contention 2:17–35Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Greene DL, Hopson JL, Li J (2003) Running out of and into oil: analyzing global depletion and transition through 2050. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, ORNL/TM-2003/259Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ragnarsdottir KV, Sverdrup H, Koca D (2011) Challenging the planetary boundaries I: basic principles of an integrated model for phosphorus supply dynamics and global population size. Appl Geochem 26:303–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ragnarsdottir KV, Sverdrup HU, Koca D (2011) Assessing long term sustainability of global supply of natural resources and materials, Chapter Number X, pp 20–46. In: Ghenai C (ed) Sustainable development.
  41. 41.
    Sverdrup H, Ragnarsdottir KV (2011) Challenging the planetary boundaries II: assessing the sustainable global population and phosphate supply, using a systems dynamics assessment model. Appl Geochem 26:S307–S310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hubbert MK (1966) History of petroleum geology and its bearing upon present and future exploration. AAPG Bull 50:2504–2518Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Hubbert MK (1972) Estimation of oil and gas resources. In: U.S. Geological Survey, workshop on techniques of Mineral mesource appraisal, pp 16–50. U.S. Geological Survey, DenverGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ragnarsdottir KV (2008) Rare metals getting rarer. Nat Geosci 1:720–721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (2010) Army vision for net zero.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Caprio et al (2011) MILCON energy efficiency and sustainability study of five types of army buildings. Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of EngineersGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Roege PE (2011) Scalable energy networks to promote energy security. Joint Forces Quart (62, 3d quarter):125–130Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    IESO (2009) Enabling tomorrows electricity system: report of the Ontario Smart Grid Forum. Independent Electricity System OperatorGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
  50. 50.
    EIA (2012) Annual energy outlook 2012: with projections to 2035. U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Energy Information AdministrationGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    CHP (2008) Catalog of CHP technologies. US Environmental Protection Agency, Combined Heat and Power Partnership, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    IESO (2011) Modernizing Ontario’s electricity system: next steps: second report of the Ontario Smart Grid Forum. Independent Electricity System OperatorGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Ali MH, Wu B, Dougal RA (2010) An overview of SMES applications in power and energy systems. IEEE Trans Sustain Energy 1(1):1949–3029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Wright RT, Nebel BJ (2002) Environmental science. Toward a sustainable future. Pearson Education, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Decision Partners (2006) Strategic Risk Communications Framework for Health Canada and the Public Health Agency of Canada.
  56. 56.
    Thorne S, Butte G (2008) Deconstructing “NIMBY”: challenging conventional Wisdom; report for the Association of Power Producers of Ontario. EPCOR, Ontario Power AuthorityGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Decision Partners (2005) Report to OPA on Supply Mix Stakeholdering – November 2005 in Ontario Power AuthorityGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Yankelovich D (1991) Coming to public judgment: making democracy work in a complex world. Syracuse University Press, SyracuseGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    DoD (2010) Strategic sustainability performance plan. mance%20Plan%20FactSheet_GPP_v2.pdf
  60. 60.
    Beardsley SC, Bugrov D, Enriquez L (2005) The role of regulation in strategy. The McKinsey Quarterly, Number 4Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    IEA (2010) World energy outlook 2010. International Energy Agency. Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Bongardt D, Breithaupt M, Creutzig F (2010) Beyond the Fossil City: towards low carbon transport and green growth. Deutsche Gesellschaftfw Carbon Transport and Green Growthstitute, IDTechEx Ltd., Eschborn. Industrial and Commercial Electric Vehicle 2012–2022. IDTechEx Ltd., BostonGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Milton J (2010) Superconductors come of age. Nature.
  64. 64.
    Patel P (2011) Super-thin superconducting cables: new compact cables show promise for power transmission and high-field magnets. MIT Technol RevGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Atman CJ, Bostrom A, Fischhoff B, Morgan MG (1994) Designing risk communications: completing and correcting mental models of hazardous processes, Part I. Risk Anal 14(5):779–788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Bostrom A et al (1992) Characterizing mental models of hazardous processes. J Soc Issues 48(4):85–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    EIA (2013) EIA-860, ‘Annual Electric Generator Report.’
  68. 68.
    Executive Order 13423 (2007) Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management, signed on 24 Jan 2007Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Fischhoff B (1995) Risk perception and communication unplugged: twenty years of process. Risk Anal 15(2):137–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Keeney RL, Robillard GA (1977) Assessing and evaluating environmental impacts at proposed nuclear power plant sites. J Environ Econ Manage 4:153–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Keisler J, Linkov I (2011) Managing a portfolio of risks. In: Cochran JJ (ed) Wiley encyclopedia of operations research and management science, Volume on Risk AnalysisGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Morgan MG, Fischhoff B, Bostrom A, Atman CJ (2002) Risk communication: a mental models approach. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Tylock SM, Seager TP, Snell J, Bennett ER, Sweet D (2012) Energy management under policy and technology uncertainty. Energy Policy 47(8):156–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    IEA (2008) World energy outlook 2008.,3790,en.html. Paris, France

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Waterloo Institute for Sustainable EnergyWaterlooCanada
  2. 2.US Army Engineer Research and Development CenterVicksburgUSA
  3. 3.Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-4 (Logistics), US ArmyWashington, DCUSA
  4. 4.Decision PartnersTorontoCanada
  5. 5.Bioengineering GroupSalemUSA
  6. 6.School of Engineering and Natural SciencesUniversity of IcelandReykjavíkIceland
  7. 7.Lockheed MartinOrlandoUSA
  8. 8.Energy Security CenterMinistry of Foreign AffairsVilniusLithuania

Personalised recommendations