The Real Cost of Energy

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


The national security implications of climate change has, in recent years, become a common theme in Washington policy debates, with politicians and military officials increasingly highlighting the potential threats posed by resource constraints and inhospitable climates. The Pentagon’s  Quadrennial Defense Review was, in fact, the first to point to climate change as an “accelerant of instability and conflict.” This week, the Pentagon is highlighting a separate but related concern: American’s unhealthy reliance on fossil fuels.

In recognition of Energy Awareness Month, the Department of Defense convened a series of panels on Wednesday examining the costs of this reliance and how national security could be strengthened by changing America’s energy portfolio. After all, the Department of Defense consumes about 2 percent of all fossil fuels used in the United States, as several speakers repeated at the event.

What was most telling, however, was the human cost of reliance. Ray Mabus, secretary of the Navy, noted that Tuesday was 10th anniversary of bombing of the USS Cole. The attack killed 17 sailors and injured 39 others, and happened when the ship was docked in Yemen for refueling. Warships are in constant need of refueling—it has to happen every few days—so more efficient vessels are also safer, he said. “If we do that, we will improve both the security and the combat capability of that ship.”

Transporting oil in conflict zones is also a dangerous mission. In the past three months, Mabus said, six Marines have been injured while guarding fuel convoys. According to an Army report from 2009 Mabus cited, one American soldier is killed or wounded for every 24 convoys.

“That is too high a price to pay for energy,” he said. “We have to change the way we operate. We have to change the way we produce and use energy, not only to save lives and injuries in Afghanistan, but also free up those soldiers and airman to do what they were sent to do, which is to fight, to build capacity in the national security forces, and to engage with the local population.”

He also noted that the danger of relying on other countries for our energy. “Denial of energy can be used as a weapon, a weapon perhaps as effective as planes and tanks,” said Mabus.

Mabus recently witnessed the environmental costs of oil reliance first hand, after President Obama tapped him to develop the Gulf Coast Restoration Plan. (A former governor of Mississippi, he also served as an ambassador to Saudi Arabia during the Clinton administration.)

His remarks—and the wider show of concern about fossil fuels on display at the Pentagon today—should be a rallying call on energy. Even for those who still think climate change is a giant conspiracy theory, it’s hard to deny the real problems that reliance on fossil fuels creates for the US.

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate