Army, marines face uphill battle to lighten troops' battery load.

• Author: Erwin, Sandra I.
• Position: Battlefield Power

* For a three-day mission in Afghanistan, the average soldier lugs a minimum of 20 pounds of up to seven types of batteries--from small AA's for night-vision goggles to brick-size packs used in tactical radios. Some troops tote even more--up to 35 pounds--for specialized equipment. An infantry battalion on a one-year deployment typically burns through $150,000 worth of batteries.

Power and energy are essential weapons of war. Troops deploy with more electronic gear than ever: Flashlights, radios, GPS receivers, computers, cameras, mp 3 players, small robots, all of which have to be constantly charged.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

But these growing energy demands are bad news for the U.S. military for a number of reasons. For one, they pose enormous burdens on the logistics support system, which endangers U.S. forces. In Afghanistan, supply trucks heading to military outposts must travel on hazardous, mine-infested roads. The weight of the extra batteries also is causing physical harm to soldiers, putting them at risk of musculoskeletal injuries, some with long-term consequences.

Freeing troops from the tyranny of batteries has taken on more urgency in recent years as the overall weight of a soldier's gear has ballooned upwards of 130 pounds. Curbing the demand for batteries is one piece of a larger effort by the Army and Marine Corps to bring down the weight from 130 to less than 50 pounds.

Another significant downside to the excess load is that it makes soldiers less effective in combat, officials said.

"Soldiers are very concerned about the weight" they have to carry said Lt. Gen. Michael Vane, director of the Army Capabilities Integration Center. "Unfortunately we're starting to see it in medical reports," he said in an interview. "Soldiers who have been carrying weight a number of years are seeing long-term injuries."

The Army and Marine Corps both have launched campaigns to address the problem. They are seeking to adopt more efficient sources of energy as well as contain the demand for power.

Unburdening troops from heavy loads also is seen as an important element of the military's strategy to prepare for future wars. The Marine Corps, for instance, wants to be able to deploy company-size units that can operate independently for several days, far away from the battalion or brigade headquarters. But that vision will be tough to achieve if troops are overloaded with stuff, said Brig. Gen. Frank L. Kelley, commander of Marine Corps Systems Command.

The idea is to "disperse our forces so we're not targeted," he said at a Worldwide Business Research industry conference. "But you don't make them heavy. ... I'm worried about our war fighting concepts and the fact that the technology today is inhibiting us from really being able to operate the way we want to in the future."

With 120 pounds on his back, an infantryman is "not very tactical or maneuverable," said Lt. Col. Rick "Silky" Schilke, deputy director of the Marine Corps' Expeditionary Energy Office.

"That's a problem not just at the individual but at the unit level," he said at an Institute for Defense and Government Advancement presentation. "We need more autonomy and self sufficiency for units. You have to have communications and protection at the small unit levels," he said. "That equates to power and weight."

There may be times when, because of the supply tether, troops "can't push far into enemy territory," Schilke said. The average multiband "manpack" radio, for instance, requires 216 AA batteries every two days if it's operated...