change can result in a 2 percent improvement in energy usage for buildings. However, one participant stressed that the overarching goal should be toward a culture shift at all levels of the organization—culture being defined as behaviors that individuals engage in even when no one is looking.


Many participants expressed that it is important that individuals at all levels of management and responsibility are aware of the importance of addressing energy security/surety and costs, and that, at times, improving efficiency and reliability can result in enhancement to the mission. Some participants suggested that having mandated energy training throughout the Air Force might be a driver toward greater understanding of the problem. For example, classes are offered by the Air Education and Training Command. Another suggestion was for process managers to have energy efficiency written into their job description and performance evaluations and receive appropriate training. A key target for improving energy awareness is the acquisition community, to get life cycle energy use to be one of the criteria on which acquisition decisions are made.


Several speakers noted that the civil engineering (CE) community has shown the Air Force that energy reduction projects are a good investment—typically returning $2 in savings for every $1 invested. One speaker noted that specific processes such as painting offer opportunities for improvement (as the General Motors presentation showed) but there is no budget for it. The CE community typically does not own either the industrial process or the budget. Participants noted that other processes that are good candidates for efficiencies are those that generate or transfer heat or involve rotating equipment. One participant noted several potential areas for future Air Force investment:

•  Work process design and associated training and audit protocols focused on business effective energy management.

•  Standardization of all common, repetitive processes such as machining, parts/equipment cleaning, painting, etc. across all sites.

•  Engineering evaluation of rotating and heat exchange equipment to establish life cycle energy use and operating costs.

•  Formal assessments of current operations vs. standard protocol to identify short and long-term improvement actions and projects (see Appendix E for possible areas to consider).

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement