U.S. Army Widens Effort to Track its Carbon ‘Bootprint’

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to our or .

| Sourced From |

CARLSBAD, Calif. — The U.S. Army has deployed a carbon reporting and management system at a dozen military installations in a bid to create a common approach for tracking its carbon “bootprint” across a diverse portfolio of military bases.

The Army tapped Carlsbad, Calif.-based software firm Enviance for its Internet-based greenhouse gas inventory and management system after a successful pilot program that began at its base in Fort Carson, Colo., in June 2008. A series of emissions data collection templates were devised for a slew of sources in order to replicate the process across the Army’s multiple holdings. Executive Order 13423 requires a 3 percent annual emissions reduction through 2015 for all federal agencies.

“We were instructed to build a greenhouse gas management extension in such a way that we could scale it quickly across various commands of the Army,” Enviance President and CEO Lawrence Goldenhersh said in a telephone interview.

Enviance, whose customers include Chevron and American Electric Power, began as a developer of environmental, health and safety reporting and monitoring software before adding carbon accounting to its offerings.

Once it created the Army’s emissions templates, the company was able to roll out the program across 10 additional Army bases, including Letterkenny Army Depot, Pa.; Redstone Arsenal, Ala.; Fort Indiantown Gap, Pa.; Fort Rucker, Ala.; Fort Campbell, Ky.; Fort Hood, Texas; Fort Drum, N.Y.; Fort Stewart, Ga.; Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Md. and Schofield Barracks, Hawaii.

A 12th base in Fort Benning, Ga., is also measuring forest-based carbon dioxide sequestration in a move that could eventually help open up a new revenue stream from the generation of carbon credits.

According to Tad Davis, the Army’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Occupational Health, the greenhouse gas inventory at Fort Carson revealed that roughly half of its emissions can be considered Scope 1 — direct emissions generated on-site from activities such as fuel combustion. Another 40-42 percent comes from Scope 2, which includes purchased electricity. The remaining emissions are Scope 3, from activities such as officer travel or contractors providing support, Davis said.

Goldenhersh compared Army bases to small cities in terms of their size, emissions and complexity. While Davis called this first phase of laying the groundwork to institutionalize the GHG data collection process as a “work in progress,” he noted the importance of looking holistically at an organization to identify the complete range of emissions sources. He advised others embarking down this road to secure mechanisms that can offer as much precision as possible, and to integrate the findings into an overall energy strategy.

The Army has a parallel energy efficiency effort underway that will eventually tie directly to the greenhouse gas collection and analysis pilot program, Davis said.

“We’re looking at ways we can reduce consumption, increase accountability, seek more renewable sources of energy,” he said, “and look at technologies that may give us better use of energy down the road.”