In the United States, the president enjoys the privilege of appointing 4,000 of his supporters to positions within the Executive Branch. When the president is a Democrat, the best connected of these invariably prefer perches in the vast social service bureaucracy, there to reign (but rarely rule) over like-minded civil servants.1 Those with the fewest friends, alas, end up in the Pentagon.
The appointees who suffer the latter fate know nothing of the work they supposedly supervise. Indeed, having been raised in homes in which there were “no war toys for Christmas,” they cannot distinguish a sailor from an airman, let alone explain the difference between a soldier and a Marine. What is worse, like impoverished Regency belles, obliged to spend the Season wearing last year’s frocks, Defense Department Democrats live in constant fear of losing caste.
With this in mind, it is not surprising that the aforementioned appointees embrace, with great enthusiasm, projects of the sort they can discuss at Georgetown cocktail parties. During the Obama years (2009-2017), many of these bore the brand of “green energy.” (No doubt, the appointees in question made much of the double entendre.) As might be expected, many of these programs went into hibernation during the presidency of Donald Trump (2017-2021), only to spring back to life after the inauguration (in 2021) of Joseph Biden.
In a recent post on his Substack, the indispensable Igor Chudov lays bare the folly of one of these initiatives. Part of the Climate Strategy unveiled by the US Army in 2022, this plan calls for the progressive replacement, over the course of twenty-eight years, of petroleum dependent cars, trucks, and tanks with their battery-powered counterparts.
According to the plan, all petroleum-powered “light non-tactical vehicles” in the Army will disappear by 2027. (This class includes such things as cars, pick-up trucks, and mini-vans.) Eight years later, the last of the gas- (and diesel-) fueled “heavy non-tactical vehicles” (commercial-type trucks weighing more than 8,500 pounds) will go the way of the Browning Automatic Rifle. Finally, in 2050 all tactical vehicles, to include (should they still exist) main battle tanks, will draw all of their power from on-board batteries.
Lest you think, Gentle Reader, that this post serves a partisan political purpose, I will mention that am convinced that the one Republican political appointee with whom I am well-acquainted is a knucklehead of the first order. Indeed, if I ever manage to locate the proper forms, I intend to nominate him for a place of particular honor in the Knucklehead Hall of Fame.
With the rise of Small, Modular Nuclear Reactors, it is feasible to I think to adapt the non-tactical fleet of vehicles, especially those servicing primarily on or near base (staff cars, airfield vehicles, range trucks) without breaking the defense budget worse than Congress already does, but the tactical fleet ones.....that's a very long way off. We'll need to achieve a whole another order of magnitude in energy density before we even consider converting things like tanks to all electric. Batteries are heavy mf'ers. Do I think it's possible, on the extreme long term? Yeah, probably. But 2050? Not happening
Are there Knucklehead Second and Third Order honorifics? What are the post-nominals?