Dominant Logistics
Disposing of Cold War Stockpiles
I've written in numerous other articles about the need to eliminate the remaining stockpiles of the Cold War. These stockpiles place an undo burden on the services and provide no useful service to the military. But the other side of the coin is the fact that disposing of these excess stocks is by no means free. Much of the reason these stocks are retained today is because it is simply cheaper to retain the stocks than to dispose of them.
The problem this brings is that in the end, these materials will eventually need to be dealt with. For example, purchases of new aircraft and vehicles occur every year, replacing older systems that are then transferred into stockpiles and cannibalization areas. But if we only put systems into these stockpiles and never bring any out, it is inevitable that we will ultimately run out of room or the costs of storage will escalate to where the stockpiles are no longer cost effective but we still won't be able to afford to get rid of them. Simply put, we must develop means by which we can effectively dispose of excess and unuseable military materials before they become a bigger problem than they already are.
Power Generating Incinerators
A process that has been around for many years is that of incineration. This is where materials are literally burned into oblivion in extremely hot fires. This particular process has proven useful in destroying our stocks of chemical weapons as it is the only proven safe method of disposing of these deadly materials. But logic tends to dictate that if we can safely burn these chemicals, we should also be able to burn many other types of materials that need to be destroyed.
Many military goods, including tires, old web gear and uniforms, explosives, chemical fuels, old NBC suits, and others, are flammable but give off toxic fumes. If we can contain the toxic fumes of materials like VX and sarin, it should be within our capabilities to contain the fumes of these less toxic materials. Ideally, this process should be linked to power generation systems that can generate electricity to help defray the disposal costs.
We should design and construct one of these facilities in each of the major regions we maintained stocks during the Cold War to eliminate the need to trasfer the materials back to the U.S. We should also build a number of these facilities within the U.S. to manage excess stocks here at home. We can also offer access to these systems to outside nations for disposal of hazardous materials for a modest fee.
Recycling
Wherever it is economically viable, we should recycle the materials used in these older systems and sell the materials back to industry. For example, older aircraft are built mainly from very high grade aluminum and this could probably be recycled economically. Other materials that are good candidates include steel, copper, and titanium. A key military good that should be dealt with promptly is the lead-acid batteries used in many military systems. These can be very detrimental to the environment and should be disposed of to the fullest extent.
Controlled Disposal
Many systems just cannot be burned or recycled economically. There are a variety of reasons that this is the case but there remains a useful option for getting rid of these systems - dumping them in the ocean to form artificial reefs. This practice has already been used for disposing of excess tanks and naval vessels and is proven effective for both disposal and for helping the environment.
Concerns have been raised over industrial fishing methods that have taken a toll on fish populations in the oceans. Many have suggested establishing reserves where commerical fishing would be banned altogether and there is ample evidence to support this idea. These types of locations would be ideal for dumping excess tanks, missiles, rockets, guns, ships, and aircraft as the presence of these materials on the ocean floor would provide a permanent shelter for sustaining fish populations while making it impossible for industrial fishing to take place in these areas.
We currently have literally tens of thousands of trucks, armored vehicles, and aircraft that could be used to rebuild these underwater habitats. We have already gotten our use of these systems in defense of our country; let's put them to use defending the fish and other creatures of the sea against destructive fishing methods in our territorial waters. Some unscrupulous types feel it appropriate to dredge the ocean bottom for shrimp, lobster, and crab destroying the habitat as well as the aquatic life - let's see them dredge an Abrams tank!
Funding Disposal Options
The funding for these practices must come from the existing defense budget. It is bad enough that we spend the insane amounts of money we do to procure all of this unneeded equipment; some of that money should be used to fund getting rid of what is unneeded as well. By incorporating money generating options into the program, we should be able to defray about 30-50% of the costs of disposing of these excess stocks, which should make disposal an economical alternative to maintaining these enormous wastes of resources.