National security and energy inextricably linked.

• Author: Farrell, Jr., Lawrence P.
• Position: PRESIDENT'S PERSPECTIVE

IT OFTEN IS SAID THAT WHILE everybody talks about the weather, no one does anything about it.

The same observation could be made about energy, a topic that during the past 30 years has been the subject of considerable conversation but not much action.

It may be no coincidence that, lately, we are seeing signs of movement on both fronts.

Weather and energy have become focal points of a much needed discussion in the United States about climate change, energy dependence and, not surprisingly, national security.

I recently served on a military advisory board at the Center for Naval Analysis. Our study, titled "National Security and the Threat of Climate Change," looked at how climate change presents a serious national security threat that could affect Americans at home, influence military operations abroad and heighten global tensions. One of the key findings was that "climate change, national security and energy dependence are a related set of global challenges."

Our panel specifically avoided passing judgment on the science of climate change, but instead focused on exploring the consequences of global warming as a "threat multiplier" in fragile regions of the world, which in sum could exacerbate conditions that lead to failed states--the breeding grounds of extremism and terrorism.

The military advisory board estimated that climate change will require the Pentagon to prepare differently for future national security scenarios. Rising sea levels could threaten coastal bases at home and abroad. Increasing storm activity could deter the military's ability to perform routine maintenance or carry out regular exercises. Changing ocean salinity could require alterations in sonar and submarine systems. Drought conditions might prompt new logistical plans and equipment for moving water to U.S. troops in war zones. Security responses to these problems all intersect, in one way or another, with the question of energy.

Our conclusions in the study, in many ways, brought full circle concerns I have had for some time about the role of energy as a key determinant of success on the battlefield.

It's a simple equation: If you can move troops and materiel more quickly, with less tonnage, but deliver the same level of firepower, you can be far more efficient. While most people assume that tanks and other heavy vehicles comprise the bulk of the Army's load, in fact nearly 80 percent of the tonnage we move on the battlefield is composed of fuel and water.

Today...