Policy Challenges of Accelerating

Technological Change: Security Policy

and Strategy Implications of Parallel

Scientific Revolutions

James Kadtke and Linton Wells II

Center for Technology and National Security Policy (CTNSP)

National Defense University (NDU)

September 2014
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not reflect the

official position of the National Defense University, the Department of Defense, or the U.S.

Government. All information and sources in this paper were drawn from unclassified materials.

Dr. James Kadtke is currently the Special Advisor on Converging Technologies at the Center

for Technology and National Security Policy, National Defense University; he is also a

consultant in the Washington, DC area focusing on emerging technologies, national security,

organizational foresight, and innovation. Previously, he served as a Fellow in the Science and

Technology Policy Institute under the White House OSTP, and as policy analyst on the Science

Committee in the U.S. House of Representatives. He then served over three years on the staff of

Senator John Warner of Virginia and as staff designee on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

More recently, he has served as Executive Director of the Accelerating Innovation Foundation,

and a research fellow at the National Defense University and George Mason University. From

2010 to 2012, he was the Industry and State Liaison at the National Nanotechnology

Coordinating Office under the White House.

Dr. Linton Wells II is a Visiting Distinguished Research Fellow in the Institute for National

Strategic Studies at National Defense University. Previously he was the Director of the Center

for Technology and National Security Policy at NDU. Dr. Wells completed more than 51 years

of service with the Department of Defense in June 2014, including duty as Principal Deputy

Assistant Secretary of Defense for Networks and Information (NII) as well as for Command,

Control, Communications & Intelligence (C3I). He also served as Assistant Secretary (acting)

and DoD Chief Information Officer. In 26 years of naval service he commanded a destroyer

squadron and a guided missile destroyer.
3

Contents

Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 1

1. Overview................................................................................................................................ 3

1.1 Policy Context............................................................................................................... 3

1.2 Accelerating Technological Change and the Globalization of ST&E........................... 4

1.3 GeoInnovation............................................................................................................... 6

1.4 Synergistic Technology Revolutions............................................................................. 7

1.5 Disruptive Convergent Technologies.......................................................................... 10

2. Policy, Legal, Ethical, and Other National Security-Related Recommendations................ 11

2.1 Cross-Cutting Areas.................................................................................................... 12

2.1.1 Foresight as an Integral Component of DoD Planning Processes................ 12

2.1.2 ST&E Capacity as a Strategic Variable (GeoInnovation)............................ 16

2.1.3 International Technology Governance and Standards Bodies...................... 17

2.1.4 Framework for Enhanced Collaboration With the Private Sector................ 18

2.1.5 Expanding Privacy Issues ............................................................................ 19

2.1.6 Impacts of Emerging Technologies on the Present and Future DoD

Workforce .................................................................................................... 20

2.1.7 Future Defense Industrial and Technology Base.......................................... 21

2.2 Technology-Specific Areas......................................................................................... 23

2.2.1 ICT and Cyberspace..................................................................................... 23

2.2.2 Energy .......................................................................................................... 25

2.2.3 Unmanned and Autonomous Military Systems............................................ 26

2.2.4 Directed-Energy Weapons ........................................................................... 27

2.2.5 Biotechnology .............................................................................................. 27

3.1 Conclusions.......................................................................................................................... 30

Appendix A: Summary of Reports Identifying Key Emerging Technologies............................... 31

Appendix B: The Revolution in Biology, Biotechnology, and Medicine ..................................... 38

Appendix C: The Revolution in Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, and Human Augmentation... 43

Appendix D: Revolution in ICT and Cognitive Science ............................................................... 49

Appendix E: The Revolution in Nanotechnology and Advanced Materials ................................ 55

Appendix F: Revolution in Energy ............................................................................................... 61
4

Table of Figures

FIGURE 1: COST TO SEQUENCE A HUMAN-SIZED GENOME.......................................... 39

FIGURE 2: MOLECULAR CAR................................................................................................. 60

FIGURE 3: WORLD ENERGY CONSUMPTION BY FUEL, 1990–2035 BY QUADRILLION

BTU....................................................................................................................................... 61
1

Executive Summary

This paper examines policy, legal, ethical, and strategy implications for national security of the

accelerating science, technology, and engineering (ST&E) revolutions underway in five broad

areas: biology, robotics, information, nanotechnology, and energy (BRINE), with a particular

emphasis on how they are interacting. The paper considers the timeframe between now and 2030

but emphasizes policy and related choices that need to be made in the next few years to shape the

future competitive space favorably, and focuses on those decisions that are within U.S.

Department of Defense’s (DoD) purview. The pace and complexity of technological change

mean that linear predictions of current trends cannot be the basis for effective guidance or

management for the future. These are issues for policymakers and commanders, not just

technical specialists. The summaries below highlight a few of the developments and implications

in each area. The body of the paper includes significantly more detail.

Transformational advances in biology, biotechnology, and medicine include personalized and

regenerative medicine, neuroscience, brain mapping, biomanufacturing, and synthetic biology.

Progress in robotics, artificial intelligence, and human augmentation is enabling advanced

unmanned and autonomous vehicles for battlefield and hazardous operations, low-cost

autonomous manufacturing, and automated systems for health and logistics.

Advances in information and communications technologies (ICT) and cognitive science are

being driven by trends such as speed, mobility, commoditization/open source, big data, the cloud,

and the Internet of (Every)Thing. They are complemented by advanced decision-support tools

and exotic computing architectures such as quantum computers.

Advances in nanotechnology and advanced materials include high-performance materials,

multi-functional smart materials, highly energetic explosives, and nanomaterials as components

of advanced electronics, and in medicine and biotechnology.

Energy initiatives need to begin with demand reduction, whether through policy, process, or

design. Other new technologies include improved renewable generation, exotic storage

technologies, smart power grid management, and better power sources for directed-energy

weapons (DEW). Accessible partner nation biofuel initiatives could enhance operational

flexibility.

Many of these areas, and especially their convergence, will result in disruptive new capabilities

for DoD which can improve warfighter performance, reduce health-care and readiness costs,

increase efficiency, enhance decisionmaking, reduce human risk, improve biochemical defense,

enable pervasive sensing and distributed command and control, and support expeditionary

energy and base resilience. However, U.S. planning must expect that many of these also will be

available to adversaries who may use them under very different ethical and legal constraints than

we would.1

1 The need to consider advanced capabilities in adversary hands is stressed in: Robert O. Work and Shawn Brimley,

20YY: Preparing for War in the Robotic Age, Center for New American Studies, 2014,

http://www.cnas.org/sites/default/files/publications-pdf/CNAS_20YY_WorkBrimley.pdf
2

This study focuses on a few broad policy, strategy, legal, ethical, organizational, and related

areas that can help shape the national security consequences of these technological changes and

their interactions. Recommendations include the following:

Foresight: Expand and institutionalize DoD capabilities for strategic foresight, adaptive

management, and technological intelligence. 2These capabilities can enhance DoD’s global

awareness, improve strategic decisionmaking, and facilitate better investment decisions.

International Governance: Examine ways that DoD can help shape the long-term security

consequences of trends in international technology governance and standards bodies (e.g., the

International Telecommunications Union and the International Organization for Standardization).

Public-Private Cooperation: Recognizing that private sector innovation and investment is

increasingly important for national security, develop a policy, legal, contractual and values

framework to let DoD leverage private sector resources better, both domestically and overseas.

Future Workforce Development: Examine the impacts of accelerating technology, generational

change, and cultural evolution on the future DoD workforce, including jobs displaced by

automation. Leverage innovative learning and private sector concepts to build new models for

the workplace.

This summary highlights only a few of the important policy issues that are addressed more fully

in the body of the paper, such as (1) recognizing science, technology and engineering (ST&E)

capacity and its geographic distribution as a strategic variable (i.e., GeoInnovation), (2)

establishing proactive DoD positions on expanding privacy issues, (3) protecting and enabling

the future defense technology and industrial base, (4) facilitating DoD’s energy-related initiatives,

and (5) addressing critical issues of ICT and cyberspace. In addition, the paper addresses policy,

legal, and ethical issues related to unmanned and autonomous systems, DEW, and biotechnology.

Maintaining DoD’s present technological preeminence will be a difficult challenge. Many

dedicated people are addressing the technology issues, but policy actions also will be crucial to

adapt to—and shape—the technology component of the international security environment.

Addressing these issues in the near term will help to mitigate risks and improve outcomes.

2

Forecasting typically extrapolates predictions based on already identified trends, whereas foresight tries to

anticipate the broad range of possibilities that could emerge from developing strategic conditions, ideally

incorporating a wide range of synthetic, holistic or creative perspectives. These can help assess impacts and

facilitate planning to improve outcomes.
3

1. Overview

New technological developments are increasingly affecting every aspect of global society, and

the pace of technological innovation is accelerating. The development and production of new

technologies is also becoming increasingly globalized, with many nations now investing

significant resources in scientific and commercialization infrastructure. A number of prestigious

studies have raised serious concerns that this increasing competition will result in a loss of

technological preeminence by the United States.3These trends are particularly worrisome for

future U.S. military capabilities, which have been based on technological dominance for decades.

Technological development today involves a highly complex interplay between elements such as

research, finance, infrastructure, education, economics, and government policy, often referred to

as an innovation ecology. Similarly, the adoption and use of technologies to create capabilities

also involves interactions among people, processes, organizations, policies, and governance, as

well as technology. It is within these areas that DoD is finding itself increasingly challenged as it

tries to adapt to and exploit rapid technological change. Failure to overcome these hurdles will

result in increasing technological obsolescence, and, eventually, diminished national power.

Within this context, this paper examines policy, legal, ethical, and strategy implications for DoD

from the impact of the accelerating ST&E revolutions that are underway in five broad areas: (1)

biology, biotechnology and medicine; (2) robotics, artificial intelligence, and human

augmentation; (3) ICT and cognitive science; (4) nanotechnology and advanced materials; and

(5) energy technology (collectively, BRINE).4 Although the principal focus is on the changes in

technology between now and 2030, this study emphasizes policy and related choices that need to

be made in the next few years to help shape the future competitive space to maintain DoD

technological dominance as far as possible. As such, the study emphasizes the impacts of

nonlinear change, cross-cutting synergies among technologies, and rapidly evolving socioeconomic, geopolitical, and resource trends more than the technologies themselves. It makes

several recommendations focused on building capacity and resilience despite disruptive change

over the coming decades, exploiting new capabilities, and mitigating potential risks—even in a

time of sustained budget austerity and evolving global competition.

1.1 Policy Context

DoD thinking about emerging technologies has evolved in recent years. In January 2012, U.S.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta issued a new strategic guidance document5for the Department,

followed in February by the document, Strategic Direction to the Joint Force, by General Martin

Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Both documents focused on 2020, describing

3

For example, Rising Above the Gathering Storm, Revisited, National Academies Press, 2010,

http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12999

4 We are indebted to Mr. Frank Hoffman for the BRINE formulation. Other groupings are possible. Some studies

group AI with ICT. Some technologies, such as Directed-Energy Weapons (DEW) are addressed as the convergence

of new power supplies, beam forming and pointing/tracking. Others, such as space technologies are only addressed

peripherally since most don’t involve new core science. Others, such as fundamental breakthroughs in physics (dark

matter, dark energy, etc.) are not included because they are not likely to demand key DoD policy decisions within

the next few years.

5

For an analysis of these documents, see: Strategic Shift: Appraising Recent Changes in U.S. Defense Plans and

Priorities, by Richard Kugler and Linton Wells, CTNSP, National Defense University, 2013. An online update is

available to include the 2014 QDR and the FY15 Budget Request.
4

the changing geopolitical security environment, the primary missions of our armed forces, and

principles to shape the development of future defense programs. There was not much in the

Defense Strategic Guidance (DSG) document about technology, prompting an op-ed piece6by

one of this paper’s authors. Later, however, the Capstone Concept for Joint Operations (CCJO)

added a considerable emphasis on technology; for example: “The diffusion of technology that is

transforming warfare is also reshaping global politics.” The 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review7

also states “The United States will remain a global leader in the creative development and use of

technology.” Finally, a more general framework for DoD guidance is provided by the 2010 U.S.

National Security Strategy, which addresses broader technology issues beyond DoD. For

example, it highlights the need for the United States to emphasize education and energy, promote

private-sector innovation, and stay “on the cutting edge of science and innovation that supports

our prosperity, defense and international technological leadership.”

Respected organizations such as the National Intelligence Council, the Defense Science Board,

and several think tanks are looking at technology trends in detail. Appendix A lists some of the

important trends and emerging technologies identified in several recent studies. This paper also

considers technology trends out to 2030 but, in contrast, focuses on “nonmaterial” issues within

DoD’s analytical structure of doctrine, organization, training, material, leadership, personnel,

facilities and policy (DOTMLPF-P).

The increasingly rapid pace of technological change is affecting not only threats or specific

mission areas but also fundamental features of the global security environment. Ongoing

developments are nonlinear, often unexpected, and sometimes disruptive. Increasingly they

affect all aspects of global society. Linear projections based on current trends cannot provide an

effective basis for future planning. This study therefore aims to flag for DoD leadership some

key policy issues raised by these accelerating technological trends, especially those that need to

be addressed in the near term (i.e., the next 2 to 3 years).

1.2 Accelerating Technological Change and the Globalization of ST&E

To illustrate the potential for technological change in the 16 years until 2030, it is instructive to

consider the evolution of the science, technology & engineering (ST&E) landscape over the last

16 years. In 1998, the human genome had yet to be sequenced; today, personal genome

sequencing products are entering the commercial market. Twitter and Facebook did not exist,

and Google had just been founded; today, social media is an integral part of the public’s daily

experience and is becoming mainstream, while the collection, analysis, and display of huge

amounts of information underpins much of today’s economy and governance. In robotics, few

unmanned vehicles were fielded by the U.S. military; today, thousands of unmanned aerial

vehicles are routinely employed on complex public and private missions, and unmanned ground

and sea vehicles are becoming common. The field of nanotechnology was still a relatively

obscure science; today, more than 1,000 commercial products contain nanotechnology

components, with a potential global market of $3 trillion by 2020. Also, in 1998 the prospects for

U.S. energy independence were not encouraging; today, hydraulic fracking technology has

created a boom in U.S. oil and gas production that may allow us to achieve that goal of energy

independence by 2020. Beyond these examples, it is important to understand that because of the

6 Linton Wells II, “Tech Changes Affect U.S. Security,” Defense News, January 22, 2012

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120122/DEFFEAT05/301220002/Tech-Changes-Affect-U-S-Security 7 

See http://www.defense.gov/pubs/2014_Quadrennial_Defense_Review.pdf, page 9.
5

accelerating rate of technological change today, the amount of change we can expect by 2030 is

likely to be much greater than we have experienced since 1998, and it will be qualitatively

different as technology areas become more highly integrated and interactive.

In another well-known example, “Moore’s Law8” states that the number of transistors on a

computer chip is doubling about every 2 years, a rate which has held true since the 1960s. If the

trend holds, computing power per unit cost (a more general formulation) will increase by about

500% by 2020 and more than 12,800% by 2030.9 More importantly, a recent analytic study10 has

found that a broader postulate, called Wright’s Law, generically predicts similar exponential

behavior for 62 technologies over several decades. Such rapid advances across a breadth of

technology areas mean that it will become harder to predict the large-scale consequences of such

technological change even in the relatively near future. In any case, linear projections of current

trends simply cannot work in this environment.

Although attempts to forecast technological developments are not new, their methodologies and

effectiveness are often debated.11 As an example, in 2010 a study was done of the performance

of an earlier long-term technology forecasting effort on behalf of Army S&T.12 One of the things

it found was that the impacts of several key advances were missed that related to the explosion of

the Internet, IT and wireless applications, and social media. A follow-on analysis13 noted, “...the

missed areas were all stimulated by developments outside DoD and were more in the nature of

very rapid technology exploitation in the marketplace, with unintended consequences for

national security. As DoD becomes a smaller player in the global S&T enterprise, such missed

forecasts are increasingly likely unless more robust [technology forecasting] methods are

employed that involve broad-based participation of subject matter experts beyond DoD and the

United States...”

In spite of these formidable challenges, a number of countries and organizations have developed

successful foresight capabilities that have allowed them to anticipate elements of change,

including technological change, build the capacity to mitigate its risks, and effectively exploit its

development. 14 Doing so requires persistent, pervasive, and rigorous efforts to collect

information, analyze and synthesize it, and, most importantly, integrate the resulting insights

effectively into decisionmaking and planning. DoD will need to develop these capabilities in

better ways to navigate a complex and uncertain future.

8

It is recognized that “Moore’s Law” is not a law, per se, but an observation that has proved useful over time.

9 This projects 2 year doubling periods beginning in June 2014. Some suggest the doubling period is 18 months, in

which case the increase in five years would be over 900%, in ten years over 10,000% and by 15 years over 100,000

percent (!). Others say the rate ultimately will slow. In any case, linear projections can’t work.

10 See Statistical Basis for Predicting Technological Progress, Santa Fe Institute, July 2012; see

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1207.1463.pdf

11 For example, see this DoD ATL report comparing performance of different methods of technology forecasting:

www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=ADA568107

12 Improving the Army’s Next Effort in Technology Forecasting, J.W. Lyons, R. Chait, and S. Erchov (ed), NDU

Defense & Technology Paper Number 73 (2010). http://ctnsp.dodlive.mil/files/2013/07/DTP-073.pdf

13 Globalization of S&T: Key Challenges Facing DOD, Timothy Coffey and Steven Ramberg, NDU Defense &

Technology Paper Number 91 (2012), p. 33. http://ctnsp.dodlive.mil/files/2013/08/DTP-091.pdf

14 For example, foresight methods for government policy are used increasingly in the EU and Singapore; see

http://www.iss.europa.eu/fileadmin/euiss/documents/Books/Yearbook/2.1_Foresight_in_governments.pdf, and

www.rahs.org.sg/ and http://www.csf.sg/
6

1.3 GeoInnovation

A fundamental, if disquieting, reality is that the concepts, outputs, and interactions of the BRINE

technologies will profoundly affect the future international security environment in ways that

cannot be controlled by the United States, much less the U.S. military. This reality will be

exacerbated by the fact that America’s share of global research is steadily declining. One

estimate is that America’s fraction of the global S&T enterprise will shrink from 26% today to

about 18% by 2050. 15 Even more problematic is that U.S. defense research represents a

diminishing percentage of U.S. research output, and future budgetary challenges may accelerate

this trend. For example, in the 1970s, DoD S&T personnel represented about 1/20th of the total

researchers in the world, whereas today they represent about 1/800th of the world’s total.16 If

these trends continue, the U.S. military faces the very real prospect of losing its technological

preeminence in important areas.

While these trends should be a source of concern by themselves, perhaps more important is the

way current ST&E capacities are distributed globally. Many other countries have now embraced

ST&E as a key enabler of economic growth, social change, diplomacy, and military capabilities.

ST&E innovations increasingly come from a distributed geographic landscape of national and

private sector entities, many of which view themselves as direct competitors to U.S. interests.

This trend will only intensify, and the opportunities and risks it provides need to be addressed as

strategic issues. Section 2.1.2 therefore proposes the development of GeoInnovation as a new

strategic variable to monitor these trends and analyze their future impacts.

A 2010 workshop by the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies investigated the potential

influence of emerging technologies on future international security and reached several

important conclusions.17 For example, “There is a direct correlation between a country’s place in

the global hierarchy and S&T capabilities. Modern technology is central to the pursuit of

national goals for all nations - big or small. However, the pace of technological change across

continents and countries is never uniform.... In a globalized world, technology access and

technology denial play key roles in determining the fate of nations.” And, “In short, the

technologies of the future will once again determine the fate of nations.”

Yet, in spite of this increasing importance of the globalization of science, technology, and

commercialization resources, DoD and the United States in general pay relatively little attention

to building the capabilities necessary to track these changes, leverage these resources, and

account for their potential effects in national policy, strategic planning, and budgeting processes.

These facts, however, have not been lost on other countries, many of which are becoming

increasingly more organized and effective at harvesting resources, talent, and intellectual

property from the global ST&E enterprise.18

For DoD to remain a technological leader in the coming decades, it must start today to build the

capabilities to understand and harvest benefits of the complex global ST&E environment, as well

as prepare for its potential effects on our future national security. A recent report by the Center

15 Coffey and Ramberg, DTP 91, op.cit., p.1

16 Ibid, p. 17

17 The Interface of Science, Technology, and Security, APCSS Workshop proceedings; see

http://www.apcss.org/college/publications/the-interface-of-science-technology-security/

18 Aside from well known efforts by major powers such as China and Russia, other countries rapidly building their

S&T capacity include Iran, Vietnam, and India.
7

for a New American Security observed that “retaining technological dominance is a strategic

choice... the nation must actively break down the bureaucratic antibodies that resist investment

in innovation and redouble its focus on sustaining technological dominance.”

19 Secretary Hagel

also recently stated, “We must maintain our technological edge over potential adversaries,”

adding that, “the military must be ready and capable to respond quickly to all contingencies and

decisively defeat any opponent should deterrence fail.” 20 And for the U.S. armed forces to

remain, as Secretary Panetta termed it, “the world’s finest military,” our investment in and

understanding of key technological opportunities and risks should be as much a part of global

strategy debates as geopolitics, demographics, economics, and the nature of conflict.

1.4 Synergistic Technology Revolutions

By any historical measure, the pace of innovation in ST&E today is very fast, and it continues to

accelerate. Diverse factors underlie this behavior. In the basic sciences, the information

revolution has made widely available new concepts, vast online databases, powerful modeling

and analysis methods, and collaborative tools that greatly enhance the speed of new discovery.

The development of new technologies benefits from these same factors but also includes

economic factors related to commercialization and deployment and is increasingly driven by

tools for e-commerce, e-marketing, crowdsourcing, and crowdfunding. Another factor driving

this rapid innovation is the globalization of ST&E, as even developing nations are now funding

and developing advanced ST&E capabilities in hopes of generating high-value economic growth.

International organizations such as the Organization for Economic Cooperation and

Development (OECD),21as well as the U.S. Department of State and the U.S. Agency for

International Development (USAID), 22 increasingly view ST&E as a tool of diplomacy,

cooperation, and mutual economic development. Finally, an increasingly important factor is the

cross-fertilization of concepts, tools, and methods in research and engineering disciplines,

particularly in the rapidly evolving areas of BRINE.23 Each of these technological areas benefits

from new innovations and tools developing in the other areas, and it is at the intersection of these

disciplines that some of the most rapid and unexpected technological innovation is occurring,

with the greatest national security implications.

To support the policy focus of this paper, a study was conducted of the current landscape and

future trends of the five elements of the BRINE technologies. Detailed descriptions of the results

are contained in Appendices B–F. This section contains a brief summary of the appendices to

provide a context for the policy, legal, ethical and other recommendations.

Biology, Biotechnology, Medicine: The biological sciences today are experiencing the kind of

profound transformation that the field of physics did over a century ago. Principal drivers of this

revolution include genomics and gene-mapping technologies; mathematical modeling and

bioinformatics; advanced materials for sensors, characterization, and medical devices; and

increasingly integrated microelectronics and nanotechnologies. These advances are already

19 Game Changers: Disruptive Technology and U.S. Defense Strategy, Center for a New American Security, 2013;

available at: http://www.cnas.org/files/documents/publications/CNAS_Gamechangers_BrimleyFitzGeraldSayler.pdf

20 See http://whnt.com/2014/02/24/defense-secretary-chuck-hagel-to-recommend-deep-budget-cuts-targeting-paybenefits/

21 See http://www.oecd.org/

22 See http://www.usaid.gov/

23 See “U.S. seen as weak on global research collaboration, ”International New York Times,” July 21, 2014, p. 7
8

resulting in the development of numerous transformational technologies and applications, such

as rapid biochemical detection and characterization, genetic modification of organisms,

personalized medicine, stem cells and regenerative medicine, neuroscience and brain mapping,

and synthetic biology. These developments will have major ramifications for DoD with respect

to improving warfighter performance, lowering health-care costs, ensuring biochemical defense,

promoting counterterrorism, and augmenting human cognition. However, there are important

legal, policy, and ethics issues related to these emerging technologies, including asymmetries in

cultural norms and political perceptions potential opponents have about their use.

Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, and Human Augmentation: After decades of research and

development, a wide range of technologies is now being commercialized that can augment or

replace human physical and intellectual capabilities. Advances in sensors, materials, electronics,

human interfaces, control algorithms, and power sources are making robots commercially

viable—from personal devices to industrial-scale facilities. Several countries, including the

United States, now have large-scale national initiatives aimed at capturing this burgeoning

economic sector. Artificial intelligence has also made major advances in recent years, and

although still limited to “weak” artificial intelligence, or AI, general-purpose artificial

intelligence may be available within a decade. Transformational applications include low-cost

autonomous manufacturing, health and medicine, advanced autonomous vehicles for battlefield

and hazardous operations, smart logistics, and, increasingly, embedded systems and the Internet

of Things (IoT). The IoT, which increasingly is being referred to as the “Web of Everything,”

also links closely with developments in ICT.24 Developments like exoskeletons and direct brainmachine interfaces can combine with contributions from bioscience and cognitive science to

augment human performance significantly. These technologies have great promise for DoD in

reducing manpower requirements, improving health care and lowering costs, increasing

efficiency, enhancing decisionmaking, and reducing risks to humans. However, important policy,

legal, and ethical considerations now are surfacing in this area, such as the use of drones in U.S.

airspace or how to control autonomous weapons systems lacking human supervision (i.e., “Kill

Bots”). As an important study points out, other countries and the private sector are taking the

lead in these areas, and the United States must begin to prepare for warfare in the robotic age.

25

Information and Communication Technologies and Cognitive Science: The development and

deployment of new ICT continues to underpin some of the greatest changes in human history.

Advances are being driven by widespread interest in speed, mobility, commoditization/open

source development, big data, the cloud, and the IoT (Web of Everything). As the digital

networking of people and devices continues to accelerate, from micro-sensors to global networks,

the volume of information online is increasing at an exponential rate. ICT are also greatly

facilitating research and development in ST&E areas across the BRINE framework. Emerging

technologies and capabilities include ubiquitous sensing, ubiquitous network access, big data,

increasingly sophisticated social media, virtual reality and telepresence, advanced decisionsupport tools, and exotic computing architectures, such as quantum computers. As humans

struggle to comprehend this sea of information, cognitive science is becoming more important,

24 Since early 2014, commentators have been extending references about the “Internet of Things” to the “Internet of

Everything” as, for example, the human body increasingly becomes a platform for wearable and embedded devices;

See for example: http://internetofeverything.cisco.com/ The “Web of Everything” suggests that devices and services

can interact directly with less dependence on the underlying infrastructure.

25 Robert O. Work and Shawn Brimley, 20YY: Preparing for War in the Robotic Age, Center for New American

Studies, 2014, http://www.cnas.org/sites/default/files/publications-pdf/CNAS_20YY_WorkBrimley.pdf
9

and rapid advances are being made in understanding and augmenting human cognition. These

can contribute to advanced capabilities for pervasive environmental sensing and situational

awareness, open source Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR), smart logistics,

distributed Command-Control-Communications-Computers (C4), education and training,

improved human creativity, and even strategic communications and humanitarian support.

However, DoD has also found itself increasingly challenged with being able to acquire and

exploit cutting-edge ICT on competitive timelines and defend against a wide range of new

threats and malicious actors.

Nanotechnology and Advanced Materials: Advances in materials have been central to human

progress for millennia. Today, the revolutions in new materials and nanotechnology are

becoming comparable to the revolutions in biology and ICT. Advanced materials, such as hybrid

composites and multi-functional materials, are already providing significantly improved

performance and lowered weight and cost to a wide range of products. Nanotechnology, a

collection of tools and methods to manipulate matter at the atomic scale, now spans nearly all

research and engineering disciplines, and product development is increasing in every business

sector. Potentially transformational technologies and capabilities include multi-functional

materials (e.g., combined physical, electrical, and optical properties), micro- and meta-materials,

smart materials, nanomaterials, nanoelectronics, nanomedicine and pharmaceuticals, and highly

functionalized nanodevices, such as nanosensors and nanomachines. Advanced materials have

the potential to revolutionize almost every technology and industrial sector and could also apply,

for example, to conformal antennas and power supplies for DEW. Related methods for advanced

manufacturing also are important, and global competition is now fierce to develop and

commercialize them. DoD could benefit from them across a wide range of application areas;

however, it will be a significant challenge for DoD and the United States in general to maintain

technological and commercial leadership in the face of increasing globalization.

Energy: After decades of research, many new energy technologies are now being

commercialized, facilitated by advances in other areas of BRINE. Particular focus areas in the

United States have been on alternate energy sources, new storage methods, increased efficiency,

and smart energy management. The last two areas are exceptionally important, along with

effective design, since demand reduction is the first step in efficient energy use.26 Areas that are

now maturing and are potentially transformational include advanced solar cells, biofuels, exotic

batteries, next-generation fuel cells, ultracapacitors, energy harvesting, and smart power grid

systems. These capabilities have many DoD applications, for example, for expeditionary energy

for ourselves and our partners. However, in just the last few years, the global landscape of

energy production has seen a seismic shift, as vast North American reserves of oil and gas have

been unlocked by hydraulic fracking and horizontal drilling. This will have not only profound

consequences for U.S. energy security and economic growth but also almost certainly a

significant impact on geopolitics, as influence shifts among major producers. As the largest

operator of facilities and vehicles in the world, DoD has pursued and should continue to pursue

alternate energy sources and increased efficiencies; however, the commercial viability of nonfossil energy sources may once again come into question as oil and natural gas prices drop. A

number of important policy choices are now presenting themselves; for example: What policy

and operational guidance could significantly reduce DoD demand for energy across multiple

26 Amory B. Lovins and Rocky Mountain Institute, Reinventing Fire, White River Junction, Vermont, Chelsea

Green Publishing, 2011, p. xiii. Summary at: http://www.rmi.org/reinventingfire
10

technologies? Could DoD significantly enhance its operational flexibility if it could negotiate

agreements with allies and key coalition partners to make their biofuels usable in U.S. systems?

1.5 Disruptive Convergent Technologies

Convergent technologies are hybrid systems that incorporate novel or cutting-edge capabilities

from two or more scientific or engineering disciplines. They often result in capabilities that are

major leaps of innovation, sometimes with rapid and unexpected repercussions. The cell phone is

such an example, as it largely reflected the engineering-level integration of several existing

technologies rather than fundamentally new ones, but the combination provided radically new

capabilities that have had profound global impacts.

As ST&E disciplines increasingly overlap, the cross-fertilization of concepts and tools across the

BRINE areas is resulting in a number of rapidly developing ST&E areas that are truly new and

potentially disruptive. Advances such as synthetic biology and 3D printing, particularly in Do-ItYourself (DIY) communities, are potentially transformational, but also fraught with new risks. In

biology, developments in human behavioral modeling, neuro-economics, and brain mapping are

creating powerful new tools for understanding ourselves and society, all of which are affected by

developments in informatics. In robotics and artificial intelligence, human augmentation and

direct brain interfaces could stretch the boundaries of what it means to be human, and the

potential threats and vulnerabilities are still unknown.27 Cyberspace continues to expand and

evolve at an unparalleled rate, and as it increasingly becomes a Web of Everything, many sociopolitical issues in the legal, ethical, security, and regulatory realms are surfacing. Tactically

useful DEW are emerging from developments in power supplies, pointing and tracking, and

advanced beam forming, including tools like meta-materials. They may change the face of

modern warfare. The convergence of energy and new materials, plus ICT in advanced design and

manufacturing, can contribute to hypersonics, which the Air Force considers transformational.28

As autonomous systems such as commercial micro-UAVs and self-driving cars begin to interface

with humans in intimate ways, thus changing the patterns of society, a host of new, poorly

understood vulnerabilities will accompany the new functionalities. These technologies, by

themselves, will certainly have national security opportunities and risks associated with them.

However, since they are mostly developing in the private sector, and spreading rapidly through it,

their economic, social, and political effects are felt globally. Since DoD exists within the larger

framework of global society, it will be vulnerable to these larger changes and disruptions and

will need to understand, anticipate, and adapt to them.

27 In April 2014 one of the authors had a valuable conversation with some Naval Academy midshipmen and asked

them what technologies they thought their children would use to befuddle them to the same degree they befuddle

their parents now. Several answered that they thought it would be the convergence between info, bio, and robotics –

“cyborgization,” if you will. Instead of “Hey, mom and dad, I got a tattoo!” it could be, “Hey, mom and dad, I got an

implant!” or “Suzie and I plan to hang out tonight and meld our brain waves.” Or whatever....

28 USAF’s Hypersonics Road Map Sets a Long-Term View, http://aviationweek.com/awin/usaf-s-hypersonics-roadmap-sets-long-term-view
11

2. Policy, Legal, Ethical, and Other National Security-Related

Recommendations

By 2030, advanced technologies are likely to have moved beyond being the important enablers

of economies, armed forces, and socio-political movements that they are today to becoming key

components of the national security environment itself. During this period, however, the United

States will find itself a steadily less dominant player in the global ST&E enterprise, and it will

need to manage and exploit its ST&E resources more efficiently and effectively to remain at the

cutting edge. This potential loss of technological leadership will occur even more rapidly for

DoD, as many cutting-edge technologies increasingly will be developed in the private sector and

by other nations. The 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) states, “While the global

technology landscape indicates that the United States should not plan to rely on unquestioned

technical leadership in all fields, the Department must ensure that technological superiority is

maintained in areas most critical to meeting current and future military challenges.”29 Several

recent national security studies have recommended specific emerging technology areas and

organizational changes on which DoD should focus to mitigate these trends. Seven of these

studies are summarized in Appendix A. This section provides a set of broader recommendations

that go beyond the technologies themselves and address the longer term issues of cultural change,

management, and planning.

DoD and other national security agencies face significant challenges in identifying, procuring,

and exploiting the most cutting-edge technologies and capabilities, and they will need to change

their organizations and cultures to adapt to accelerating, interactive technological change. Most

technologies are, by themselves, merely tools, but these tools are turned into capabilities when

adopted and used by people, organizations, societies, and governments. They become effective

when they are integrated into socio-technical systems, which involve learning, training, process

development, strategy, and organizational and cultural adaptation. In DoD, these elements are

captured within the DOTMLPF-P analytical structure described earlier. Some of the greatest

hurdles that DoD faces in responding to accelerating technological change involve nonmaterial

elements (“DOTmLPF-P”). Additionally, one of the greatest impediments to DoD innovation

lies in its acquisition system; however, this is a challenge that has been debated for decades, and

indeed there is another significant effort currently underway to reform the acquisition regulations,

so we will not discuss it here.

Below are 12 sections offering cross-cutting recommendations that address these broader policy,

legal, ethical, and organizational issues. They focus on areas that could have significant longterm impacts, but where there will be opportunities for shaping actions and capacity building

within the next 2–3 years. These areas are as follows:

Cross-Cutting Areas

1. Foresight as an Integral Component of DoD Planning Processes

2. ST&E Capacity as a Strategic Variable (GeoInnovation)

3. International Technology Governance and Standards Bodies

4. Framework for Enhanced Collaboration With the Private Sector

29 See page 25, http://www.defense.gov/pubs/2014_Quadrennial_Defense_Review.pdf
30 Thanks to our colleagues Neyla Arnas and Josh Kerbel for these insights.

12

5. Expanding Privacy Issues

6. Impacts of Emerging Technologies on the Present and Future DoD Workforce

7. Future Defense Industrial and Technology Base

Technology-Specific Areas

1. ICT and Cyberspace

2. Energy

3. Unmanned and Autonomous Military Systems

4. Directed-Energy Weapons

5. Biotechnology

While these recommendations are focused on DoD leadership strategies, many of them will be

most effective if coordinated with the leadership of other Federal agencies, the states, the private

sector, academia, and other countries and international organizations. This may seem a daunting

challenge; however, models exist outside the United States, where other countries are effectively

using foresight, strategic planning, and international engagement to enhance their ST&E

enterprises and become technological and economic leaders. The United States can and must

address these choices.

The remainder of this section covers these recommendations in detail. Sections 3.1.1 to3.1.7 deal

with cross-cutting topics across several of the ST&E revolutions areas; Sections 3.2.1 to 3.2.5 are

more focused on specific technologies.

2.1 Cross-Cutting Areas

2.1.1 Foresight as an Integral Component of DoD Planning Processes

There is much DoD can do to anticipate and prepare in better ways for the effects of accelerating

technological change on the future global security environment. Foresight methods, versus

forecasting tools, can be important tools for thinking about the future. Forecasting extrapolates

predictions, based on identified trends, while foresight is about anticipating the broader range of

possibilities that could emerge from developing strategic conditions. The U.S. Government often

is behind the curve here: the Cold War’s end and rapid technological innovation have diminished

the effectiveness of planning approaches that are primarily analytical/reductive/quantitative

approaches. These were built for a complicated world, but not a complex one. Today’s

increasingly complex world requires more synergistic/holistic/creative perspectives, which

unfortunately remain relatively rare.30

To support more effective foresight, the U.S. Government will need to build or expand its

capabilities for assessing technological situational awareness, understanding the potential

impacts of technological developments on militaries and societies, and incorporating these

insights broadly into strategic planning. It will also require outreach and coordination well

beyond DoD—to other Federal agencies, the private sector, and international actors. There is no

single answer to these challenges—some activities should examine new technologies, some,

nonmaterial ways of using existing systems more effectively. Some should look at generational
13

change, some at structures and incentives. Innovation needs to be addressed across the

dimensions of people, processes, organizations, and technology. While these efforts will not be

simple, the eventual cost of not developing these capabilities could be catastrophic.

Elements of the above capabilities do exist in DoD and other agencies; however, they are often

isolated, incomplete, episodic, and poorly accounted for in planning processes. What is needed is

a persistent, pervasive, and rigorous set of activities that are institutionalized and valued by DoD

leadership. There are several recommendations below to enhance these capabilities.

 Enhance Horizon-Scanning Activities for Emerging Technology: Technological horizonscanning activities are critical to identifying ST&E developments globally and assessing their

potential consequences. Such activities exist to some extent within DoD, for example within

the Technical Intelligence Office of The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and

Engineering (ASD(R&E)), and also are addressed by occasional studies of the Defense

Science Board (DSB) and other periodic assessments, such as the National Intelligence

Council’s (NIC) Global Trends studies. However, the accelerating pace of technological

change and the increasing globalization of ST&E require that such horizon-scanning efforts

be continuous, more extensive, and more in depth.

To enhance global situational awareness of emerging technology developments, DoD should

consider a number of organizational and policy actions to enhance its capabilities. The recent

DSB 2030 study has generally suggested increasing budgets for programs related to

monitoring the maturity of technology developments globally.31 More formal mechanisms

should be created that can effectively scan for and synthesize technology developments, as

have been proposed in a 2009 National Academy of Sciences32 study. Such efforts have been

implemented within the Singapore33 government, for example. In a previous CTNSP study,34

Drs. Coffey and Ramberg proposed funding DoD personnel from defense labs to serve as

“brain cells” for monitoring foreign technology developments by attending conferences and

developing professional relationships with foreign scientists in targeted areas, essentially

developing enhanced Human Intelligence (HUMINT) for foreign scientific and technological

developments.

A particularly effective and efficient strategy for horizon-scanning can be the development or

use of existing online data mining or synthesis platforms. These platforms include collective

intelligence environments such as The Millennium Project, 35 prediction markets such as

SciCast 36or Longbets, 37 online Delphi environments such as TechCast, 38 and ongoing

collaborative environments such as Intellipedia.39 While some of these environments are used

in limited ways by DoD, there should be a more centralized, thorough, and institutionalized

capability to harvest insights from these increasingly powerful sources.

31 See http://www.defenseinnovationmarketplace.mil/resources/DSB2030-TechnologyInnovationEnablers2030.pdf

32See: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12834

33 See: http://www.rsis.edu.sg/cens/publications/conference_reports/RSIS_ICEDTReport_050110.pdf

34 See Globalization of S&T: Key Challenges Facing DOD, Timothy Coffey and Steven Ramberg, NDU Defense &

Technology Paper Number 91 (2012).

35 See: http://millennium-project.org/

36 See: www.scicast.org

37 See: www.longbets.org

38 See: www.techcastglobal.com

39 See: www.intelink.gov
14

Finally, DoD should consider creating mechanisms to engage more effectively with the large

number of futures and technology policy organizations and experts that have horizonscanning activities. Creating a virtual community of interest (CoI) to explore emerging

technologies and their national security implications would provide a very cost-effective,

consensus-based process that could scope technology trends and evaluate potential scenarios.

Similarly, extending this CoI to emerging technology and foresight activities in other Federal

agencies, for example through the Public Sector Foresight Network, 40 could provide

significant benefit at low cost. The knowledge generated by these activities should

additionally be captured in synthesis reports that could inform other DoD analysis and

strategic planning processes.

 Improve Estimates of Future Military Capabilities: To turn technological intelligence into

useful information regarding the future security environment, it is important to assess the

potential military value of emerging technologies, as well as their effect on other strategic

variables. Activities to assess the future military applications of emerging technologies occur

periodically and for limited areas, but because of the increasing pace of technology

development, an ongoing and broad effort in this area is necessary to avoid technological

surprise and to leverage potentially high impact technologies.

DoD should seek to enhance its ability to forecast new and transformational military

capabilities that will arise from emerging technologies and to broadly incorporate or respond

to them. A number of publications at CTNSP have explored the effectiveness of past DoD

technology forecasting efforts and also proposed some improvements.41 The DSB 2030 study

has recommended funding conceptual application studies to explore these areas, as well as

funding red-teaming and experimentation activities. The NextTech project,42 funded by the

Office of the Secretary of Defense’s (OSD) Rapid Reaction Technology Office, is an

excellent example of a study that incorporated a broad range of policy, legal, and societal

factors in examining potential future effects of emerging technology and should serve as a

model for other efforts. The U.S. Army’s “Mad Scientist” workshops43 were also an effective

means of exploring the future destructive use of emerging technology, in particular by nonstate actors, and should be replicated. Other mechanisms such as online gaming, for example,

the Massively Multiplayer Online Wargame Leveraging the Internet44 (MMOWGLI), could

provide a very effective, tailorable, and low-cost crowdsourcing environment to explore

future military capabilities and potential future doctrine.

Because of the accelerating rate of technological change and its increasingly broad impacts,

the common approach of occasional studies in limited areas is unlikely to provide effective

foresight for DoD on future military capabilities available to itself or its adversaries.

Therefore, DoD should consider funding or creating a center devoted to developing foresight

about how emerging technology could impact national and international security. This center

should engage in outreach to the entire national security ST&E and policy community, as

40 See: www.altfutures.org/psfn

41 See CTNSP Defense and Technology Papers No. 71, 73, and 95, available at:

http://ctnsp.dodlive.mil/category/publications/defense-technology-papers/

42 For a summary report about the NexTech project, see:

www.cnas.org/files/documents/publications/CNAS_Gamechangers_BrimleyFitzGeraldSayler_0.pdf

43 E.g.,see: www.wired.com/2009/01/armys-mad-scien/

44 See: https://portal.mmowgli.nps.edu/
15

well as the private sector, to serve the role of an integrator and synthesizer of a wide range of

information in these areas, and the outputs of this center should be crafted to inform a range

of DoD planning and budgeting activities.

 Incorporate Foresight into DoD Strategic Planning Processes: DoD’s present approach to

strategic planning tends to be episodic—quadrennial defense reviews, once-peradministration National Security Strategies, studies leading to occasional executive orders,

and the like. The pace of change outlined in this study suggests that this is far too infrequent.

There are other models, such as in Singapore,45 where foresight is routinely and effectively

incorporated into governmental processes and developments. Although their focus is well

beyond ST&E, similar approaches aimed at anticipatory governance,

46 which incorporate

continuous feedback loops, not only can greatly reduce the likelihood of technological (and

other) surprise but also can improve U.S. government efforts to be proactive. DoD would not

only benefit from such a paradigm but also could also take the lead in promoting such

approaches across the U.S. Government.

Developing such an overarching governance framework will require many organizational and

cultural changes, but there are a number of steps that could begin this process. The DSB 2030

study has recommended exploring mechanisms whereby senior DoD leadership can be

alerted to emerging technology capabilities that could have significant impact. The Center for

a New American Security (CNAS) report on the NexTech project has recommended the

creation of a White House Interagency Working Group on Emerging Technology and

National Security. Another potential option is to create a function at the National Security

Council that evaluates national security impacts of rapidly emerging technology areas and

potential threats. In terms of planning, a significant advance would be to begin building

potential future technology capabilities into DoD’s long-range planning scenarios. More fully

leveraging the work of North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO) long-term futures

program47 and its European collaborators would be an effective step as well. These actions

would increase the likelihood that the knowledge generated by the horizon-scanning and

foresight activities discussed previously would be effectively utilized by DoD to anticipate

the future global security environment.

 Build Whole-of-Government/Whole-of-Society Efforts: Accelerating technological change

will affect all of global society across many areas, and DoD is not equipped to understand

fully or deal with these ramifications by itself. It must be proactive in reaching out to and

coordinating with the rest of the Federal Government to monitor, plan for, and prepare

responses to profound change and potential threats to the nation. A Whole-of-Government

(WoG) mindset, indeed Whole-of-Society (WoS), will be increasingly important. While

WoG approaches are difficult, there has been some success at formulating conceptual

frameworks and developing appropriate mechanisms.

DoD could take a number of actions in the near future to enhance WoG activities to prepare

for the future security environment. As in other sectors, ICT can be a broad and cost45 Singapore Centre for Strategic Futures (www.csf.sg/) and Risk Assessment Horizon Scanning

(RAHS) (www.rahs.gov.sg/)

46 Anticipatory Governance: Practical Upgrades, Leon Fuerth, October 2012, see:

http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/Anticipatory_Governance_Practical_Upgrades.pdf

47 See: www.act.nato.int/futures-work
16

effective tool, for example in developing collaborative spaces across agencies on specific

topic areas. The report on anticipatory governance referenced above outlines a systematic

framework and specific recommendations for using foresight and continuous adaptation

across Federal agencies to coordinate planning and resources. Project Horizon,48 conducted

in 2006–2007, provides an excellent example of WoG strategic course-of-action planning

based on future world scenarios and should be repeated periodically. Additionally, enhanced

engagement with international futures and strategic planning activities, such as the Global

Futures Forum and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)

futures program,49 would be highly beneficial to DoD for providing global perspective at low

cost. While full implementation of some of the actions above will require the authority of the

White House, DoD can provide strong leadership and a focus on the future international

security environment.

2.1.2 ST&E Capacity as a Strategic Variable (GeoInnovation)

In a future environment where advanced technologies underpin militaries, economies, and

societies, the capacity to create and adopt new technologies will become as important as other

strategic resources, such as energy or population. Some countries have considered ST&E

capabilities or technology commercialization infrastructure as key national resources, but they

are rare. Today, as ST&E becomes increasingly globalized, many nations are racing to develop

these resources and there is an increasingly intense competition for talent, capital, intellectual

property, and infrastructure. These elements are key to the process of technological development

and are strong indicators of the future technological sophistication and competitiveness of a

nation or region. Yet no formalized framework exists to study these factors as a global resource

or their effects on the future national security environment.

An analytic framework needs to be developed for a new key strategic variable, namely, the study

of how ST&E assets, commercialization resources, and technology adoption capacities are

distributed globally, and how they may affect the economic and global security environment in

the future. Analogous to the study of geopolitics, this variable could be termed GeoInnovation.

The factors contributing to GeoInnovation ultimately enhance the diplomatic, information,

military, and economic (DIME) levers of national power by underpinning the future economic,

military, and political power of a nation. GeoInnovation factors, however, are leading indicators

(by years or even decades) as they reflect the future capacity to develop and deploy technological

innovations.50

A number of existing resources could inform a more integrated framework for GeoInnovation. A

2006 study by Rand 51 addressed in depth the development of emerging technologies, their

potential impact, and the likelihood of various countries being able to develop them and is a

good model for future studies. The NIC’s Global Trends assessments52 also deal with aspects of

how technologies and technological capacities of countries may affect the future international

48 See interimreport: http://www.osif.us/images/Project_Horizon_Progress_Report.pdf

49See:http://www.prospective-foresight.com/spip.php?article547

50 GeoInnovation can build on Innovation Theory, which stresses that the holistic flow of technology and

information among people, enterprises and institutions is key to the innovative process on the national or regional

level. For example, see the OECD publication: http://www.oecd.org/science/inno/2101733.pdf

51See: http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR303.html

52 See the homepage: http://www.dni.gov/index.php/about/organization/national-intelligence-council-global-trends
17

security environment. A recent study by the National Academies of Science53 discussed the

national S&T strategies of six major nations and their potential implications for future U.S.

national security. Private sector analytic firms also provide analyses of the technological capacity

of various regions and nations, such as Cientifica’s adoption and commercialization index54 for

different countries. Numerous other sources of data are also available, such as the National

Science Foundation’s (NSF) Science and Engineering Indicators and OECD economic data,

which can form the basis of an initial global assessment of GeoInnovation.

The recommendation is that DoD should consider funding a major study to assess the usefulness

of a GeoInnovation analytic framework, the resources that would be required, and how this

knowledge and insight could be directly utilized within medium- and long-term strategic

planning and budgeting processes.

2.1.3 International Technology Governance and Standards Bodies

The development, commercialization, and adoption of new technologies depend critically on

technology standards developed by international bodies, such as the International Organization

for Standardization (ISO).55 Similarly, the governance of global technological infrastructure also

increasingly depends on a number of international bodies, such as the International

Telecommunications Union (ITU),56 the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers

(ICANN), 57 and the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT).58 The

activities of these organizations can deeply affect future technology development, markets,

economies, national security, and safety and privacy issues, among other areas. In recent years,

the United States has become increasingly detached from the activities of many of these bodies.

It represents a disturbing trend at a time when critical issues about some emerging technology

areas are being decided. 59 This is potentially a serious threat to future U.S. economic and

national security, and in fact other countries are increasingly taking advantage of this lack of U.S.

engagement.

Particularly important areas that are in rapid flux include Internet governance, standards for

nanomaterials and their safety, international standards for biofuels, safety of synthetic biology,

and governance of domestic and military use of autonomous robotic systems. A number of

organizations are involved in policy development for national and international governance of

emerging technologies and can serve as a resource.

60,61,62

53See:http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12920&page=35

54 See: http://www.cientifica.com/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2012/10/EmTech-Index-2012.pdf

55 See: http://www.iso.org/iso/home.html

56 See: http://www.itu.int

57 See: http://www.icann.org/

58 See: http://www.internetsociety.org/wcit

59 See, for example, Nigel Cameron’s June 10, 2014 C-PET (Center for Policy on Emerging Technologies)

conversation with Sally Wentworth, Vice President for Global Policy Development at the Internet Society (ISOC),

on the future of Internet governance. She reviews the evolution of Internet governance from WSIS 2003/5 through

WCIT and Net Mundo and notes that the United States’ “multi-stakeholder” approach to Internet governance is not

finding acceptance. She sees a greater need for innovation and for the ability of net users to be engaged in

decisionmaking. http://www.c-pet.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Sally-Wentworth-June-10th.mp3

60 See: http://www.oecd.org/science/sci-tech/meetingglobalchallengesthroughbettergovernanceinternationalcooperationinsciencetechnologyandinnovation.htm

61 See http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/20463/technology_governance_20.html
18

The United States must recognize that the development, deployment, and management of

advanced technologies and critical infrastructures are key components of economic and national

security. Moreover, this security is being increasingly threatened not only by the globalization of

technological resources but also by proactive strategies by particular countries to increase their

influence via these channels. DoD leaders should work, in concert with other agencies such as

the Departments of State and Commerce, to craft new policies and strategies to engage more

effectively with international technology bodies and lobby for positive U.S. outcomes. DoD

should consider advocating for an interagency working group to develop such unified crossagency efforts, which will also require outreach to U.S. private sector entities.

2.1.4 Framework for Enhanced Collaboration With the Private Sector

Most technological innovation and deployment occurs outside of the Federal Government, and

DoD activities represent an even smaller fraction of the national innovation enterprise. As ST&E

becomes increasingly globalized, and U.S. Federal budgets potentially remain austere, DoD will

find itself increasingly challenged to marshal the resources necessary to maintain technological

leadership. An effective strategy, however, is to leverage the resources of other Federal agencies,

and in particular, the private sector. Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) and Public-Private

Cooperation (PPC) represent a range of mechanisms that have been used in the past by Federal,

state, and local governments to share goals and resources to achieve mutually beneficial

outcomes. DoD has developed numerous PPPs in the past; however, its efforts to do so are often

hampered by legal, policy, organizational, and contractual restrictions. The U.S. Agency for

International Development (USAID) typically is much more flexible the DoD, and their

migration to “v4” of PPP based on shared values with private sector entities represents a

sophisticated and effective approach. The key point is that DoD must think strategically about

what resources it can and should use for PPPs, and it must evolve new organizing principles for

partnering with the private sector to make their engagements with DoD easier and more

attractive.

DoD is already taking proactive measures to improve how it develops PPPs and PPCs. An April

25, 2013, DoD memo63 emphasizes the importance of PPPs and gives guidance on authorities

and procedure. There is also currently a DoD Working Group on PPPs that is developing a draft

DoD Instruction document to flesh out the policy and legal framework for future PPPs. This is a

very positive step, but DoD needs to think broadly about a variety of different organizational

models that have been used in the Federal Government for PPPs over decades, particularly in the

ST&E and commercialization arenas. In the emerging technology area, models such as the

Departments of Energy and Commerce shared user facilities are quite valuable, allowing a wide

range of public and private sector entities to access rare or expensive scientific equipment and

infrastructure and to collaborate.

A considerable body of knowledge and precedence already exists on PPPs and PPCs. A 2012

study by the Defense Business Board64 made a range of recommendations about PPPs in DoD.

62 For an overview of many international technology governance organizations, see

http://www.issp.uottawa.ca/eng/pdf/Governance_of_Emerging_Technologies.pdf

63 See http://www.defensecommunities.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/OSD004391-13-RES.pdf

64Seehttp://dbb.defense.gov/Portals/35/Documents/Reports/2012/FY12-

4_Public_Private_Collaboration_in_the_Department_of_Defense_2012-7.pdf
19

The Council on Competitiveness has also published a useful summary65 of different models for

PPPs. The National Council on Public-Private Partnerships66 is an important resource. There is

also a significant body of academic literature on PPPs as drivers of ST&E, innovation, and

economic growth.67 The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has also done considerable

work on developing innovative new models for PPPs.68

A 2012 CTNSP report69 on PPPs and PPCs studied some of the current policy and organizational

challenges for DoD and made a number of recommendations. It concluded that DoD should (1)

create a flexible, unified policy/legal/contractual framework to allow a wider range of PPP and

PPC activities beyond what is currently available; (2) develop a “toolbox” of PPP models and

contractual templates that is standardized, so that new ones can be implemented relatively easily;

(3) in terms of ST&E, expand and streamline contracting mechanisms for funding research,

commercialization, and collaboration with private sector partners; and (4) create positions or

offices in DoD to coordinate PPP and PPCs across the department, with other agencies, and with

nongovernmental partners.

One of the most fruitful avenues for DoD for partnering with the private sector is to engage with

regional, state, and local (RSL) ST&E and commercialization initiatives. In the last decade,

many states and regional authorities have significantly increased funding and resources for

research, commercialization, and technology workforce development to foster high-tech

economic growth. RSL initiatives are very flexible in that they can mix resources from Federal,

state, corporate, and philanthropic organizations, and they are also much more closely engaged

with businesses, universities, and infrastructure providers in their locality. They also have a

number of umbrella organizations that develop policy and provide networking opportunities

across the United States, such as the State Science and Technology Institute.70 However, a 2012

policy study about RSL initiatives engaged with development of emerging technologies 71

concluded that RSL initiatives face significant hurdles when attempting to partner with the

Federal Government. These include opaqueness of the landscape of the Federal bureaucracy, an

uncertain regulatory environment, the amount of time and resources necessary to contract with

agencies, difficulties negotiating shared goals, and poor communication and response from their

Federal counterparts.

The recommendation is that DoD should seek to develop better policies and partnering

mechanisms to take fuller advantage of RSL resources, making full use of the authorities granted

to DoD by Section 331 of the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act, since these RSL

initiatives will be increasingly important drivers of technological innovation within the United

States.

2.1.5 Expanding Privacy Issues

As ICT continue to permeate every aspect of society, it is becoming increasingly difficult for

anyone to remain anonymous or undetected. In particular, sensitive personal information can

65 See http://www.compete.org/images/uploads/File/PDF%20Files/AEMC_Part_PPP_Summary_FINAL.pdf

66 See http://www.ncppp.org/

67 Fe example,see: http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/econ_stat/en/economics/gii/pdf/chapter2.pdf

68 See https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/st_innovative_public_private_partnerships_0710_version_2.pdf

69 See http://ctnsp.dodlive.mil/files/2013/07/DH-074.pdf

70 See www.sst.org

71 See http://www.nano.gov/node/1020
20

now be mined from readily available online sources, and social media provides a particularly

porous avenue for information flow. 72 Access to such information can be particularly

problematic for DoD, quite apart from the need to protect its secure networks and databases.

Information available about DoD personnel and their activities in private life are a new

vulnerability that could compromise national security concerns. Such sources include

information citizens voluntarily share about themselves (e.g., via social media); actions that

commercial firms take with that information (location-based services and the tracking of cell

phone externals); malicious and criminal activities (hacking and ID theft); financial and

marketing information; and soon, data available through common household devices, as the IoT

expands its reach.

DoD’s response to information security has often been to limit the use of advanced ICT severely.

This not only reduces the efficiency and flexibility of DoD personnel but also is no longer an

effective security paradigm in an increasingly connected world. Therefore, DoD needs to

establish new policy positions and procedures proactively on privacy issues. In particular,

effective policies need to be established on Personally Identifiable Information (PII) to determine

the Department’s ability to make use of information from social media in domestic contingencies.

A number of ICT companies such as Google are developing new concepts for security that

involve synergetic combinations of technological solutions with better processes and practices,

which should be examined by DoD.

The recommendation is that DoD should establish a program or working group, engaging with

Federal and private sector experts, to develop a new paradigm for digital security that would seek

to maximize both flexibility and privacy. An example is the privacy rules that have been

established through open source community engagement by Wikipedia. DoD must also begin to

change its culture to recognize that information leaks will be increasingly commonplace and, in

fact, inevitable. Even while continuing to try to protect information responsibly, more attention

needs to be paid to resilience when leaks occur and contingency plans to address the release of

particularly sensitive information.

2.1.6 Impacts of Emerging Technologies on the Present and Future DoD Workforce

The information revolution and ICT, as well as AI and cognitive science, are creating a wide

range of transformational tools for education, training, and the future workforce. They are

enabling a lifelong, recruitment-to-retirement, innovative learning environment that supports the

delivery of content at the point of need. Some argue that the nature of work itself may change

dramatically; others predict that these technologies will create inequalities and social stress. In

any case, future generations of DoD personnel will have a different mindset and different skills

than in the past. DoD will need to understand how to leverage these capabilities and adapt to new

norms of behavior and workplace paradigms. It must also begin to leverage these technologies to

create new modes of education and training (E&T) that are appropriate for the information age.73

If it does not, DoD will be at an increasing competitive disadvantage in attracting the best talent

from the larger U.S. workforce.

72 See the DoD social media hub for current guidelines: http://www.defense.gov/socialmedia/.

73 See,for example: http://www.emergingedtech.com/2014/04/imaging-the-classroom-of-2016-empowered-bywearable-technology/.
21

The impact of emerging technologies on the present and future workforce74 can be viewed from

two perspectives: (1) preparing individuals with the competencies that they will need for future

work and (2) addressing the revolutionary changes that are needed in the delivery and

consumption of teaching and learning to meet future needs.

A number of very important policy questions for DoD arise in this area. With the rapid changes

occurring in technology, how does DoD prepare a workforce for technologies and skills that

have yet to be discovered? What enduring skills transcend and apply across new technology

developments and needs for the force? How does DoD compete for and support those positioned

with these skills needed for the future? How does DoD prepare and transition the current force

into developing these future skill requirements that are already emerging? Many of these

questions are only beginning to be addressed in the fields of training, education, and foresight.

Organizations preparing their workforce are being driven to change delivery systems,

pedagogical approaches, and certification practices. The current E&T systems, including DoD’s,

have been slow to move out of a static physical classroom environment that uses an industrial

approach of teaching everyone the same thing at the same time. The revolutions in information

and computer technologies are driving education and training into a personalized learning

approach supported by big data analytics. Continual learning will be a requirement for success.

Attaining and assessing competencies will not depend on the courses, workshops, or programs

the person has attended; an individual’s ability to do the tasks required by a job will demonstrate

competency. Mentoring, apprenticeships, experiential learning, and communities of interest will

become increasingly important for ongoing learning support. The roles of educators and trainers

will transition from information delivery agents to facilitators and guides.

DoD needs to begin to organize its E&T efforts to meet this revolution. It should develop

programs and working groups to craft strategies for transitioning current E&T doctrine into a

new paradigm of innovative, continuous learning that optimizes resources and outcomes.

Moreover, it should institutionalize these processes so DoD’s E&T activities continually evolve

as new technologies and best practices and organizational structures evolve.

2.1.7 Future Defense Industrial and Technology Base

One of the most important aspects of the BRINE areas is their profound impact on new industrial

and manufacturing technologies. These include a range of new paradigms, such as IT-enabled

smart manufacturing, additive manufacturing, nano-manufacturing, biomanufacturing, and

crowdsourcing. Many experts think they will fundamentally re-make the global economy and

greatly increase the sophistication of all manufactured goods while improving efficiency and

lowering costs.75 Moreover, such transformational methods motivate, and require, increasing

investments in ST&E and commercialization resources, resulting in a “virtuous cycle” of

innovation.

The United States, however, is now being severely challenged in the development of advanced

industrial and manufacturing capabilities. Many countries are also investing significant resources

in research and infrastructure in hopes of capturing market segments for novel products from

these evolving capabilities. Much more worrisome is the increasing rate of other nations’

acquisition of U.S. technology through concerted campaigns. China, for example, has built a

74 This subsequent discussion was contributed by Dr. Paulette Robinson, CTNSP, NDU; RobinsonP@ndu.edu.

75 See,for example: http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/futuresource/an-emerging-third-industrial-revolution
22

large government enterprise aimed at acquiring and importing U.S. technology by a wide range

of means, some of them questionable or clandestine.76 Russia is using large capital resources to

acquire intellectual property and small high-tech businesses, in aggressive ways—often when

these companies are most vulnerable financially. Korea, Japan, and other nations have repeatedly

engaged in “dumping” of high-tech products to kill off U.S. competition. Negative factors in the

United States, such as flat research budgets, the complexity of government contracting, an

uncertain regulatory environment, and an insufficient science, technology, engineering, and

mathematics or STEM-trained workforce are also accelerating the offshoring of companies with

the most advanced technologies. Many technology policy professionals believe that the loss of

high-tech manufacturing is a prelude to the loss of national commercialization capabilities and,

eventually, degradation of the national ST&E enterprise.

The U.S. military could be highly vulnerable to these trends. The loss of domestic manufacturing

capability for cutting-edge technologies means the United States may increasingly need to rely

on foreign sources for advanced weapons systems and other critical components, potentially

creating serious dependencies. Global supply chain vulnerabilities are already a significant

concern, for example, from potential embedded “kill switches,” and these are likely to worsen.

The loss of advanced manufacturing also enhances tech transfer to foreign nations and helps

build their ST&E base, which accelerates the loss of U.S. talent and capital. This loss of

technological preeminence by the United States would result in a fundamental diminishing of

national power.

Solving these problems will be hard, in part because of the complex political, economic, and

international factors that come into play. It is also beyond the scope of any one Federal agency.

However, DoD arguably will be the Federal component most significantly affected by the loss of

future U.S. technological preeminence, and should take a leading role to ensure that

commercialization activities for critical emerging technologies are fostered domestically. This

will require a broad set of activities to address the innovation ecosystems that generate advanced

industrial and manufacturing capabilities. These could include the following: increasing funding

for DoD ManTech77 programs; increased partnering with other agencies, such as Department of

Commerce’s i6 Challenge program78; increased engagement with the PPPs being created by the

Advanced Manufacturing Partnership79 under the White House and similar initiatives; DoD’s use

of its power as a first adopter and limited-run consumer on high importance technology products;

development of novel capitalization programs,80 perhaps similar to In-Q-Tel81 and DeVenCI;82

policies or mechanisms to help protect small technology businesses with critical emerging

technology products from predatory foreign business practices; and increased engagement with

high-tech RSL83 research and commercialization initiatives. These actions will require a holistic

76 On 19 May 2014, the U.S. Justice Department filed the first charges ever for stealing industrial secrets via cyber

hacking. The defendants are five Chinese PLA officers. See http://www.fbi.gov/pittsburgh/press-releases/2014/u.s.-

charges-five-chinese-military-hackers-with-cyber-espionage-against-u.s.-corporations-and-a-labor-organization-forcommercial-advantage

77 See https://www.dodmantech.com/

78 See http://www.eda.gov/challenges/i6/

79 See http://www.manufacturing.gov/amp.html

80 See the NDU Defense Horizons Report #71: http://inss.dodlive.mil/files/2012/09/DH-71.pdf

81 See https://www.iqt.org/

82 For an overview,see http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/14/venture-pentagon-idUSN1E79C21O20111014

83 See the State Science and Technology Institute for extensive information on these resources: http://ssti.org/

DeVenCI is the Defense Venture Capital Initiative
23

approach by DoD and other agency partners that involves policy, acquisition, research funding,

partnering, educational initiatives, and perhaps legislative proposals for financial and

international issues.

2.2 Technology-Specific Areas

2.2.1 ICT and Cyberspace

Cyberspace and all aspects of ICT continue to expand and evolve very rapidly, and even nearterm future capabilities will be difficult to predict. As a military domain, cyberspace is still

poorly understood and lacks a coherent theory for sense-making. There are, however, a number

of clear trends that can serve as organizing principles for policymaking or planning. Existing and

emerging vulnerabilities clearly need to be addressed.

Whether DoD likes it or not, the agency will be increasingly affected by trends in cyberspace. It

will be impossible for its personnel and systems to function without some interface with or

reliance on domestic or global infrastructure. Thus far, DoD has been increasingly challenged by

rapid developments in these open systems and has suffered due to increasing vulnerabilities and

slow adaptation. However, an extensive array of cyberspace capabilities is being deployed to

make the Department more proactive, agile, and creative in anticipating and mitigating potential

threats and vulnerabilities, since these will only increase, and isolation from cyberspace networks

is no longer an option. DoD must focus on organizational, cultural, and process adaptation to

solve many of these problems, rather than only strictly technological solutions. Several

recommendations are below for some of the most critical issues.

 Enhance Security of Critical Infrastructure and Industrial Control Systems Critical

infrastructure systems throughout the United States are rapidly implementing automated

industrial control systems (ICS) that communicate via cyberspace, and with more and more

wireless pathways as well. Few of these systems have effective security in place, and

numerous policy reports have brought attention to this serious vulnerability in recent years.84

DoD systems and facilities rely on such critical infrastructure to a surprising degree, not only

for large scale resources (e.g., electric power, telecoms) but also for small-scale support (e.g.,

environmental controls in buildings). Cyber attacks on and through these systems can not

only result in disruption of services but also be used in novel ways, such as surveillance

through thermostats or maintenance control systems.

DHS has recently adopted the term operational technology (OT) to refer to the more general

class of online control systems now available. These are defined as, programmable systems

or devices that interact with the physical environment (or manage devices that interact with

the physical environment). Examples include industrial control systems, building

management systems, fire control systems, and physical access control mechanisms. With

new standards and off-the-shelf technologies now available for IoT devices, OTs are

expanding very rapidly and are a very significant security uncertainty. Supply chain security

also is a critical element of infrastructure protection.

DoD has already taken several steps to begin understanding and addressing these

vulnerabilities, such as its recent policy on the Cybersecurity 85 and Risk Management

84 For example,see http://asymmetricthreat.net/docs/asymmetric_threat_5_paper.pdf

85Seehttp://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/850001_2014.pdf
24

Framework 86 and a March 19, 2014, memo from the Office of the Under Secretary of

Defense Installations and Environment (DUSD(I&E)) on Real-Property Related ICS. It is

also beginning to leverage resources of the Department of Homeland Security’s ICS Cyber

Emergency Response Team (ICS-CERT) and some of their security products and has also

established working groups or is participating in interagency working groups on related

subjects. A February 2014 report to Congress gives an extensive overview of these current

efforts.87 However, DoD must increase the priority level of OT security and continue to raise

awareness of potential vulnerabilities across its enterprises. DoD should develop additional

policies, operational procedures, and even new technologies that are specific to securing OT

systems and develop the framework for integrating OT security with private sector providers.

 Organize Command Structures to Optimize Cyber Assets: Authority over national cyber

assets has evolved for nearly a decade and continues to do so. While the United States

struggles with creating a national organizational model to effectively operate in cyberspace,

we increasingly lose ground as other countries and non-state actors learn to exploit cyber

resources more effectively. DoD has also evolved its organizational structure for cyber assets

and operations a number of times and may need to continue to do so in response to the

evolving cyber domain. Recently, General Keith Alexander, Commander, U.S. Cyber

Command proposed elevating Cyber Command, currently under U.S. Strategic Command

(USSTRATCOM), to the level of a full unified combatant command, potentially structured

similar to U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM). However, a logical extension of

this reorganization may be to create Theater Cyber Commands (for example, a CyberEUR),

modeled after the theater special operations commands (TSOC), where it is a sub-unified

command of CyberCom but serves a Geographic Combatant Command.88 A recent CNAS

report recommended organizational changes along similar lines. 89 DoD should study the

feasibility of this organizational change, which would provide more effective support to

regional operations.

 Understand and Plan for the Asymmetric Aspects of Cyberspace and CyberWar: DoD relies

on, and is vulnerable to, open network infrastructures in cyberspace and other ICT. These

networks are increasingly available to most people and organizations globally, and that

access is increasingly functional and powerful. Trends in embedded systems and the IoT also

mean that vast amounts of data are now being collected from billions of devices and systems

globally, and it is increasingly easy to use cyberspace to act on physical systems. Cyberspace

is becoming a highly asymmetric environment where even small groups or individuals can

operate with some degree of effectiveness against even large organizations90 by a variety of

means. Many of these small groups share information and operational knowledge through

user networks and thus have larger effective footprints and resources.91

86Seehttp://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/851001_2014.pdf

87 See 24 February 2014 DoD Report to Armed Services Committees titled “The Threat to the Readiness of Military

Installations from Possible Cyberattacks on Civilian Critical Infrastructure.”

88 Private communication, Dr. Alex Crowther, CTNSP / NDU.

89See http://www.cnas.org/digital-theaters#.U2KzEpt16_E

90 See http://flashcritic.com/nsa-cyber-attacks-are-an-asymmetric-warfare-weapon-and-pose-a-significant-threatfacing-the-u-s/

91 For example,see http://www.sans.org/reading-room/whitepapers/attacking/jester-dynamic-lesson-asymmetricunmanaged-cyber-warfare-33889
25

DoD needs to develop a much better understanding and appreciation of these developments

and develop better policies, doctrine, and resources to effectively operate in such a highly

complex and uncertain environment. 92 Technological innovations such as the Joint

Information Environment (JIE) 93 will help improve the coherence and agility of DoD’s

operations in cyberspace and more generally. However, DoD should consider a long-term

research program to study the multi-disciplinary, multi-sector, and cross-technological

factors that are contributing to this new security domain and develop near-term solutions and

long-term strategies that will allow DoD to broadly mitigate risks and operate effectively

against a spectrum of actors. Increased use of red-teaming, experimentation, and outreach to

the private sector and “hacker” groups would be effective and in many cases require minimal

resources.

2.2.2 Energy

Over the last decade, the United States has made an increasing commitment to attaining energy

independence, and advanced energy technologies and renewables have been a key component of

this strategy. As the largest single consumer of energy in the world, DoD has a major stake in

energy security and has been very proactive in funding and deploying both new energy

technologies and approaches to energy efficiency. The prospect of up-front demand reduction,

whether by design, technology, or processes, offers immediate operational and financial benefits.

Moreover, within the last few years, an increasing number of breakthroughs in advanced

materials, novel manufacturing technologies, and IT-enabled smart energy systems are creating

the possibility of having a range of new economically and operationally viable energy sources

available.

At the same time, unconventional oil and gas (UOG) technologies (i.e., “fracking”) have created

a boom in U.S. domestic oil and gas production. 94 These technologies will have profound

consequences for the U.S. economy, as well as geopolitical consequences around the globe.

Some experts predict that oil prices may drop very significantly within a few years.

This domestic windfall will likely have a number of unintended consequences. One of these may

be a disinvestment in research and commercialization of advanced energy technologies, as they

once again become commercially unattractive. Whatever the near-term economics of generation,

however, demand reduction remains a place to start. Also, as a policy, the DoD should make a

strategic decision to continue its investment in advanced and renewable energy technologies

because its unique requirements for expeditionary energy and self-sufficiency will benefit greatly

from advancements in solar power, energy harvesting, smart grids, and other emerging energy

technologies.

Although not directly within DoD’s purview, a strategic policy issue for the United States with

regards to the UOG boom will be the possibility of using our domestic energy resources for

geopolitical influence, in effect turning the tables on the current major oil producers. While this

is a politically sensitive debate at present, one practical change needed to facilitate this strategy is

the rescission of the 1975 law95 banning exports of domestic crude oil. This standpoint is gaining

92 For example,see http://asymmetricthreat.net/decision_superiority/decision_superiority.shtml

93 See http://www.disa.mil/About/Our-Work/JIE

94 For a good overview,see http://www.cfr.org/energy-and-environment/hydraulic-fracturing-fracking/p31559

95 For a summary, see: http://www.bloomberg.com/quicktake/u-s-crude-oil-export-ban/
26

political steam currently96 among economists and oil producers, and a number of influential U.S.

senators are now advocating for action.97

Emerging technologies can also play a significant role in expeditionary energy requirements for

DoD. One significant policy action would be to facilitate negotiations on international standards

for biofuels, so DoD could potentially purchase reliable biofuels in theatre when this makes

sense operationally. Another would be increased support for the Smart Power Infrastructure

Demonstration for Energy Reliability and Security (SPIDERS), 98 which is exploring the

feasibility of cyber-secure smart microgrids with demand-side management and integration of

renewable energy and energy storage on military installations for enhanced mission assurance

during prolonged outages of commercial power. New nanomaterials are significantly increasing

the efficiencies of solar power and will become increasingly useful for onsite energy generation,

and other smart materials are also increasing the efficiency of thermal- or mechanical-to-electric

energy conversion, making energy harvesting a potentially useful energy source for individual

warfighters. Wireless electricity also may become operationally useful.

2.2.3 Unmanned and Autonomous Military Systems

Unmanned and autonomous robotic systems are becoming increasingly more capable and

intelligent and are starting to be widely deployed in both military and domestic capacities. This

has already raised a number of significant legal, policy, ethical, and regulatory concerns. Perhaps

the most serious issue is the possibility of robotic systems that can autonomously decide when to

take human life. The specter of Kill Bots waging war without human guidance or intervention

has already sparked significant political backlash, including a potential United Nations

moratorium99on autonomous weapons systems. This issue is particularly serious when one

considers that in the future, many countries may have the ability to manufacture, relatively

cheaply, whole armies of Kill Bots that could autonomously wage war. This is a realistic

possibility because today a great deal of cutting-edge research on robotics and autonomous

systems is done outside the United States, and much of it is occurring in the private sector,

including DIY robotics communities. 100 The prospect of swarming autonomous systems

represents a challenge for nearly all current weapon systems, which partly drives the emphasis

on DEWs.

DoD needs to monitor these trends closely and engage with the policy, legal, and political

debates surrounding these issues. It should also be highly proactive in taking steps to ensure that

it is not perceived as creating weapons systems without a “human in the loop.” It may be that

DoD should publicly self-limit its operational doctrine on the use of such systems to head off

public or international backlash to its development of autonomous systems.101 DoD should also

remain ahead of the curve by developing concepts for new roles and missions and developing

operational doctrine for forces made up significantly or even entirely of unmanned or

autonomous elements.

96 See http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/01/08/u-s-oil-exports-have-been-banned-for-40-

years-is-it-time-for-that-to-change/

97 See http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/02/us-usa-energy-murkowski-idUSBREA310QP20140402

98 See http://energy.sandia.gov/wp/wp-content/gallery/uploads/SPIDERS_Fact_Sheet_2012-1431P.pdf

99 See http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/Acallforamoratoriumonthedevelopmentrobots.aspx

100 See for example: http://diydrones.com/ or http://openrov.com/

101 20YY, op. cit.
27

2.2.4 Directed-Energy Weapons

DEWs have been in development since the 1960s, and today they include a number of maturing

technologies that project electromagnetic radiation in some capacity, such as laser light. DoD has

begun to deploy test versions of a number of different DEWs and plans to begin installing and

integrating them into shipboard combat systems within a few years—USS Ponce deployed in

2014 with an operational laser. There still are technical and operational challenges,102 but when

widely deployed, DEWs will be a very disruptive military technology. They will have unique

characteristics, such as near-zero flight time, high accuracy, and an effectively infinite magazine,

which will require re-thinking basic battlefield tactics and procedures. DoD continues to invest

very significantly in these technologies and the research and development, or R&D, programs

have thus far proven effective in delivering functional prototypes. They are also on track to scale

up power requirements and mitigate many of the outstanding technical hurdles. DEWs will likely

benefit from developments in other BRINE technology areas, such as meta-materials and

nanotechnology, which could provide novel power sources, targeting, tracking, and beam

forming.

To deploy DEW combat capabilities effectively across the Services, a number of policy,

programmatic, and organizational issues still need to be addressed.103 For example, DoD should

develop a strategic plan and roadmap for DEWs, such as has been in development by the Naval

Directed Energy Steering Group. DoD should also develop a program of record for DEWs to

define its acquisition plans, which would help industry focus its development efforts as well.

Given the potentially austere future budget environment, it may be wise also for DoD to begin

down-selecting from the number of different technologies it currently has under development

and integrating the rest into a structured prototyping and experimentation regime. DoD should

also accelerate development of new doctrine and tactics for using DEWs effectively in a

battlefield capacity, since their unique characteristics will require years of operational

development to fully exploit and integrate with existing kinetic weapons systems. Finally,

considerable cultural adaptation by personnel will need to occur for weapon systems as unique as

DEWs, and DoD should begin to explore education and training capabilities for their

assimilation, for example tactical computer simulations.

2.2.5 Biotechnology

Biotechnology is a very broad area that is evolving very rapidly—faster, in many ways, than

even ICT.104 A tremendous amount of funding flows into this area from governments, companies,

and venture capitalists, both domestic and international. This research is producing revolutionary

devices, designer drugs, green manufacturing processes, and advanced prosthetics, some of

which are creating legal, ethical, and even political challenges. Innovations in medicine and

biotechnology also are increasingly being driven by tools from the other BRINE areas, in

particular ICT and nanotechnology.

The issue space of biotechnology is too large to cover here, but there are a few areas of

considerable relevance to DoD technologically that may also prove to have significant policy

challenges. These are discussed below.

102 See Elihu Zimet and Christopher Mann, Directed-Energy Weapons—Are We There Yet? NDU, CTNSP, May

2009, http://ctnsp.dodlive.mil/files/2013/07/DTP-062.jpeg.

103 For an overview of these issues, see CRS report R41526, available at: https://opencrs.com/document/R41526/.

104 See Figure B-1.
28

 Human Augmentation: DoD has funded research on technologies to enhance human

performance for decades. Today, however, there are a number of technologies that could

profoundly alter not just human performance, but human physical, psychological, and

cognitive makeup as well.105 These include personalized (genetic) medicine, tissue and organ

regeneration via stem cells, implants such as computer chips and communication devices,

robotic prosthetics, direct brain-machine interfaces, and potentially direct brain-brain

communications. Many of these will provide significant future capabilities for DoD, on and

off the battlefield. However, many will also raise significant policy, legal, and ethical issues,

such as the ethics of compromising or changing the integrity of an individual’s body or

deeply altering an individual’s cognitive or decisionmaking processes. In many cases there

may be public reactions or legal challenges to these capabilities. A case in point involves the

predictive potential of personal medicine, with its implications for personnel assignments and

long-term care. DoD should therefore consider establishing multidisciplinary working groups

or funding studies or centers ahead of the deployment of particularly novel biotechnology

capabilities in these areas.

 Bioinformatics, Big Data, Digital Health Records: The application of ICT and large-scale

data collection has many powerful advantages for medicine and society,106 and DoD can

leverage these advantages as well. Personalized or genetics-based medicine could greatly

improve the effectiveness of treatment and lower a variety of costs. Collection and analysis

of large sets of data from many individuals could make patient care more effective and lower

cost by correlating variables to improve treatment options (i.e., precision medicine). 107

Monitoring of individuals and populations using sensors, wearable devices, and IoT will

provide detection and predictive analytics that can move toward a health maintenance-based,

rather than a disease-based medical model, and also enhance operational readiness. However,

there will be many risks involved as these systems are implemented, for example, the many

ways that digital data or privacy information can be compromised, issues of ownership or of

access to the data. These systems will also require new enterprise-level models for the

management and exploitation of potentially huge amounts of health related data.

DoD should continue to pursue these avenues in partnership with large private sector

providers, where the most innovative solutions are currently developing.108 At the same time,

DoD will need to enhance its efforts towards information security, cyber security, and the

protection of personally identifiable information (PII) as these systems are deployed.

 Brain Mapping and Cognitive Science: With recent advances in cognitive science and the

creation of major brain mapping initiatives in the United States and other countries, major

leaps are on the horizon for deeply understanding and enhancing human cognitive

performance. For DoD, these capabilities could greatly improve individual warfighters’

ability to assess situational awareness, make decisions, and reduce cognitive load and stress.

These advancements can also improve larger scale activities, such as tools for leadership

decisionmaking, and the understanding of socio-behavioral dynamics and human geography.

105 See Appendix B for a longer discussion.

106 See http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/health_systems_and_services/the_big-data_revolution_in_us_health_care

107 See for example: http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2013/02/21/rapid-learning-for-precision-medicine-a-big-data-toknowledge-bd2k-initiative/

108Forexample:http://www.marketwatch.com/story/ibm-joins-forces-with-epic-to-bid-for-department-of-defensehealthcare-management-systems-modernization-contract-2014-06-10
29

However, the principal hurdles for DoD, in exploiting these new capabilities, may involve

culture, education and training, organizational adaptation, process development, and other

human factors. DoD should begin now to plan for the adoption of these new capabilities to

maximize their impact as they evolve, as they could be critical enablers for the U.S. military

in the future.

 Synthetic Biology: Synthetic biology (SynBio) may become one of the most transformational

areas of ST&E in the near future. Researchers have recently created cells with DNA

composed of non-natural amino acids, opening the door to the potential creation of designer

life forms. Moreover, SynBio tools are now available, relatively cheaply, to an expanding

DIY community, and research is being pursued commercially in many countries. SynBio has

the potential to generate significant tactical, operational, and strategic impacts across a wide

range of defense-relevant applications in medicine, human performance, weapons, power and

energy, sensors, and high-performance materials, and it should be a priority research,

development, and engineering area for DoD.109 However, this area may soon raise significant

legal, ethical, and regulatory issues related to the creation of entirely new biologic entities.

The potential for malicious or terror-related activities will also increase as these methods

become cheaper and more widespread. One important application that may prove valuable

for DoD is its application to biomanufacturing. For example, biomanufacturing processes are

performed under ambient conditions, thus enhancing safety in the production of new

energetic materials, biofuels, and high-value specialty chemicals and feedstocks. DoD needs

to closely monitor this area not only for potential opportunities but also for potential risks

and foreign competition.

109 OSD(R&E) research assessment: Herr, Andrew, DoD Research and Engineering Technology Assessment:

Synthetic Biology, to be published.
30

3.0 Conclusions

Accelerating technological change is not just the stuff of science fiction, nor is it relegated only

to technology communities. Increasingly it is affecting every aspect of global civilization. It will

enable not only profoundly positive advancements for mankind but also new modes of

warfighting and tools for malicious behavior. It may also have contradictory effects on the future

security environment. For example, while it will likely flatten the world economically, socially,

politically, and militarily, it could also increase wealth inequality and social stress. DoD cannot

afford to be unprepared for its consequences. The successful countries, organizations, and

individuals of the future will be those that can continually sense and adapt to a constantly

changing global landscape.

For DoD to remain the world’s preeminent military force, it must redefine its culture and

organizational processes to become more networked, nimble, and knowledge-based. It must view

technological change not only as improvements in capabilities but also as the organic evolution

of a new cross-domain environment whose influence will be pervasive.

With the current re-balancing of the U.S. global force posture, there is an opportunity today to

explore longer range thinking and alternate future trajectories. DoD leadership should examine

more closely the trends and potential consequences of profound technological change and how

DoD could shape, and not simply react to, the outcomes. The recommendations discussed in this

paper, while not comprehensive, do address important issues that could influence such a process.
31

Appendix A: Summary of Reports Identifying Key Emerging

Technologies

Below are short summaries of several recent reports and statements that cover viewpoints about

key emerging technology areas and related issues that might affect future national security.

Excerpt from ASD(R&E) FY13 Budget Testimony110

Testimony by Zach Lemnios: “In FY2010, we gathered over 200 scientists, engineers, operators

and subject matter experts from across the Department and launched a comprehensive analysis of

operational architectures, critical capabilities, and enabling technologies to support the

Department’s current and future missions. We took a broad look at cross-cutting areas that would

have the greatest impact to the Department, even as the Department’s New Strategic Guidance

was being outlined.

That review resulted in the April 2011 announcement by Secretary Gates that the Department

will consider seven S&T areas as key priority areas. These priority areas are supported in the FY

2013 PBR [performance-based remediation] 2013; these investments provide the technical

foundation for important future capability options:

 Cyber S&T: The focus of cyber S&T is on the development of technologies that enable

system resiliency, agility, and mission effectiveness across the spectrum of joint operations.

The research also addresses foundations of trust and development of new frameworks to

more thoroughly assess cyber-security techniques.

 Electronic Warfare/Electronic Protection (EW/EP): Pervasive advances in commercial and

consumer electronics challenge conventional U.S. electronic warfare capabilities.

Investments in this area focus on new concepts and technology to protect systems and extend

capabilities across the electro-magnetic spectrum.

 Data-to-Decisions: The Department relies upon the ability to analyze enormous data sets

very quickly. Data-to-Decisions investments focus on investments in automated analysis

techniques, text analytics, and user interface techniques to reduce the cycle time and

manpower requirements required for analysis of large data sets.

 Engineered Resilient Systems: The technically advanced systems our Joint Forces will need

in the future must be adaptable to operate in dynamic, and sometimes unpredictable,

environments. Research in Engineered Resilient Systems focuses on agile and cost-effective

design, development, testing, manufacturing, and fielding of trusted, assured, easily-modified

systems.

 Counter Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD): The Department is focused on cross-cutting

research in countering weapons of mass destruction, specifically directed at finding and

tracking unsecured fissile material. Research focuses on the development of novel detectors

and processing algorithms for increased detection capabilities.

 Autonomy: The Department’s investments in this area are focused on developing systems that

can operate in complex real-world environments. Such systems will augment or substitute for

human operators, particularly in hazardous environments, and to conduct missions that are

impractical or impossible for humans.

110Availableathttp://www.defenseinnovationmarketplace.mil/resources/Lemnios_Testimony_2013.pdf.
32

 Human Systems: The goal of Human Systems is to advance the Department’s technology

capabilities for development of system interfaces and for training of personnel to increase

productivity and effectiveness. Training research focuses on realistic, adaptive, and

interactive scenarios, and persistent, affordable integrated training. Personnel training

research concentrates on human-machine teaming; intelligent, adaptive human aiding; and

intuitive interaction.

These are emergent technologies that could form the basis for the next generation of dominant

military technologies in the next decade:

 Synthetic Biology: Involves modifying living cells (typically bacteria) to produce novel

substances, such as biofuels, biosensors, improved vaccines, and high strength materials.

 Quantum Information Science: Uses quantum mechanics to perform otherwise intractable

numerical calculations, provide ultra-secure communications and solution possibilities to

certain important problems, and enable an ability to simulate exotic materials.

 Cognitive Neuroscience: This study of how the brain functions provides a deeper

understanding of human learning and decisionmaking, which can lead to improvements

of performance under stress and to cures to the effects of war trauma.

 Novel Engineered Materials: Encompasses superconductors, metamaterials, plasmonics,

and spintronics, among other materials, that can provide fluid-repellant coatings, yield

self-healing composites, improve energy efficiency, improve antennas and detectors, and

greatly increase computational capabilities.

 Human Behavior Modeling: Modeling of individuals, groups, and nations is intended to

enhance strategic and tactical decisionmaking, improve immersive training and mission

rehearsal, and facilitate cross-cultural coalition building.

CNAS Emerging Disruptive Technologies Report111

In 2013, CNAS published a report entitled Game Changers: Disruptive Technology and U.S.

Defense Strategy. This report summarized the results of the NexTech project, which explored

emerging disruptive technologies, their potential implications for defense strategy, and their key

policy questions. The report highlighted the following technology areas:

 Additive Manufacturing: This could fundamentally impact the defense industrial base and

the manufacturing process, writ large, by dramatically increasing the pace of moving from

prototype to production and by enhancing the flexibility and adaptability of production lines.

 Autonomous Systems: Autonomous and semi-autonomous systems have already

revolutionized ISR and counterterrorism. In time, autonomous systems could be applied

across a broader range of military operations and intelligence activities.

 Directed Energy: These technologies have been under development since the 1960s and

offer a variety of potentially game-changing applications that could be deployed within

existing organizational constructs and concepts of operation.

 Cyber Capabilities: With over 2.4 billion individuals online globally, cyber capability is

already—and will continue to be—game changing, with rapid increases in Internet usage

111 Game Changers: Disruptive Technology and U.S. Defense Strategy, Center for a New American Security, 2013;

available at http://www.cnas.org/files/documents/publications/CNAS_Gamechangers_BrimleyFitzGeraldSayler.pdf.
33

penetration, software innovation and the existing variety of applications and connected

devices.

 Human Performance Modification (HPM) : Advances in biology and genetics are opening

up a number of possibilities to increase the impact of HPM in ways that present significant

opportunity but also pose deep philosophical and moral questions.

One conclusion of the study was that “the tremendous potential of these game-changing

technologies requires consistent investment and attention by defense policymakers as well as

more robust collaboration between DOD and leading-edge innovators in the commercial sector.”

The Intelligence National Security Alliance (INSA) Emerging Science and

Technology Study112

In April of 2013, INSA published a report entitled Emerging Science and Technologies:

Securing the Nation through Discovery and Innovation. The study’s premise was that S&T

investments have historically provided for a significant intelligence and national security

advantage for the United States, but that increased global competition threatens that long-term

leadership. It therefore recommended increased investments in key research areas, organized by

technical application area:

Technical Collection Research Recommendations:

1. New Generation Sensors

2. Energy Harvesting

3. Bio-Mimicry

4. The Internet of Nature

Communications and Sharing Intelligence Research Recommendations:

1. Swarm Technologies and Communications

2. Holographic Telepresence

3. Advanced Materials for Computing

4. Bio-Inspired Computing

HUMINT Collections and Operations Research Recommendations:

1. Big Data Knowledge Discovery for Asset Identification

2. Countering Asymmetric ISR for HUMINT Signature Reduction

3. Behavioral Biometrics

4. Bacterial Steganography

Intelligence Analysis Research Recommendations:

1. Derivation of Knowledge from Data

2. Human-Inspired Big Data Access Strategies

3. Activity Based Intelligence and Predictive Analytics

112 Emerging Science and Technology: Securing the Nation through Discovery and Innovation, Intelligence and

National Security Alliance, 2013; Available at

http://www.cnas.org/files/documents/publications/CNAS_Gamechangers_BrimleyFitzGeraldSayler.pdf
34

Protection of the Intelligence Enterprise Research Recommendations:

1. Quantum Computing and Associated Technologies

2. Self-Protecting Data

3. Data Authentication

The study further noted: “We believe that additional interest and emphasis in these

recommended research areas has the potential to revolutionize the intelligence capabilities of our

nation and enhance U.S. leadership in S&T.”

Atlantic Council 2030 Report on the Technology Revolution113

In 2013, The Atlantic Council published a report entitled Envisioning 2030: U.S. Strategy for the

Coming Technology Revolution, in which was covered a number of emerging transformational

technologies, and a proposed strategy for harnessing these technological innovations to help the

United States maintain leadership in the coming decades. It organized these recommendations

into three broad areas (Manufacturing, Energy, and Cities) and identified several emerging or

disruptive technologies in each area which should be priorities. These were as follows:

Manufacturing:

1. Synthetic Biology and Biomanufacturing

2. 3D and 4D Printing

3. Robotics, including AI and unmanned vehicles

Energy:

1. Hydraulic Fracking, especially technologies for making it environmentally friendly

2. Smart Grids

Cities:

1. ICT to create “smart cities” that optimize resources

2. Green Technologies, especially use of engineered bio-organisms

This report also called for a national emphasis on STEM education, and reform of the

immigration and visa frameworks to make it easier for U.S. trained foreign scientists and

engineers to remain in the United States

The NIC Global Trends 2030 Report114

While NIC’s future assessments typically address a broad range of issues such as demographics,

economics, military, and socio-political trends, they also consider a range of potentially

disruptive technologies. The most recent report identified the following four general areas, and

specific technologies within those areas:

113 Envisioning 2030: U.S. Strategy for the Coming Technology Revolution, the Atlantic Council, 2013; Available at

http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/publications/reports/envisioning-2030-us-strategy-for-the-coming-technologyrevolution

114 See http://www.dni.gov/files/documents/GlobalTrends_2030.pdf, pp. 83-95.
35

Information Technologies:

1. Big Data Solutions

2. Social Networking Technologies

3. Smart City Technologies

Robotics:

1. Robotics, especially in manufacturing

2. Autonomous Vehicles

3. Additive Manufacturing

Resource Technologies:

1. Genetically Modified Crops

2. Precision Agriculture

3. Water Management Technologies, especially micro-irrigation

4. Bio-based Energy

5. Solar Energy

Health Technologies:

1. Disease Management, especially through personalized medicine

2. Human Augmentation

DSB Report on Technology and Innovation Enablers for Superiority for 2030115

In August of 2013, the Defense Science Board published the final report for its 2012 Summer

Study on Technology and Innovation Enablers for Superiority in 2030. The study reviewed

emerging technologies that will enable the next generation of dominant military capabilities,

anticipated to be in development or fielded by 2030. However, the report made a very valuable

contribution by organizing technological developments according to desired military capabilities

to address potential threats by 2030. These general capability requirements and potential

investment opportunities were as follows:

Coping With Parity:

1. Satellite Security

2. Cold Atom Sensing for Navigation and Timing

3. Networks Inherently Self-Defensible to Cyber Attack

Achieving Superiority Through Cost-Imposing Strategies:

1. Conventional, Affordable Effects at Intercontinental Ranges

2. Long Endurance, Autonomous, Networked Unmanned Underwater Vehicles

3. Enhanced Vertical Lift

Achieving Superiority Through Enhancing Force Effectiveness:

1. Radionuclide Power to Lighten the Soldier’s Load

2. Warfighter Resilience and Performance

3. Next Generation Training

115 See http://www.defenseinnovationmarketplace.mil/resources/DSB2030-TechnologyInnovationEnablers2030.pdf
36

Anticipating Surprise:

1. Nuclear Proliferation Prevention

2. Horizon Scanning and Hedging

3. Use of Experimentation to Avoid and Create Surprise

In addition, the study identified a number of disruptive emerging technologies which were high

payoff and high risk, but which it did not feel would be mature by 2030:

1. Extreme Prosthetics

2. Bespoke [made-to-order] Materials

3. Universal Energy Approach for Warfighter Systems

4. Global Persistent Surveillance via Distributed Aperture Sensing

5. Thought-based Machine Control

6. Micro Climate Engineering

7. Exploitation of Entanglement Physics

8. Portable Compact Fission for Megawatt Power Levels

CNAS Report on Robotic Warfare116

In January of 2014, the Center for a New American Security published a report entitled “20YY:

Preparing for War in the Robotic Age”. This report proposes that a new warfighting regime is

emerging that could see a future "in which guided munitions and battle networking has fully

proliferated and unmanned and autonomous systems have become central to combat ..." Also:

"The integration of manned and unmanned systems in the armed services will spur profound

debates regarding U.S. military roles and missions, the operational concepts necessary to take

full advantage of new technologies, and the ethical and moral implications of doing so." It listed

a number of technological drivers which are underlying these developments:

1. Cyber Warfare

2. Protected Communications

3. Advanced Computing and Big Data

4. Autonomy

5. Artificial Intelligence

6. Commercial Robotics

7. Miniaturization

8. Additive Manufacturing

9. Small, High Density Power Generation

10. Electric Weapons

11. Human Performance Modification

Additionally, it outlined a number of defense policy issues that these developments will

potentially impact:

1. Deterrence

2. Crisis Stability

3. Force Posture

4. Alliances and Partnerships

5. Roles and Missions

116 See http://www.cnas.org/sites/default/files/publications-pdf/CNAS_20YY_WorkBrimley.pdf
37

6. Operational Concepts

7. Accelerated Diffusion and Technological Surprise

The report also noted that this may be a particularly different future environment because most

technological development in this area is occurring in the private sector, and outside the United

States.
38

Appendix B: The Revolution in Biology, Biotechnology, and Medicine

General Trends: Over the last few decades, biology has experienced as profound a

transformation as physics did over a century ago. One principal driver was the discovery and

characterization of DNA, which is essentially the genetic blueprint117 for an organism. With the

sequencing of the human genome in 2003, and many other genomes since, real progress is now

being made in creating therapies and biotechnologies that manipulate and exploit specific genetic

information. Progress is also being made at higher levels of complexity, such as transcriptomics

and proteomics, and increasingly towards the detailed understanding and manipulation of the

dynamics of cells, tissues, and whole organisms.

Another prime driver of the rapid advances in biology is a far greater use of quantitative methods.

Many fields of biology now routinely employ advanced mathematical and computational

techniques, and computer modeling holds real promise as a replacement for in situ

experimentation. The large scale application of information technologies, simulations, and

bioinformatics is facilitating rapid advancement in many areas, from disease diagnostics to

environmental affects to public health.

A wide range of technologies from other fields is also contributing to the increasingly rapid rate

of innovation in biology and biotechnology. For example, nanotechnology is being exploited for

advanced sensors, chemical characterization and design, and rapid bioassays. Functionalized

materials are also making possible new kinds of implants and prosthetics, biosensors, and direct

brain-computer interfaces.

Transformational Technologies: Within these general trends, there are a number of specific

technology areas that have significant potential to dramatically alter the future landscape of

technology, business, trade, and national security. Development and commercialization of

products from these areas will provide high value economic growth in certain sectors, as well as

the facilitation of a range of new capabilities, from medicine to public health to the military.

These transformational technology areas include:

 Rapid Characterization and Detection: The ability to measure, store, and analyze

information from and about biological systems is now improving exponentially. One key

example is the speed and cost of sequencing DNA, which has improved at an astounding rate

over the last decade. Figure B-1 below shows a plot of the cost of sequencing a human-sized

genome over the last decade,118 which has dropped far faster than a comparable Moore’s law

improvement would predict.

117 See http://www.biology-online.org/dictionary/Dna

118 See http://www.genome.gov/sequencingcosts/
39

Figure 1: Cost to Sequence a Human-Sized Genome

 Similarly, biochemical detection and characterization is improving dramatically, as

increasingly sophisticated biosensors are developed which incorporate biologically sensitive

materials, electronic detection and signal processing elements, and external communication

capabilities. Integrated “lab on a chip” technologies and massively parallel bioassay methods

are increasingly cheap and powerful, improving performance and dropping cost dramatically.

The application of nanotechnology and nanomaterials to biosensing is already being

developed, and has the potential for extreme sensitivity and specificity,119 to the point of

being able to identify single molecules or a single diseased cell. As size decreases and

capability improves, such multifunctional biodevices can increasingly be incorporated in or

on living organisms for monitoring or even intervention. For example, the Boston-based

company, MC10, is marketing flexible electronics that can be printed on the skin or

embedded within the body, to perform complex monitoring functions.120 Highly specific and

reliable biometrics are another near term application. Longer term capabilities could feasibly

include a “smart dust” of nanosensors that could be distributed finely over large areas and

produce massive amounts of data for environmental, security, or potentially battlespace

applications.

 Genetic Modification of Organisms: Direct genetic modification of organisms is now a wellestablished research area (e.g., a range of genetically modified plants are already in use).

Genetic modification of insects and animals is increasingly possible and has already been

demonstrated in a few instances; however, there are significant biological, cultural, ethical

and legal issues with the release of such organisms into an ecosystem. Experiments on

altering the genes of individual humans began in 2000, and a number of successful clinical

applications have been reported for fertility or genetically related diseases;121 however, there

have been some serious side effects as well. Many believe it is becoming increasingly

possible to modify a human’s genetic makeup successfully to select for increased physical

performance, intelligence, memory, or even appearance. However, such experimentation may

119See http://www.nanowerk.com/spotlight/spotid=22137.php

120 See http://blogs.wsj.com/venturecapital/2012/12/17/are-wearable-flexible-electronics-the-next-big-thing-mc10-

says-so/

121 See http://www.naturalnews.com/036372_genetically_modified_human_babies.html
40

carry serious risks of harmful side effects to individuals, or even future generations. Genetic

engineering of “super bugs” as bioweapons is a near term possibility, and these may already

exist.122 Another hypothetical long-term military application that has been proposed is the

engineering of future “super soldiers”; however, major social and ethical hurdles to such

experimentation will likely exist in many countries.

 Personalized Medicine: With the development of sophisticated chemical and physiological

analyses and monitoring technologies, and the ability to cheaply sequence an individual’s

genome, the possibility of designing individual-specific drugs and therapies will become a

real possibility over the next 5 to 10 years. Since treatment of patients by conventional

“general” medicine results in millions of adverse reactions each year that waste billions of

dollars in health-care costs, personalized medicine will revolutionize many aspects of health

care. Such cost savings may benefit the U.S. military greatly. However, others have also

hypothesized that these capabilities could also be “weaponized” to attack particular racial or

ethnic groups.123

 Replacement of Organs, Limbs, Tissues: Replacement of organs via artificial electromechanical devices is already possible for a wide range of body parts. However, many recent

developments which combine tiny sensors, miniature electro-mechanical systems, advanced

digital control algorithms, and advanced biomaterials are now revolutionizing the

sophistication of such prostheses. For example, in 2012 Swedish researchers successfully

tested the first fully implantable, thought-controlled human prosthetic arm,

124 and the U.S.

Army is conducting research in this area on cognition and neuro-ergonomics.125 Reliable

artificial lungs, ear and eye implants, and muscles will all likely be commercially available

within 5 to 10 years. A much more significant advancement is the use of stem cells for

potentially regenerating every human body part. Stem cell research has made tremendous

strides in the last decade, and has advanced to the point where there are many existing

clinical treatments and a fledgling stem cell engineering industry worldwide126 with a market

value of nearly $90 billion. Applications beyond body part regrowth include rapid drug

testing, treatments for fertility and aging, and even growth of biologically inspired circuits

for artificial intelligence.

 Computation and Bioinformatics: Characterizing biological organisms and systems requires

an enormous amount of information that increases dramatically with the level of detail.

Information technologies are therefore playing an increasing and critical role in biology and

biotechnology. Gene sequencing is an obvious example, which was a major computational

hurdle for even a single individual, yet a proposed next step is to sequence the entire U.S.

population and perform sophisticated analyses on this database. Bio-informatics is also an

important tool in a wide range of other areas, such as molecular biology, drug discovery, and

disease correlation in public health. Modeling and simulation are playing an increasingly

important role, from molecular dynamics to whole individuals or ecosystems. These areas are

all increasingly in need of faster computers and larger memory storage, as well as a range of

122See http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=117204&page=1

123 See

http://salempress.com/store/samples/encyclopedia_of_genetics_rev/encyclopedia_of_genetics_rev_biological_weap

ons.htm

124See http://www.gizmag.com/thought-controlled-prostheticarm/25216/?utm_source=Gizmag+Subscribers&utm_campaign=ee62cbcbf4-UA-2235360-4&utm_medium=email

125See http://www.arl.army.mil/www/default.cfm?page=393

126 See http://www.wtec.org/SCE/
41

advanced algorithms and visualization tools. Another important application of ICT to

biotechnology is for telemedicine, which includes digital medical records, expert system

diagnoses, remote health care, and even robotic surgery. Telemedicine already accounts for

almost 15% of health-care applications in the United States and is growing by about 30% per

year. As a wide range of biological, environmental, and medical monitoring devices come

online, from in situ patient devices to supply chain monitoring, real time situational

awareness of the public health landscape is becoming a real possibility. Applications to

disease outbreaks and WMD events are immediate.

 Neuroscience/Neurobiology: The field of neurobiology has undergone very rapid

development, with a deeper understanding of the nervous system resulting in applications

ranging from “thought controlled” prosthetics and improved detection of physiological and

emotional states of humans, to better treatment for various psychological disorders or

damage (e.g., Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, or PTSD). Recently, neuroscientists have

proposed a large-scale Brain Activity Mapping 127 project to map the physiological

underpinnings of brain activity, a project some have compared to the human genome

sequencing in scope and importance, and the Obama Administration has recently added this

to the FY2014 budget request.128 The larger field of neuroscience continues to show rapid

progress due to advanced methods such as neural imaging, electrophysiology, and brainrelated DNA sequencing, and new fields such as neuro-economics and social neuroscience,

which are beginning to understand the physiological origins of human decisionmaking and

how humans interact with others and their environment. The above areas all have a wide

range of important military applications, from clinical treatment and training, to human

performance enhancement, as well as organizational behavior and even applications to

counterterrorism.

 TransHuman Augmentation: A more radical area of technological development falls within

the intellectual movement generally called “transhumanism,” basically the belief that human

beings could and should fundamentally change their physical beings by enhancing them with

transformational technologies. 129 Such futuristic enhancements include eliminating aging,

creating super intelligence, synthetically replacing a person’s entire body, or digitally

uploading their mind. While much of this area is speculation and philosophy, a surprising

number of technologies are now developing or are available that are already raising these

possibilities.130 Psychostimulants and cognition enhancing drugs are already available and

developing rapidly. Direct implantation of silicon memory and processors into the brain have

been successfully demonstrated, as have purely thought controlled devices. 131 These

advancements not only have direct military applications, they also could be utilized in

clandestine operations or espionage, and potentially even by terrorists.

 Synthetic Biology: SynBio is a radical new branch of biology and bioengineering that is

making it possible to design an entirely new sequence of DNA, model its properties,

chemically produce it, and insert it into an empty cell. The possibility therefore exists to

create entirely new organisms that have never existed before, and potentially to give them

127Seehttp://www.livescience.com/27721-brain-activity-map-project-launch.html

128 See http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2013/04/02/brain-initiative-challenges-researchers-unlock-mysterieshuman-mind?utm_source=040213&utm_medium=topper&utm_campaign=daily

129 See http://humanityplus.org/

130 See http://io9.com/5967896/us-spy-agency-predicts-a-very-transhuman-future-by-2030

131 See http://www.cyberkineticsinc.com/
137 Internal CTNSP report on Synthetic Biology by Dr. James Valdez, james.j.valdes.civ@mail.mil.

42

specialized and exotic properties. Recently, Craig Venter, of the J. Craig Venter Institute,

announced that his lab had effectively created a living cell with an entirely new genome,132

perhpas the world’s first synthetic life form. More worrisome, the basic knowledge and

equipment for designing, modifying, or producing synthetic DNA is now so cheap and

readily available, through open source networks133 and even from eBay, that a new area of

DIY Biology has been born.134 This has raised deep concerns from a wide variety of groups

about the possibility of having potentially thousands of new life forms created by

“biohackers” released into the environment, with unforeseen consequences, and there are

now serious discussions about developing regulation for Federal oversight.135 What is clear is

that we have already entered uncharted territory in terms of the potential for creation of new

pathogens and other bioweapons, which might be leveraged by a range of actors. However, a

recent OSD Research and Engineering assessment of current research in the field suggests

that SynBio also has great promise for the engineering of synthetic organisms that will be

useful or produce inputs for a wide range of defense relevant applications, many for DoD,

across medicine, human performance, weapons, sensors, and high-performance materials.136

These relevant applications include forward manufacture of fuel and pharmaceuticals, active

and passive signature management, chemical and biological defense countermeasures, data

storage and fusion, lightweight armor, smart coatings and materials, soldier health, and

enhanced human performance and training.137

National Security Implications: Biology and biotechnology are likely the most rapidly

evolving areas of S&T today, and have some of the most profound implications. The breadth and

speed of these advances make them difficult to fully assess, although there is potentially much

low hanging fruit that the national security community might take advantage of. New

technologies and treatments for force protection, health, and medicine will likely be significantly

more effective than others and could provide great cost reductions. Advanced artificial

prosthetics offer much for treatment of veterans, as well as artificial human augmentation for a

variety of tasks and even battlefield use. Bioinformatics and telemedicine also have great

promise for reducing the cost of health care and emergency treatment. Genetic modification of

organisms and SynBio, while some of the most important new technologies now appearing, may

also constitute a grave new threat area, as the difficulty and cost of creating new organisms and

bioweapons falls dramatically. The rapid growth in the field of synthetic biology and the

potential for it to generate significant tactical, operational, and strategic impacts in a wide range

of defense relevant applications, from medicine, to human performance, weapons, sensors, and

high-performance materials merit its recognition as a priority research, development, and

engineering area for the DoD.

132 See http://www.dcbar.org/bar-resources/publications/washington-lawyer/articles/may-2012-diy-scientist.cfm

133 See www.DIYbio.org

134Seehttp://www.openscientist.org/2011/10/tools-of-trade-for-do-it-yourself.html

135 See http://www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/resources/publications/washington_lawyer/may_2012/DIY_scientist.cfm

136 Herr, DoD Research and Engineering Technology Assessment: Synthetic Biology, op.cit.
43

Appendix C: The Revolution in Robotics, Artificial Intelligence,

and Human Augmentation

General Trends: Robotics is often defined as the development and deployment of automated

machines. It has a surprisingly long history; however, today it is reaching the stage where

significant numbers of sophisticated robots are being sold commercially for industrial, military,

and even domestic use. Robotics involves a wide range of research areas and engineering

disciplines, and generally requires capabilities which include power sources, precise mechanical

actuation, sensing, locomotion, environmental interaction, and control. These areas themselves

are now developing rapidly, with advancements such as high density batteries, advanced

materials, micro-electronics and sensors, computer vision, GPS and navigation tools, and

advanced control algorithms. Additionally, there has been considerable research into creating a

more natural human-robotic interface, which includes speech recognition and generation, gesture

recognition, and artificial facial expression. Several countries, most notably Japan and South

Korea, have made large R&D investments in robotics over the last couple of decades, partly with

an eye toward augmenting their labor pool as their societies age.

Artificial intelligence is a related field that is increasingly utilized in robotic and other control

systems, but its focus is on developing intelligent machines or systems, and it is sometimes

defined as a branch of computer science. However, today it involves a wide range of research

and problem areas, such as reasoning, planning, learning, perception, and environmental and

situational awareness, which are studied by a broad range of disciplines, including engineering,

psychology, and philosophy. The development of “weak AI,” namely, the cognitive ability to

solve specific problems or perform specific tasks, has been demonstrated in a broad range of

applications over several decades. It is becoming increasingly important to facilitate many

“smart” technologies now available commercially. However, the development of “strong AI,” or

true general intelligence and creativity similar to a human brain, is a long-term goal that some

believe may never be realized.

Robotics, artificial intelligence, and human augmentation have become very important

technologies not only because of their military and industrial applications, but also as a

burgeoning economic sector and a potentially transformative social driver. In this vein, in June of

2011, the Obama Administration launched the National Robotics Initiative, 138 a partnership

between the NSF, National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Aeronautics and Space

Administration (NASA), and U.S Department of Agriculture (USDA), which is designed to

move forward on a broad research front to develop a wide range of robots that can work

alongside humans in a variety of settings.

Transformational Technologies: Specific technology and application areas which are evolving

rapidly and are having major impacts include:

 Industrial Robotics: Robotic systems have been used in industrial settings since the early

1960s, and it is currently estimated that there are over 8.4 million such robots in use

globally,139 with a projected world market of over $15 billion by 2015.140 Increasingly cheap

and capable sensors, actuators, and control systems are dropping the cost of robotic systems

138 See http://spectrum.ieee.org/automaton/robotics/industrial-robots/obama-announces-major-robotics-initiative

139 See http://www.worldrobotics.org/

140 See http://www.roboticsbusinessreview.com/article/consumer_robot_sales_to_surpass_15b_by_2015
44

dramatically, as well as rapidly expanding the tasks they can do and the complexity of

products they can make. The standardization and modularization of robotic components is

also increasing flexibility and dropping costs. These developments will likely have

increasingly profound consequences for labor forces worldwide, but especially in developing

countries, where robotic systems may become even cheaper than their low wage human

workers. It will also mean developing countries will be able to manufacture increasingly

sophisticated products themselves, perhaps changing the balance of global economic

competition and even the national security environment.

 Health and Medicine: A rapidly expanding sector of commercial robotics is in health and

medical applications, driven by the generally high value of its products and services, as well

as the increasing shortage of human labor. There are already a number of commercial robotic

systems available to assist or replace human surgeons, often with much-improved results,141

and remote telemedicine systems are increasingly in use. A potentially large and lucrative

market is in robotic patient, home, and elder care.142 A large amount of research dollars are

being invested in these systems globally by governments and corporations, although there are

still considerable technical and social hurdles to overcome, principally because of concerns

about the safety of human-to-robot interactions. This sector, however, may be a key driver

for developing the technical, legal, and sociological tools to make robots commonplace in

human society. This general area has significant implications for DoD, related to the costs of

health care and personnel support, advanced battlefield care, and in the development of

frameworks for the sociology of human-to-robot interactions in operational environments.

 Unmanned Vehicles: The area of unmanned vehicles (UVs) has become a large research and

commercial sector, with a number of Federal agencies funding research, and a wide range of

companies developing and producing them. There are also trade organizations and non-profit

research consortia that coordinate a wide range of activities, 143 including the legal and

legislative frameworks for operating UVs. Open sourcing and cheaply available components

and systems have also encouraged a significant community of DIY UV developers. The

global market for unmanned air vehicles alone was estimated at $7.1 billion in 2011,144 and

the United States currently accounts for about 77% of all the research, development,

technology and engineering (RDT&E) on UVs worldwide.

From a military standpoint, UVs are already making major contributions on and off the

battlefield for the United States and other nations, including air, 145 ground, 146 and sea

vehicles,147 and their role will continue to expand. While this area is too large to cover in

detail here, extensive information is available elsewhere, for example, the U.S. Unmanned

Systems Integrated Roadmap.148 Remote controlled vehicles of various kinds are increasingly

mature technologies, and fully autonomous vehicles are still limited but evolving rapidly.

Facilitating trends in these technologies include miniaturization, reduced power consumption,

141 See http://www.intuitivesurgical.com/

142 See http://www.roboticsbusinessreview.com/article/progress_report_on_eldercare_robots

143 For example, see http://www.auvsi.org/Home/

144 See http://www.unmanned.co.uk/unmanned-vehicles-news/global-unmanned-vehicles-market-expected-to-growby-4-over-the-next-decade/

145 See http://www.iar-gwu.org/node/144

146 See http://www.rsjpo.army.mil/

147Seehttp://auvac.org/community-information/community-news/view/1473

148 See http://www.defenseinnovationmarketplace.mil/resources/UnmannedSystemsIntegratedRoadmapFY2011.pdf
45

better sensors and navigation tools, advanced materials, and more substantial armaments. For

autonomous vehicles, artificial intelligence and system control are still the primary limiting

factors, particularly when they are to operate in concert with each other or conventional

forces. DoD is funding considerable research on improved intelligent control systems, and

significant advances are expected over the next five years.

Unmanned vehicles could also make significant contributions in civilian environments, for

example, for surveillance, infrastructure monitoring, police telepresence, and homeland

security applications. However, operational safety in urban or built environments has been a

major issue so far, which extends to legal and liability concerns. One significant development

recently has been the testing of unmanned commercial automobiles. Although Google has

had a high profile program, almost all the major auto companies have significant autonomous

domestic vehicle research programs, as does the Department of Transportation, NASA, and

parts of DoD.149 In another interesting development, Amazon recently announced plans to

develop a system to deliver packages by fleets of unmanned drones150 although there has

already been some backlash from the public and regulatory bodies. These programs

significantly benefit the U.S. military efforts in these areas because they add private sector

resources, help resolve issues of safety and human interaction, and increasingly are evolving

the legal and legislative frameworks for operating such vehicles in populated areas. In fact,

there are currently three states that issue vehicle permits for driverless cars. As these

capabilities accelerate, the U.S. military will be able to take advantage of such systems for a

much broader array of support functions, relieving human personnel for more substantive

tasks.

 Hazardous Operations: Synergetic with the technologies being developed for military

operations are those for a variety of operations in hazardous or extreme environments. These

include space exploration,151emergency response and firefighting,152 bomb and hazardous

waste disposal,153 police support duty,154 search and rescue,155 and mining.156 While these

technologies typically parallel that of military systems, they often add additional operational

capabilities, such as being designed to withstand extremes of temperature, radiation, or other

unusual circumstances. These applications are important for DoD robotics efforts in general

because they create additional private sector markets for niche capabilities, which will

ultimately drive additional innovation and lower costs.

 Service and Domestic Sector: Service robots for personal use represent the fastest growing

segment of the robotics industry, and it is estimated that almost 11 million units will be sold

worldwide between 2012-2015, with a total value of almost $4.8 billion. 157 Dozens of

149 See

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2011/August/Pages/Army,CarMakersPushAheadWithDriverlessV

ehicleResearch.aspx

150Seehttp://www.cnn.com/2013/12/02/tech/innovation/amazon-drones-questions/

151 See http://robotics.nasa.gov/

152See http://www.allonrobots.com/firefighting-robots.html

153 See

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2011/July/Pages/NewRobotsPlannedforBombDisposalTeams.aspx 154 

See http://www.policeone.com/police-technology/articles/6003779-Ariz-cops-to-get-robots-to-help-in- dangeroussituations/

155See http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20042945-1.html

156Seehttps://share.sandia.gov/news/resources/news_releases/miner-scou/

157 See http://www.worldrobotics.org/
46

companies now manufacture service related robots, with capabilities that include vacuuming,

lawn mowing, dog walking, indoor courier service, kitchen helper service, grooming, elder

assistant service, as well as a wide range of entertainment functions.158 These robots tend to

have very limited artificial intelligence, although this is improving rapidly. Another

increasing use is in public relations, for example as robotic receptionists, salesmen, or tour

guides, and this involves research into creating more lifelike and fully functioning humanoid

robots, such as Honda’s Asimo.

159 While this market segment is driving considerable

innovation in niche areas, it also must also deal with novel problems, such as human

acceptance of robotic form and presence in close proximity, and the mimicking of human

expression.

 Embedded Systems: While not strictly robotics, the accelerating trend toward embedded

systems parallels robotics development and is already having a major effect on some aspects

of society. Embedded systems generally refer to physical systems which incorporate digital

or analog electronic devices, microprocessors, sensors, actuators, software, communication

devices, and often Micro-Electro-Mechanical Systems (MEMS) or mechanical systems, and

are usually focused on real-time operation.160 Smart phones are now the canonical example

of an embedded system; however, nearly every major industry is now incorporating

embedded systems of various kinds in their products. At present, examples of embedded

systems exist in automobiles, factories, infrastructure, appliances and homes, pets, and

potentially, inside human beings. As new paradigms such as “cloud robotics” become

prevalent,161 the line between conventional robotics and intelligent everyday devices will

become increasingly blurred. The profound ramifications of this trend are that nearly every

aspect of global society could become instrumented, networked, and potentially available for

control via the Internet, in a hierarchy of cyber-physical systems.162 With cybersecurity still

an increasingly serious global problem, embedded systems may present even more severe

privacy and security issues.

 Human Augmentation: Advanced robotic devices that can augment human physical or

cognitive abilities is an area that is also rapidly developing. Although often related to the

replacement and regeneration of biological tissues, covered in Appendix B, many purely

robotic devices are being developed that can temporarily enhance a human being’s

characteristics for special tasks. For example, exoskeletons, which could impart greatly

increased physical characteristics, are in their early stages of development and have great

promise.163 Recently, researchers demonstrated a “Spidersense” suit,

164 which significantly

enhances sensory perception of a wearer’s environment and could be modified to detect a

wide range of phenomena. Google, which developed Google Glass to provide wearable

computer and network access, is developing a contact lens version.165 Research in direct

158See http://www.trendhunter.com/slideshow/domestic-robots

159 See http://world.honda.com/ASIMO/

160 See http://eetimes.com/discussion/other/4204667/Emerging-trends-in-embedded-systems-and-applications

161 See http://www.roboearth.org/cloud_robotics

162 See http://cyberphysicalsystems.org/

163 See http://techland.time.com/2012/10/15/meet-x1-the-exoskeletal-robot-suit-that-could-make-astronauts-superstrong/

164 See http://www.gizmag.com/spidersensesuit/26592/?utm_source=Gizmag+Subscribers&utm_campaign=4475661ac6-UA-2235360-4&utm_medium=email

165 See http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/google-considers-tiny-cameras-for-contact-lenses/#!GvDCw
47

brain-to-device interfaces is already a developing field, 166 and recently researchers

demonstrated two human brains communicating directly over the Internet.167 This range of

technologies is now more generally referred to as the field of bionics, and has potentially

profound implications for a wide range of applications, in particular, warfighter capabilities,

as well as support personnel capabilities.

 Weak AI: As described above, “weak AI” generally refers to limited machine intelligence

focused on decisionmaking for a specific problem area. Weak AI can be implemented by a

variety of methods, such as rule sets, statistical methods, neural nets, and adaptive or learning

algorithms. Weak AI is currently present in a wide range of technologies, from sensor

systems and infrastructure control, to human interfaces, and is improving steadily due to

software developments and increasing computer speed. There is a huge community of

researchers developing new weak AI capabilities, including many in DoD. 168 However,

improvements in cognition of weak AI systems are still qualitatively incremental.

 Strong AI: Strong AI has been the holy grail of artificial intelligence research for decades.

Strong AI seeks to build a machine which can simulate the full range of human cognition,

and potentially include such traits as consciousness, sentience, sapience, and self-awareness.

No AI system has so far come close to these capabilities; however, many now believe that

strong AI may be achieved sometime in the 2020s. Several technological advances are

fostering this optimism; for example, computer processors will likely reach the

computational power of the human brain sometime in the 2020s (the so-called “singularity”).

Other fundamental advances are in development, including exotic/dynamic processor

architectures, full brain simulations,169neuro-synaptic computers,170 and general knowledge

representation systems such as IBM Watson.171 It is difficult to fully predict what such

profound improvements in artificial cognition could imply; however, some credible thinkers

have already posited a variety of potential risks172 related to loss of control of aspects of the

physical world by human beings. For example, a 2013 report commissioned by the United

Nations has called for a worldwide moratorium on the development and use of autonomous

robotic weapons systems until international rules can be developed for their use.173

National Security Implications: Over the next 10 to 20 years, robotics and AI will continue to

make significant improvements across a broad range of technology applications of relevance to

the U.S. military. Unmanned vehicles will continue to increase in sophistication and numbers,

both on the battlefield and in supporting missions. Robotic systems can also play a wider range

of roles in automating routine tasks, for example in logistics and administrative work.

Telemedicine, robotic assisted surgery, and expert systems can improve military health care and

lower costs. The built infrastructure, for example, can be managed more effectively with

166 For example, see the University of Michigan project: http://www.umich.edu/~umdbi/

167 See http://www.washington.edu/news/2013/08/27/researcher-controls-colleagues-motions-in-1st-human-brain-tobrain-interface/

168 See http://www.militaryaerospace.com/articles/2013/03/DARPA-machine-learning.html

169 See http://www.kurzweilai.net/waterloo-researchers-create-worlds-largest-functioning-model-of-thebrain?utm_source=KurzweilAI+Weekly+Newsletter&utm_campaign=d92f0f2be5-UA-946742-

1&utm_medium=email

170Seehttp://www.gizmag.com/ibm-neurosynaptic-computer-chips/19562/

171 See

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9237343/IBM_Watson_will_eventually_fit_on_a_smartphone_diagnos

172 See http://www.fastcoexist.com/1678899/how-stephen-wolfram-is-preparing-for-the-singularity

173Seehttp://phys.org/news/2013-05-moratorium-killer-robots.html
48

embedded systems, saving energy and other resources. Increasingly sophisticated weak AI tools

can offload much of the routine cognitive or decisionmaking tasks that currently require human

operators. Assuming current systems move closer to strong AI capabilities, they could also play a

larger and more significant role in problem solving, perhaps even for strategy development or

operational planning. In the longer term, fully robotic soldiers may be developed and deployed,

particularly by wealthier countries, although the political and social ramifications of such

systems will likely be significant. One negative aspect of these trends, however, lies in the risks

that are possible due to unforeseen vulnerabilities that may arise from the large scale deployment

of smart automated systems, for which there is little practical experience. An emerging risk is the

ability of small scale or terrorist groups to design and build functionally capable unmanned

systems which could perform a variety of hostile missions.
49

Appendix D: Revolution in ICT and Cognitive Science

General Trends: The ICT that have been developed and widely deployed over the last three

decades have driven some of the greatest change in human history. Not only are ICT globally

connecting mankind, but ubiquitous flows of information are facilitating profound changes in the

industrial, transportation, energy, media, defense sectors, and others, as well as changing the way

governments operate. The networking of people and things continues to expand from the largest

scales (global networks) to the smallest (embedded microsensors). As such, data and information

is being produced at a hyper-exponential rate.174 Technologies which digitally store and process

data and information, such as microprocessors and memory, continue to improve rapidly, but at a

slower rate than information production. Tools to help human beings process and understand this

information deluge are developing at an even slower rate, and this cognitive mismatch is already

presenting significant dilemmas for operations, governance, and organizational and personal

decisionmaking.

ICT generally facilitate information pull, information push, information analysis, and

increasingly, information effects. Technologies facilitating information pull include physical

devices like PCs and smart phones, environments like browsers, and search and query tools like

Google. Technologies to push information to potentially large numbers of other users include the

above, as well as social networking sites, blogs, tweets, and other emerging digital media. ICT

also provide a range of analysis tools, such as expert systems, modeling and simulation,

visualization tools, and the like. And increasingly, ICT can be used to affect the physical world,

for example through Internet-based industrial controls (IC) and SCADA (Supervisory Control

and Data Acquisition) systems, embedded systems, web-based logistics, and the ICT themselves

(e.g., via hacking). All of these capabilities have benefits and risks which are poorly understood,

since their evolution is extremely rapid and there is little historical precedent for such large scale

developments.

These developments have an increasingly wide range of consequences for the U.S. national

security community, the Federal Government, and in fact organizations worldwide. Ubiquitous

online information and ICT will transform environmental sensing, situational awareness,

intelligence gathering, logistics and resources, command and control, marketing and business,

public relations and diplomacy, and education and training, and improve human cognition and

creativity. However, new concepts and tools will be needed to keep pace with this evolving

global landscape and harness its potential. Some of the transformational technologies which

could provide, or are affecting, these capabilities are discussed below.

Transformational Technologies: Specific technology and application areas which are evolving

rapidly and are having major impacts include:

 Ubiquitous Sensing: The deployment of electronic sensors to collect data has exploded in

recent years, and includes traditional sensors from environmental monitoring, infrastructure

systems, transportation, medicine, and the like, and increasingly, mobile electronic devices,

which contain a variety of data gathering elements. Moreover, a rapidly increasing amount of

data is generated or gathered by ICT themselves, such as data about Internet operations or

174 Marcia Connor’s blog, in a post on “Data on Big Data” recently stated that: “Every day, we create 2.5 quintillion

bytes of data—so much that 90% of the data in the world today has been created in the last two years alone.”

http://marciaconner.com/blog/data-on-big-data/
50

traffic, video feeds, and metadata (i.e., data about data). In 2010 it was estimated that there

may be up to 1 trillion sensors now connected to the Internet, 175 a number which may

quadruple by 2020. Many kinds of new ICT-based sensor technologies are also in

development, such as wearable biosensors176 and networks of nanosensors,177 and as wireless

deployment expands, these will all increasingly contribute to the flood of online information.

While this represents enormous opportunity for understanding and managing the global

environment, the potential for illicit or malicious activities also is increasing greatly, as these

resources become widely available to nearly everyone.

 Big Data: Big data is a relatively recent term that refers to the extremely large digital

databases of stored or transmitted information collected from a range of sensing systems, as

well as data from Internet traffic, cell phones, video recordings, social media, and other

sources. As noted earlier, all such data sources together produce about 2.5 quintillion bytes of

data178 per day, about 80% of which is unstructured, and the rate of increase only seems to be

accelerating. There is currently much enthusiasm about big data as a potential tool for

understanding, analyzing, and managing many aspects of society, such as transportation,

energy use, natural resource prospecting, public health, security and law enforcement, as well

as new concepts such as smart cities and crowdsourcing. However, as these databases

continue to grow, there are increasing challenges in the ability to mine and analyze them.

New tools such as MapReduce, Hadoop, and behavioral biometrics are improving these

capabilities, however there will continue to be challenges in dealing with the volume,

velocity, variety, and veracity179 of such large data sets to help make better decisions.

 New Computing Architectures: At the core of ICT lie computer processors and memory,

which perform digital computation and storage functions. For several decades, computer

power has doubled roughly every two years (“Moore’s Law”), and this has driven the

extremely rapid advances of the information revolution. However, current silicon-based

computer architectures are reaching their physical limits. A number of new technologies are

being developed to continue the increases in computer power, some of which may be

revolutionary. In the near term, advancements such as improved lithography, heat dissipating

materials and true 3D chip architectures180 will likely extend silicon chip density increases

into the 2020s. Optical computers are another near term possibility, and offer advantages in

speed and power consumption. Most of the necessary components for optical computing

have already been developed,181 although a commercial optical computer may not be fielded

until the 2020s. Biocomputers, which typically perform operations using complex molecules

such as DNA, could perform huge numbers of parallel calculations at once, and have been in

development for decades. However, there are still significant technological hurdles which

may keep them from commercial deployment until at least the late 2020s. Finally, quantum

computers are the most exotic and potentially transformational new computing technology,

since they actually exploit the quantum nature of matter. Quantum computers would not be

175 See http://websimpletools.com/2010/09/mother-earth-gets-a-central-nervous-system-1-trillion-sensors/

176 See

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=4650309&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls

%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D4650309

177Seehttp://www.ece.gatech.edu/research/labs/bwn/surveys/wnsn10.pdf

178 See http://marciaconner.com/blog/data-on-big-data/ , op. cit.

179 See http://www-01.ibm.com/software/data/bigdata/

180 See http://phys.org/news187454589.html

181Seehttp://phys.org/news/2012-03-holey-optochip-trillion-bits-power.html
189 See http://www.washington.edu/news/2011/09/12/new-study-quantifies-use-of-social-media-in-arab-spring/

51

limited to conventional binary logic, could exploit other exotic properties such as a quantum

entanglement, and would have near infinite speeds in comparison to current silicon

computers.182 Many organizations are funding research on quantum computing, including

DoD, and remarkable progress has been made in recent years, but several profound technical

barriers remain. Still, some researchers have predicted that special purpose quantum

computing architectures may be available within one to two decades.183

 Ubiquitous Networks: Along with ubiquitous sensing and big data, ubiquitous availability of

Internet connectivity promises to be another transformational trend. Deployment of devices

to access the Internet continues to rapidly expand, with nearly 7 billion devices and about 4

billion human users currently connected, and 6 billion users likely by 2020. Internet

penetration is growing by 40% per year globally, a majority of which is occurring in

undeveloped countries, and many countries are now deploying 1 Gb Internet backbones.

Network speeds and WiFi availability have now become key indicators for macroeconomic

analysts. As cloud and grid computing also become increasingly available, it is possible that

within a decade almost every human being, globally, will have access to enormous data

resources and sophisticated analytic tools. With the evolution of the IoT,184 they will also

have information about, and potentially limited control over, a wide range of physical

devices and systems. Further, wearable access technologies, such as Google Glass and

potentially direct human-computer brain interfaces, may mean that human beings will have

the ability to be “always online” within a decade.

185

 Social Media: Social media environments represent one of the most important web based

technologies yet developed, and they continue to expand rapidly in sophistication, user base,

and commercial influence. Current estimates are that 2/3 of the U.S. population uses social

media regularly,186 and the user growth rates in developing countries are particularly high,

for example, by as much as 50% yearly in India and Indonesia.187 This penetration is likely to

continue as their mobile versions, or SoMo, proliferate, and there is increasing integration

across environments and technology platforms. Social media, such as LinkedIn, Facebook,

and Twitter, allow users to search for, connect to, and exchange information and opinions

with large numbers of other users globally. They incorporate many conventional information

sources, and increasingly they are facilitating the emergence of new social phenomena such

as “digital tribes.”

188 Such emergent phenomena have already produced important effects,

such as enhancing political campaigns, and helping organize political demonstrations and

even insurgencies such as the Arab Spring.189 Many governments are now trying to utilize

these technologies for more transparent governance, but also increasingly for soft power,

public relations, and diplomacy on a global scale, which is now being termed “cyber

statecraft.” The business and economic applications of social media have been developing for

some time, for example for marketing analysis, but an important new trend is in

182 See

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/03/20/quantum_computing_and_the_future_of_moore_s_law.html

183Seehttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17688257

184Seehttp://qz.com/156075/internet-of-things-will-replace-the-web/

185 See http://www.marketplace.org/topics/tech/always-internet-2013-and-controlling-robotic-arm-brain-implant

186 See http://www.pewinternet.org

187 See http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2242467/Global-Social-Media-Trends-in-2013

188 See Emerging Data Models to Help Serve Tomorrow’s Digital Tribes, KPMG International 2009.
52

crowdsourcing, crowdfunding, and open design, which could greatly increase innovation in

many sectors.

 Virtual Reality/MMOG/Telepresence: Somewhat related to social media are environments

for virtual reality (VR). These generally comprise 3D digital environments of high detail, in

which human subscribers can generate and manipulate a virtual avatar to interact with other

players and virtual objects. Diverse organizations have already developed some kind of VR

presence, including many Federal agencies190 and many cities and states. SecondLife, started

in 2003, was the first sophisticated VR environment and also developed much of the early

innovation. At its peak it had several million subscribers exchanging millions of real dollars

through its virtual economy. Today, however, the largest environments are Massively

Multiplayer Online Games (MMOG), which are competition oriented environments, of

which there are now hundreds. These games are significant because of the sheer size of their

enterprise: World of Warcraft has over 12 million subscribers worldwide, while Happy Farm

has over 228 million registered subscribers. The financial aspects of MMOG are staggering;

U.S. MMOG gamers spent over $3.8 billion in 2010, and the value of virtual property in

some games ranks their economies above many nations. These environments, however, may

have considerable national security implications; they are known to be collaborative

environments for terrorists and criminal organizations 191 and environments for money

laundering. Conversely, they are also excellent environments for open source intelligence

gathering.

Much has been written about VR environments for training and educational aspects, and

many institutions such as universities and museums have generated 3D renderings of their

facilities. The U.S. military has funded the development of these environments for years as

training devices, and currently has projects for PTSD treatment,192 squad tactics,193a variety

of flight simulators, cultural training, medical training, and potentially, a persistent,

individualized personal avatar194 for each soldier. Technologically, great strides are now

being made in 3D virtual visualization systems, whole body instrumentation, and virtual

behavioral mapping, which could provide a natural, effortless, and seamless interface to a VR

environment. A related application is to telepresence, in which a person’s physical form,

voice, and behavior are represented remotely via digital media, for example, a full 3D

hologram, or even a robotic form. Telepresence195 has potential for enhanced remote meeting

and negotiations capabilities, or even for enhanced remote operations, for example,

hazardous operations or space travel. Whether these capabilities may also enhance terrorism

or criminal operations, remains to be seen.

 Cybersecurity: Although cybersecurity has been an increasingly important priority for the

United States and other nations for a decade, in many ways the global situation has worsened

in recent years. Because it is currently a high profile topic, with much written and said about

it, we will not focus on it here. However, two recent trends which may have grave security

implications should be noted. The first is the increasingly large and transparent offensive

190 See http://www.fcvw.org/

191 See http://singularityhub.com/2011/08/24/al-qaeda-in-azeroth-terrorism-recruiting-and-training-in-virtual-worlds/

192 See http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2012/11/29/daily-circuit-virtual-reality-ptsd

193 See http://www.army.mil/article/84453/

194Seehttp://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/01/army-virtual-reality/

195 See http://www.telepresenceoptions.com/2011/06/telepresence_and_visual_collab_2/
53

operations in cyberspace by certain nations, which suggest an increasing militarization of

cyberspace, and perhaps even a cyber arms race. A recent report by the DSB has concluded

that the U.S. military is unprepared for a cyber offensive by a top-tier adversary, and has

recommended increasing offensive cyber capabilities.196 The second point is the increasing

vulnerability of mobile devices to malicious cyber activities as their hardware and software

becomes more sophisticated. As mobile devices, including embedded systems, proliferate

faster across the globe, the effects of major cyber attacks via these “attack surfaces” may

become increasingly severe and difficult to anticipate.

 Cognitive Enhancement and Collective Intelligence: ICT will continue to increase the global

flow of data, information, and knowledge dramatically, at least for the foreseeable future.

Ultimately, however, individuals need to understand this sea of information to make use of it,

a task which is only likely to get harder. Tools to enhance human cognition will therefore

become increasingly important. Cognitive enhancements could generally take the form of

devices, actual physical augmentation of the brain, or a hybrid of both.

Examples of cognition enhancing devices include mobile devices which use situational and

contextual information to prioritize and predict the most relevant information for the user,

which has already been demonstrated for traffic navigation applications. Other applications

include biologically inspired search algorithms for big data, which mimic some of the

cognitive aspects of the human brain (e.g., IBM’s Watson). Interactive, geometric,

multidimensional data representation environments, such as Oblong,197are already seeing

important applications. More long-term developments could include distributed humanmachine systems employing brain-machine interfaces and analog physiomimetic

processors, 198 as well as hybrid cybernetic systems, which could provide seamless and

artificially enhanced human data exploration and analysis.

A number of technologies for directly enhancing human cognitive capabilities were

mentioned earlier in the biology section, and many of these are directly applicable to

improved information processing. These technologies are still early in their stages and results

are uneven. However, developments in the enhancement of human cognition on a macroscale are becoming more mature. Studying the emergence of collective intelligence199 from

large human-machine systems is an important new discipline, building on aspects of complex

adaptive systems. Other more mature efforts, such as The Millennium Project,200 utilize

existing ICT to mine the knowledge and creativity of worldwide networks of experts to help

develop solutions to complex problems. The longer term evolution of these trends may be the

emergence of the “global brain,” a concept proposed in the late 1990s, in which all human

beings are constantly connected through ICT into one macro-intelligence. Several notable

institutes are already studying the possibility of this phenomenon and the capabilities it could

provide.201

196 See http://www.homelandsecuritynewswire.com/dr20130306-u-s-military-unprepared-for-cyberattacks-bytoptier-cybercapable-adversary-pentagon

197 See http://gigaom.com/2013/02/18/video-grabbing-data-and-pushing-pixels-a-visit-with-oblong-industries/

198 See http://www.synesisjournal.com/vol2_no2_t1/GiordanoWurzman_2011_2_1.pdf

199 See http://cci.mit.edu/

200 See http://www.millennium-project.org/

201 See http://globalbraininstitute.org/
54

National Security Implications: As with society as a whole, ICT will facilitate a very wide

range of future capabilities for DoD. Perhaps the greatest challenge will be in keeping pace with

the rapid evolution of ICT, and in developing appropriate doctrine, operational structures, and

decisionmaking to exploit them. The Chinese, for example, are already studying the military uses

of the global IoT, 202 and are building capabilities to exploit it. 203 However, DoD has had

significant issues in the past acquiring and deploying cutting edge ICT from the private sector,

and using them effectively. Another major challenge in the future will be in dealing with the

asymmetries arising from ubiquitous ICT, as small groups or even individuals are able to create

temporary but significant operational advantages for malicious ends, using cyber resources

which are essentially free.

The most direct military application of advanced ICT will lie in the areas of Command-ControlCommunications, Computers and Intelligence-Surveillance-Reconnaissance (C4ISR). Over the

next 20 years, the most consequential advancements for C4ISR will be the availability of

enormous amounts of information, collected from entities almost everywhere, in real time,

through pervasive network access. Commercial ICT will be an important part of this capability.

The challenge for DoD will be how to use these developments to out-think our adversaries.

World-class organizations such as the National Security Agency (NSA) can provide exceptional

insights, but decisionmakers must know how to use them. C4ISR will also have to meet the still

undefined demands of future cyber war. Since cyber can disrupt nearly all elements of remote

observation (the “observe” part of the Observe, Orient, Decide, Act (OODA) loop), it can

dominate the entire decision cycle. Moreover, with the near-zero cost of entry into information

space, and the explosion of open source information, adversaries will be able to deceive, deny

and disrupt our data, while building their own awareness. Big data, and its successors, may offer

many invaluable insights, but the fog of war will remain so long as there are adaptive enemies.

202 See http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?arnumber=6273031

203 See http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/OEWatch/201309/China_04.html
55

Appendix E: The Revolution in Nanotechnology

and Advanced Materials

General Trends: Advances in materials have been key to human progress for millennia. Today,

the revolution in new materials and nanotechnology have become comparable to the revolutions

in biology and ICT. Advanced materials, such as composites and multifunctional materials, are

adding improved performance and lowered weight and cost to a wide range of products. While

generally incremental in their technological advancement, such novel composites and functional

materials are now being widely produced and deployed, and will cause widespread changes in

many commercial sectors and built environments.

Nanotechnology, generally a shorthand for “nanoscience, nanoengineering, and nanotechnology,”

is a collection of concepts, methods, and tools that have been developing for several decades, and

it sometimes also refers the products that come from them.204 The aim of nanotechnology is to be

able to measure and manipulate matter on the atomic scale, and the goal is eventually to be able

to routinely design and create materials and devices at that scale. Within the last decade, many of

these tools and methods have matured, and when they become widely commercialized, many

believe it will result in the “next industrial revolution.”

Nanotechnology spans nearly all research and engineering disciplines, and product development

is increasing in every business area. The U.S. Government coordinates nanotechnology

development across 26 Federal agencies via the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI),

funded at about $2 billion in 2013. However, many other nations have developed their own

national nanotechnology programs, aimed at capturing a share of the global market for nanorelated products, which some estimate to be as large as $3 trillion by 2020. This global

competition is becoming increasingly sharp, with almost $10 billion spent this year on research

worldwide by governments and the private sector,205 and with roughly 2,100 nanotech companies

from 48 countries in existence as of late 2010.206 A handful of nations are now investing large

amounts for commercialization, and are aggressively acquiring intellectual property and small

businesses, often from the United States. Rusnano,207 a commercial investment fund that is

buying many U.S. nanotech companies and was capitalized at $10 billion in 2012, has Russian

President Vladimir Putin’s personal backing. Recently China opened SuZhou,208 a city devoted

entirely to nanotechnology research and commercialization, which is targeted to employ 200,000

workers.

Generally, the methods and facilities for manufacturing these materials involve a very advanced

set of technologies, and are often very capital intensive. There is a global race now to develop

the science, industrial processes and production capabilities for these advanced products, with

trillions of dollars in market share at stake. Who wins and loses this race will have serious

implications for future geopolitics and national security.

204 See http://www.nano.gov

205 See http://www.electronics.ca/presscenter/articles/1542/1/Annual-Global-Nanotechnology-Research-FundingRunning-at-10-Billion-Per-Year/Page1.html

206 See http://www.prweb.com/releases/nanotechnology/companies/prweb4203334.htm

207 See http://en.rusnano.com/about

208See http://www.nanotech-now.com/columns/?article=469
56

Transformational Technologies: Specific technologies and application areas in advanced

materials and nanotechnology which are evolving rapidly and are having major impacts include:

 Composites and Hybrid Materials: Composites and hybrid materials are typically

combinations of existing materials into new ones with enhanced properties. Modern material

science has become extremely innovative in developing tools and methodologies to design

and create composites such as modeling, joining, blending, and embedding in matrices. New

classes of materials include new ceramics, hybrid metals, and new polymers, as well as

combinations of these. These materials can have highly enhanced properties, such as being

much stronger, lighter, or more wear resistant than conventional materials, or having novel

electrical, optical, or even biomimetic properties. These materials are having significant

effects on many industries, including construction, transportation, energy production, textiles,

health care, and defense. For example, the new Boeing 787 is achieving some 20% greater

fuel efficiency than earlier competing aircraft through the extensive use of carbon reinforced

plastic composites. DoD has funded materials science for decades, and has a wide range of

programs to develop advanced materials for armor, superstructures, paint and coatings,209 and

having exotic electrical or optical properties, or other functional properties such as selfhealing, or energy or moisture harvesting.210 Such materials will continue to enable new

defense capabilities across a range of applications. However, a future challenge will be to

maintain the leading manufacturing base for these products here in the United States, as

research and production become globalized. With the global market size for composite

materials estimated at $57 billion by 2014,211 there is widespread competition.

 Smart Materials: Smart materials are materials that can respond to their environment or

external stimuli in a specific, controllable fashion. There are a wide range of such materials

already in development or available commercially. The materials themselves can include

polymers, ceramics, plastics, metals, carbon fibers, glasses, and others which are engineered

to respond to many kinds of stimuli, such as light, heat, stress, humidity, electric or magnetic

fields, and pH. Applications include structural materials that can change shape or color on

demand, self-cleaning materials, pharmaceuticals that are released only when specific

conditions appear in the patient,212 materials that heat or cool with optical or electromagnetic

stimuli, and clothing which can alter shape, color, or moisture exchange according to the

wearer’s conditions.

213 The next generation of smart materials will include embedded sensors

and communication devices, distributed actuators, energy harvesting, shape control for

aerodynamics and hydrodynamics, exotic optical properties, and self-healing properties.

Commercially, the global market for smart materials is expected to jump from $19 billion in

2010 to over $40 billion by 2016.214 Smart materials can have many important applications

for DoD,215 for example wearable or printable electronics to monitor soldiers physiological

state, self-healing coatings and paint for ships,216 self-healing body armor, piezoelectric thin

209Seehttp://www.jhuapl.edu/newscenter/stories/st100615.asp

210Seehttp://www.darpa.mil/Our_Work/DSO/Focus_Areas/Materials.aspx

211 See http://nanopatentsandinnovations.blogspot.com/2009/12/21-billion-global-composite-materials.html

212See http://www.jhuapl.edu/newscenter/stories/st100615.asp

213 See http://www.attendly.com/if-you-want-to-build-the-future-you-need-to-understand-smart-materials/

214See http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/smr/si/ctsma.pdf

215 See http://www.slideshare.net/Anupam_Tiwari/smart-materials-for-military-applications

216See http://www.jhuapl.edu/newscenter/stories/st100615.asp
57

films for acoustic sensing, hydrodynamic shape control for aircraft and micro-air vehicles, a

variety of advanced medical applications, and smart dusts.217

 Nanomaterials: Nanomaterials are materials that are structured at the nanoscale, between 1

and 100 nanometers, roughly the scale of a one to a few atoms. Materials structured at the

nanoscale can have exotic properties not exhibited by the same material without such

structure. Nanomaterials were the first wave of nano-related products to be commercialized,

and over 1,000 products are now being sold. Currently, the majority of these materials are

sold as additives for a wide variety of other products, for example nanosilver in sunscreens,

nanogold for medical treatments, and carbon nanotubes in sports equipment. These additives

can significantly enhance the performance properties of such products, and often at relatively

low cost. However, many nanomaterials exhibit other unusual properties which are more

important. For example, carbon nanotubes can be excellent conductors of electricity, and are

already being developed as a lighter, more robust substitute for standard copper wiring and

potentially electronics. More exotic are meta-materials, which are conventional materials

with precise patterns engraved on them at the nanoscale, for example extremely thin films

which form nano-antennae. Nanomaterials could have an extremely wide range of

applications for the military, and are currently being developed for novel body armor,218 very

strong but light structural elements,219 and carbon nanotube cables and sheeting,220 among

others. Graphene, essentially the first two dimensional material, could revolutionize

electronics,221among other areas. Long-term potential uses include stealth coatings, selfhealing materials, adaptive camouflage, electromagnetic shielding, 222 and smart skins. 223

These materials will undoubtedly provide significantly new capabilities over the next decade;

however, it is not clear whether the United States will be able to maintain its lead in global

development and production.

 Nanoelectronics: In keeping with Moore’s law, current semi-conductor devices have

decreased in size to the point where their smallest length scales are already within the

nanoscale (i.e., 22 nanometer lithography ). However, current silicon architectures generally

do not exploit the exotic properties that are possible at the nanoscale, where for example

quantum mechanical effects can dominate. Development of nanoelectronic devices will not

only extend Moore’s law, but provide truly new and transformational capabilities. Many

governments and companies worldwide are investing large R&D amounts in this area.

Nanoelectronics is probably the area of nanotechnology that is most ripe for

commercialization, with the global market for nanoelectronics expected to reach over $400

billion by 2015.224 A significant U.S. innovator is the Nanoelectronics Research Initiative,225

a part of SemaTech, which funds university research through a consortium of industry and

Federal funding. Recently, the state of New York, IBM, and the University of Albany

partnered to create the world’s largest research and commercialization center for

nanoelectronics, reportedly capitalized at over $7 billion.

217See http://robotics.eecs.berkeley.edu/~pister/SmartDust/

218Seehttp://www.businessinsider.com/mit-body-armor-breakthrough-2012-11

219See http://www.gizmag.com/zyvex-piranha-usv/22078/

220 See http://www.nanocomptech.com/

221 See http://www.technologyreview.com/news/421853/making-graphene-nanomachines-practical/

222See http://www.nanowerk.com/spotlight/spotid=27088.php

223Seehttp://www.nanowerk.com/news2/robotics/newsid=27943.php

224 See http://www.prweb.com/releases/nanoelectronics/nanotechnology/prweb2493854.htm

225 See http://www.src.org/program/nri/
58

Nanoelectronics research is developing a range of new tools and devices which exploit

fundamental atomic and quantum mechanical properties of matter. These include nearly onedimensional lithographic methods, nanowires, quantum dots, molecular computing,

spintronics, and nanophotonics. These technologies could allow computation and memory

storage to occur using devices far smaller than current silicon technologies, and requiring far

less power. Many of these new technologies have already been demonstrated in the

laboratory, for example single molecule computing devices have been built by a number of

research groups.226 However, widespread commercialization of more exotic nanoelectronic

devices is at least 5-10 years away. A major hurdle will be developing reliable manufacturing

methodologies which can be scaled up to significant production. DARPA has recently

announced the creation of the STARnet program to accelerate research in nanoelectronics,227

funded at a minimum of $40 million per year. STARnet and other DoD programs may create

the cutting edge of innovation in this field, but with the bulk of electronics manufacturing

now lying outside the United States (particularly in China) it is unclear whether the United

States can maintain leadership in commercialization.

 Nanosensors: Sensors are one of the more immediate and useful applications of

nanotechnology. Nanosensors can be sensors that detect extremely small amounts

(potentially single molecules) of a substance, or sensors actually constructed at or near the

nanoscale. A number of commercialized technologies exist in the first category, which often

exploit the extreme sensitivity of existing biological organisms or biomimetic instruments

(e.g., electronic noses

228). However, the second category, namely, sensor devices constructed

at the nanoscale, will be particularly innovative. These sensors utilize nanostructures such as

functionalized metallic nanoparticles, functionalized nanowires and nanotubes, macroscopic

materials with nanoscale features or surface treatments, and nanostructured mechanical

systems, whose properties respond to the presence of extremely small amounts of particular

substances. While initially limited to a small set of substances, a number of these

technologies are now appearing which can detect a fairly wide range of materials.229 A great

deal of research on nanosensors has gone on in the biological and medical world, for example,

with the goal of studying individual cells or detecting molecules of pathogens or toxins with

high specificity.230 These technologies are applicable to a wide range of industries, such as

the chemical industry, electronics, food safety, public health, aerospace, and homeland

security. Nanosensors can be particularly important for DoD, as they may replace many

conventional sensors, providing greatly increased sensitivity, lower power and weight, and

potentially lower cost. More ambitious capabilities being researched include large networks

of nanosensors that have wireless communication and potentially onboard processing, which

could provide nearly noninvasive monitoring of a wide area to collect data pervasively.231

Military applications include health and environment, battlefield instrumentation, and

intelligence gathering, among others.

226 See http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2010-05/single-molecule-computes-thousands-times-faster-your-pc

227Seehttp://www.darpa.mil/Our_Work/MTO/Programs/STARnet.aspx

228See http://www.nanowerk.com/spotlight/spotid=17373.php

229 See http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-03/new-ultra-sensitive-sensor-could-sense-any-substancetaking-light-sensing-tech-out-lab

230Seehttp://www.nanoscience.ucf.edu/research/biomedical_perez5.php

231Seehttp://www.ece.gatech.edu/research/labs/bwn/granet/projectdescription.html
59

 Biomedical Nanotechnology and Nanomedicine: Because nanostructures are of roughly the

same scale as many biological structures, there are a wide range of applications in

biotechnology and medicine. Many new nanomaterials are being developed or tested for a

variety of biomedical applications, such as nanogold for cancer treatments. Nanoelectronics

are being used to help develop nanobiosensors, and to provide direct interfaces to neurons.

Nanosensors are also being developed to image and measure a wide range of cellular

functions, both outside and inside cells. Novel drug delivery mechanisms are probably the

most active area being commercialized, particularly by the pharmaceutical industry, where

they can provide better skin penetration, timed or conditional drug release, nonviral gene

therapy vectors, or even delivery directly inside cells. Targeted drug delivery, potentially to

specific organs or body areas, is another goal, and the development of drugs designed for an

individual based on their genome, for example, ”personalized medicine,” is an increasing

area of research investment. Nanomaterials are also being investigated as frameworks for

tissue reconstruction or engineering, where cells can be grown around a nanomaterial

scaffolding. Longer term capabilities may include nanomachines that can operate at the

cellular level, or even grow or reconstruct whole organs.

Nanobiotechnology is a very rapidly growing commercial sector, with a global market

predicted at over $6 billion by 2017.232 A number of countries are investing heavily in it, and

the NIH budget alone for nanotechnology related research in 2013 was over $400 million,

with several other agencies funding their own programs. DoD can benefit widely from

emerging nanobio and nanomedicine capabilities in the areas of health care and battlefield

treatment,233as well as in the chemical/biological warfare area. The U.S. Army maintains a

center devoted to nanomaterials and biology applications,234 and the U.S. Air Force recently

announced a Nano-Bio Manufacturing Consortium235 to create a public-private partnership to

develop advanced manufacturing of these products in areas such as vaccines, therapeutics,

and detection technologies.

 Nanomachines and Nanomanufacturing: Perhaps the most ambitious goal of nanotechnology

is to be able to create nanoscale devices, or nanomachines. Such devices would generally be

composed of a small number of atoms that perform useful tasks on other nanoscale structures.

One class, synthetic nanomachines or molecular machines, are generally designed to mimic

some macroscale machine-like operation, and so far nanotechnologists have constructed

molecular propellers, molecular switches, molecular tweezers, and even molecular motors.

Another class of nanomachines is biologically motivated, which, for example, mimic

biological structures within cells that perform physical operations, such as flagella.

Significant progress has been made in this latter area; for example, scientists recently created

artificial proteins, or bionic proteins,236 potentially paving the way for entirely artificial life.

Nanorobots, or nanobots, are more complex nanomachines which could potentially carry

instructions to perform more complicated tasks at the nanoscale, and could include sensors

232 See http://www.prweb.com/releases/nanobiotechnology/nanomaterials_nanotools/prweb9340108.htm

233 See http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2012-01/mits-nano-treated-bio-bandage-can-stop-bleeding-almostimmediately

234 See http://www.tatrc.org/ports_nanoMedBio.html

235 See http://globalbiodefense.com/2012/11/16/nano-bio-manufacturing-consortium/

236Seehttp://phys.org/news/2013-02-nano-machines-bionic-proteins.html
60

and communication capabilities; however, as rendered in Figure 2, these are largely notional

at this time.

Figure 2: Molecular Car

The figure shows a computer graphic rendition of an actual molecular car with four carbon-based

wheels that rolls on axles made from linked carbon atoms. See

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090427080545.htm.

Nanomachines are still in their early development, and unlikely to have a major impact over the

next 5 to 10 years. However, a few examples of nanomachines which act at the macro level have

been demonstrated, for example large assemblies of nanomachines that can form artificial

muscles.237 Yet even if successful prototypes of nanomachines are demonstrated, many technical

hurdles remain, such as reliability and robustness, and the capability to manufacture them safely

and at scale. Several Federal agencies currently fund programs on nanomanufacturing, a number

of companies manufacture products truly at the nanoscale, and a few promising prototype

nanomanufacturing technologies have been demonstrated, 238 yet widespread development of

industrial scale nanomanufacturing technologies will take a decade or more.

National Security Implications: Nanotechnologies have the potential to revolutionize almost

every technology and industrial sector globally; however, in most areas they are still in

laboratory development or very early commercialization. There are still significant hurdles for

incorporating them in existing systems or operational environments, and there are also health and

environmental concerns. DoD can and should stay on the cutting edge of research and

development in these areas, both to exploit transformational technologies as they evolve, but also

to mitigate risk of foreign development. One important challenge facing DoD and the United

States in general is the fierce international competition for nanotechnology related intellectual

property or IP, and the fact that many U.S. startups are being aggressively acquired by foreign

companies. This orchestrated effort by a number of foreign countries is increasingly a threat to

the nanotechnology tech base in the United States.

237Seehttp://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121023100940.htm

238 See http://www.webpronews.com/3d-printed-nanomachines-may-soon-be-a-reality-2012-10
61

Appendix F: Revolution in Energy

General Trends: The availability of energy and the technologies to deliver it have been key

drivers of human advancement throughout much of history. The development of fossil fuels

helped spark the industrial revolution and subsequent rapid economic growth throughout the 20th

century, and still underpins the global economy. Oil in particular has created enormous wealth

for some nations, and diminished the influence of others. It has also been a key driver of

geopolitics and conflict since before WWII. Because the United States has become a major oil

importer over the last few decades, its strategic position has sometimes been weakened. Energy

security has thus become an important national goal for the United States, which will require

becoming largely energy independent, and this will certainly require significant demand

reduction efforts and development of new domestic sources of energy to replace imported oil.

Consumption of fuel types, globally, is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3: World Energy Consumption By Fuel, 1990–2035 By Quadrillion Btu

Figure Credits: Projected Global Energy Use, by source type, compiled by the U.S. Energy Information

Administration. See: http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/ieo/world.cfm

Energy availability underlies almost all activities, large and small, that occur in daily life.

Development of new technologies to produce, store, transmit, and conserve energy is a major

research area globally.

The first step in energy efficiency is to reduce up-front demand, whether through design,

technology or process improvement.239 A range of significant new technologies are now on the

cusp of being deployed, and other transformational technologies are in the research stage. Many

239 The Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on DoD Energy Strategy, “More Fight – Less Fuel,” is an

important study that focused on “Unnecessarily high and growing battlespace fuel demand” and the unacceptable

risk stemming from the “almost complete dependence of military installations on a fragile and vulnerable

commercial power grid and other critical national infrastructure....” It also called on the Department to reengineer

its business processes to make energy a key factor in DoD decisions.

http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/reports/ADA477619.pdf. See also Reinventing Fire, op.cit.
62

of these technologies are facilitated by the other technology areas of the BRINE framework. The

U.S. military, as the world’s largest consumer of energy, should have a major interest in these

technologies, particularly in times of constrained budgets. It also has unique needs on the

battlefield, particularly for vehicles and individual soldiers, and in delivering fuels to the

battlefield.

Transformational Technologies: The discussion below focuses on some of the more significant

and potentially transformational energy technologies now in development, with a focus on those

where DoD policy decisions can make a difference.

 Oil and Gas Recovery Technologies: While not transformational technologies per se, the

recent scale up and integration of horizontal drilling technologies and hydraulic fracturing

(“fracking”) methods have created a potentially transformative path for the energy future of

the United States. These technologies are unlocking vast reserves of oil and natural gas in

shale deposits in North America. By some estimates, the we have now roughly tripled our

accessible natural gas supply, and production has been increasing at roughly 50% per year

since 2007, with smaller but similar increases for oil. On this trajectory, the United States

will become the world’s largest natural gas producer by 2015, the world’s largest oil

producer by 2017, and a net exporter of energy as early as 2020.240 The consequences of this

are profound, including more robust economic growth for the United States, significantly

lowered energy costs, and major shifts in geopolitical power globally, as we become less

dependent on foreign resources and as major energy exporters lose income and influence.241

While it is still too early to predict the consequences of these events, DoD would be well

advised to begin assessing and planning for the potential changes outlined above.

 Solar Energy: Solar energy has been in development for decades, but has never been

economically competitive with fossil fuels, principally because of poor sunlight conversion

rates and expensive installation costs. In recent years, a number of new technologies have

been developed that may surmount both of these hurdles. These technologies are being

funded by major government programs here and abroad, such as DoE’s Sun Shot,

242 but

increasingly invested in by large and small businesses who see growing, lucrative solar

energy market. New solar cell technologies, such as quantum dots and crystals that allow

multi-exciton dynamics,243 could raise solar conversion efficiencies from the current 25% to

a theoretical maximum of 42%, and perhaps to 70% with appropriate system engineering.

Large scale deployment of novel, thin-film solar cell systems, for example by First Solar,244

have dropped overall production costs to about $0.67 per watt, making it competitive enough

for grid deployment. Several research groups have recently developed cheap, printable,

flexible solar cells, and a Stanford group has developed versions composed entirely of

extremely rugged carbon nanotubes,245 although their current solar conversion efficiencies

are low.

240 See http://csis.org/publication/geostrategic-implications-unconventional-oil-and-natural-gas

241 See http://globaltrends2030.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/global-trends-2030-november2012.pdf, pp. 35-37

242See http://www1.eere.energy.gov/solar/sunshot/index.html

243 See http://cleantechnica.com/2013/01/30/super-efficient-solar-cells-possible-through-use-of-exotic-form-ofsilicon-generating-more-than-one-electron-hole-pair-per-photon/

244 See http://www.firstsolar.com/

245 See http://www.technologyreview.com/news/506901/all-carbon-solar-cells-will-mean-cheap-and-flexible-solarpanels/
63

The U.S. military has already become a leader in testing and deploying solar power, from

large scale installations to tactical level devices for individual soldiers and vehicles,246 part of

a plan to deploy 3 Gigawatt or GW of renewable energy by 2025. Helping to develop and

deploy the more advanced solar technologies mentioned above would give DoD much more

bang for the buck, and additionally help keep this technology base in the United States, since

it is being increasingly threatened by foreign competition. Current estimates are that the solar

energy market will be about $15 billion by 2016 in North America, and about $75 billion

globally, 247 and many nations are now attempting to commercialize and deploy solar

technologies, most notably China.

 Biofuels: Biofuels, generally, are biological substances either naturally occurring or

processed that are used as an energy source. There are a very wide variety of existing

biofuels used globally, from burning wood and waste products, to liquids and gases produced

from biomass using simple or more exotic chemical reactions. Most biofuel sources are not

viable as a large scale energy source because of limited feed stocks; however, a few are now

contributing at significant scale.248 Most notable are ethanol fuels produced from various

feed stocks such as corn and sugar cane, which currently make up a few percent of the liquid

fuel sources in the United States. These particular biofuels, however, have had the

unintended effect of raising food prices in some regions, with some resulting political

backlash. Using cellulose-based feed stocks could alleviate much of this source competition

and widen the potential base of stocks; however, it has proven much more difficult to

develop the chemistry necessary to convert cellulose efficiently. Still, biofuels currently

make up almost 3% of the transportation fuels used globally, and they are growing by about

6% per year, almost twice the rate of fossil based fuels.249

Several recent technology advances could make biofuels much more competitive and

plentiful. Genetic engineering of plants, in particular, switchgrass, so that their cellulosic

components are easier to process into biofuels has been demonstrated by a number of

groups. 250 Genetically engineering bacteria to be able to digest a variety of cellulosic

materials has also been recently demonstrated.251 Algae, including genetically engineered

versions, are a promising route to significantly improved processes for converting a range of

feed stocks to biofuels, and a number of companies have recently invested hundreds of

millions of dollars in several large scale pilot plants.252 In April of 2013, DoE also announced

the award of almost $18 million in matching funds for four different pilot biorefineries to

create drop-in fuels for automotive, naval, and aviation use.253

DoD has several major activities aimed at developing biofuels as alternative fuel sources,

such as the Great Green Fleet demonstration, part of a $510 million interagency effort to

246 See http://www.solarnovus.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5763:us-military-support-forsolar-energy&Itemid=352

247Seehttp://www.marketsandmarkets.com/PressReleases/solar-energy.asp

248 See Dr. Tim Coffey, A Primer on Alternative Transportation Fuels, NDU, CTNSP, Sept 2010, which looks at the

cost of producing various kinds of alternative transportation fuels at scale.

http://ctnsp.dodlive.mil/files/2013/07/DTP-074.pdf

249 See http://www.grida.no/graphicslib/detail/world-biofuels-production-trends_d3ec

250Seehttp://arstechnica.com/science/2011/02/get-ready-for-gmo-biofuels/

251 See http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/28/genetically-modified-bacteria-ka-yiu-san_n_2972556.html

252 See http://gigaom.com/2013/01/17/2013-could-be-a-make-or-break-year-for-algae-fuel/

253 See http://www.renewableenergyfocus.com/view/32112/us-energy-department-announces-projects-to-developadvanced-drop-in-biofuels-for-military-jets-and-ships/
64

develop these fuels, and also plans to spend about $300 million to purchase biofuels over the

next 5 years as an early adopter.254 However, at a current cost of roughly ten times that of

petroleum, these efforts recently drew Congressional criticism.255 With an austere budget

outlook for the foreseeable future, and the prospect of decreasing oil prices as shale gas

reserves are tapped, it is unclear whether biofuels will continue on a trajectory to become

economically competitive within this decade.

 Batteries: Batteries are an enormously important technology across a range of application

areas, from large scale storage to small scale devices, and they are important technology for

industrial, personal, and military uses. Much research has gone into improving battery

technology over several decades, but energy densities have historically improved relatively

slowly. However, as mobile electronic devices continue to proliferate and electric cars are

being commercialized, the global market for batteries is accelerating, and expected to reach

$144 billion by 2016.256

A number of exotic new battery technologies are now in development or already being

commercialized. Successors to the current lithium-ion battery include lithium-air batteries,

magnesium or aluminum-ion batteries, and electrolyte flow batteries.257 A number of new

battery technologies are also in development that make use of nanotechnology or

nanomaterials, for example lithium-ion batteries enhanced by nano-tin crystals, 258 or a

silicon-graphene matrix.259 These enhancements can dramatically improve energy densities,

battery life, and re-charge times. One notable case was the NanophosphateTM battery

technology created by A123 Systems,260 which had excellent performance and was to go into

mass production in 2012. A123 became financially troubled, however, and in early 2013 was

sold to the Chinese conglomerate Wanxiang America, despite considerable public criticism

in the United States. Another cutting-edge technology is flexible, thin films that are solar

panels as well as batteries,261 in which China has been investing considerable resources.

Significantly enhanced battery technologies will not only improve the operational

characteristics of electronics and communication devices, but will facilitate wholly new large

scale systems, such as operationally viable all-electric vehicles, large scale storage for solar

and wind power, and mega-scale storage for the electric grid. DoD has been funding various

programs to develop next generation batteries, for example, Defense Advanced Research

Projects Agency (DARPA) programs developing nanomaterial enabled batteries,262or hybrid

254 See

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2012/June/Pages/BiofuelsIndustryatCrossroadsasMilitaryWaitsfor

LowerPrices.aspx

255 See http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/28/business/military-spending-on-biofuels-drawsfire.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&

256 See http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/global-battery-market-forecast-to-reach-usd144-billion-in-2016-

175444421.html

257 See http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21571117-search-better-ways-storing-electricityhotting-up-batteries

258Seehttp://phys.org/news/2013-04-tin-nanocrystals-battery-future.html

259 See http://gigaom.com/2011/11/16/future-gadget-batteries-could-last-10-times-longer/

260 See http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/06/12/498076/troubled-battery-maker-a123-unveils-breakthrough-newlithium-ion-technology/?mobile=nc

261Seehttp://www.globalsources.com/gsol/I/Solar-cell/a/9000000118833.htm

262 See http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2010-10/future-li-ion-batteries-will-be-smaller-grain-salt
65

battery/ultracapacitor systems.263 Additionally, the U.S. Army has two battery labs under the

Tank Automative Research Development and Engineering Center (TARDEC). 264 The

Department of Energy Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) also funds a

number of advanced battery programs, and in the private sector, the U.S. Advanced Battery

Consortium265 is coordinating development of next generation battery, ultracapacitor, and

fuel cell technologies across sectors. These significant improvements in energy storage

technologies, most likely to be commercialized within the next 5 to 10 years, will have

considerable impact on U.S. military systems, including the individual warfighter, vehicles,

drones and unmanned vehicles, as well as large scale storage for enhancing solar or wind

power facilities.

 Hydrogen Storage and Fuel Cells: The prospect of a future hydrogen economy has been a

long-term goal of the United States and other nations for years, including being a priority of

the last Bush Administration. Combining hydrogen generation and storage technologies with

fuel cells to provide electric or thermal power has been studied extensively in technological,

engineering, infrastructure, and economic aspects. While much of the capability exists or is

feasible, a number of significant technological hurdles remain. Major Federal programs are

tackling these problems, for example at the DoE National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL)

Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Office 266 and Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

Fuel Cell Office, and in a wide range of domestic and foreign universities and companies.

Several recent technological developments are bringing hydrogen-based energy systems

much nearer. MIT researchers have developed an Artificial Leaf, 267a cheap

silicon/cobalt/nickel chip that splits water directly into hydrogen and oxygen using sunlight.

In 2012, Australian researchers developed a nano-enabled form of sodium borohydride that

has a very large hydrogen storage capacity, and also safely stores and releases energy within

a moderate temperature range.

268 Ford, Daimler, and Nissan recently announced they are

teaming to bring an advanced fuel cell drive train system for vehicles to market by 2017,269

prompting Toyota and BMW to follow suit.

DoD has been a major developer of fuel cell technology for a decade or more, and fuel cells

could provide a wide range of power sources, including tactical level power, vehicles, direct

and backup power for facilities, distributed generation, and power for unmanned vehicles.270

With recent technological breakthroughs and major commercialization and deployment

efforts by large corporations, however, highly capable commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS)

technologies will likely be available within 5 years time, which may be a better DoD

investment for most routine power applications.

 Energy Harvesting: Energy harvesting or “scavenging” is one of the more novel and

potentially important energy technology areas now developing. It involves collecting low

263 See http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/intelligent-energy/darpa-funds-17-million-for-new-ultracapacitor/4231

264 See http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/04/11/fact-sheet-obama-administration-announcesadditional-steps-increase-ener

265See http://www.uscar.org/guest/view_team.php?teams_id=12

266 See http://www.nrel.gov/hydrogen/proj_storage.html

267 See http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/28/tech/innovation/the-artificial-leaf-power-solar-electricity/

268Seehttp://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/08/120815093303.htm

269 See http://www.economist.com/blogs/schumpeter/2013/02/hydrogen-powered-cars

270 See http://www.fuelcells.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/LMI-Fuel-Cell-Report.pdf
66

level background or waste energy and utilizing it for useful applications. The low level

energy sources can be thermal, mechanical, electromagnetic, acoustic, or even fluid flow, and

collection technologies include small scale mechanical generators, piezoelectrics,

photovoltaic cells, induction coils, ultracapacitors, or a variety of other devices. Generally,

these systems also require energy storage capability, power conditioning or management

elements, and a mode of transmitting the collected energy efficiently. A considerable amount

of R&D is ongoing in these areas, including in Federal agencies such as DoE, universities,

and a variety of companies, and there are a number of industry groups coordinating research

agendas.271

Converging technology trends are making energy harvesting much more viable. One is that

the energy requirements of many electronic devices and other systems are being reduced to

the point where low level ambient energy is sufficient to power them. Another trend is that

several new technologies are being developed that can efficiently harvest, store, and utilize

the energy. For example, small printable antennas have been developed recently that can

harvest ambient electromagnetic radiation,272 and Microgen Systems273 is now developing a

number of small integrated piezoelectric devices that can harvest background vibrations and

convert it directly to electricity. Researchers at Wake Forest are developing a new flexible

fabric made of carbon nanotubes in a plastic matrix that is very efficient at converting

background thermal energy into electricity,274 and the Auckland Bioengineering Institute is

developing a suite of highly efficient human biomechanical energy harvesting devices based

on electrically driven elastomer membranes. 275 At a larger scale, several existing

technologies already can harvest waste heat, for example from near power plants, which

could be deployed on a much wider scale.

The U.S. military has funded a number of research programs on energy harvesting over the

last decade, and a number of pilot technologies have been tested or deployed; however, there

are many additional opportunities for harvesting energy for small scale devices, such as for

individual soldier power requirements, unmanned vehicles, and unattended sensors or

distributed wireless sensor networks. Still, the rapid development of these technologies in the

private sector may make COTS technologies available sooner for a wide range of mission

areas.

 Smart Power Systems: Smart power systems generally refer to energy generating and

delivery systems which are enhanced by information technology, including use of distributed

sensors and data gathering, real time modeling, and advanced control systems. The smart grid

concept being developed for the U.S. national electric grid276 involves these technological

innovations and will facilitate more efficient management, repair, and energy allocation, but

also allow for use of a variety of distributed renewable energy sources and storage

271 See http://www.energyharvesting.net/

272 See http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-07/new-printable-devices-can-harvest-ambient-energypower-small-electronics

273 See http://www.microgensystems.co/

274 See http://cleantechnica.com/2012/02/24/imagine-electricity-generating-clothes-but-without-solar-panels-onthem/

275 http://www.digitaltrends.com/features/batteries-not-included-how-small-scale-energy-harvesting-will-power-thefuture/6/

276See http://energy.gov/oe/technology-development/smart-grid
67

technologies, as well as self-healing resilience against disturbances or attack, and even ability

to support the energy markets. Smart grid concepts and technologies are also easily applied

to local or isolated power grids as well, such as in a military setting. Another application of

smart power systems is to smart buildings. 277 Smart buildings sometimes refers to

incorporating advanced materials such as insulation or green roofs; however, the novel

technological aspects are the use of embedded systems throughout the building, use of

appliances and heating and cooling systems, managed by a central computer system and

sometimes incorporating SCADA control systems. In 2011, the Obama Administration

launched the Better Buildings Initiative 278 to nationally coordinate the development and

deployment of advanced technologies and standards for smart buildings. These efforts have

significant implications for future U.S. energy use the DoE estimates that there are roughly

4.8 million commercial buildings and 350,000 industrial facilities in the United States that

consume about half the country’s total energy needs, and about 30% of this could be saved

by optimizing energy use.

DoD has been given a mandate to improve its energy efficiency in a variety of ways by the

Energy Security Act of 2011,279 and many provisions pertain to buildings and facilities. In

response, DoD currently has a goal of reducing its overall energy intensity by 30% by 2015,

the Navy has a goal of having half of its bases being energy self-sufficient (i.e., “net-zero

energy”) by 2020, and the Army has implemented the strictest building standards in the

Federal Government, with a goal of eventually having all its facilities at net-zero energy.

 Directed-Energy Weapons: One novel use of energy technologies is for DEWs, an area

which has been in development since the 1960s. Such weapons emit pure energy in the form

of electromagnetic radiation of some spectral range, for example, laser light or millimeter

wavelength radiation. The advantages of such a weapon system have long been recognized,

and include near-zero flight time, high accuracy, and a potentially infinite “magazine.” DoD

has had research programs and facilities developing directed-energy technologies for many

years, in particular within the Navy. 280 There have also been a number of significant

advancements in recent years in the ability to aim, mount, and operationally integrate such

weapons, in particular, lasers.281 The Navy deployed its first laser weapon on the USS Ponce

in mid-2014.282 However, a serious hurdle at present is the ability to generate enough energy

to make the weapons very effective. Most current systems are an order of magnitude or more

weaker than would be minimally desirable, although all the armed services and DARPA

currently run research programs aimed at reaching dramatically improved power levels by

about 2020.

 Once DE weapons are fielded, however, there is little doubt that they will dramatically

change battlefield dynamics.283 They will likely require the development of new doctrine and

277See http://www.triplepundit.com/2013/02/smart-building/

278 See http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/02/03/president-obama-s-plan-win-future-makingamerican-businesses-more-energy

279 See http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/06/14/244716/military-renewables-efficiency-and-energy-security/

280 See http://www.navsea.navy.mil/nswc/dahlgren/NEWS/directed_energy/directed_energy.aspx

281 For example,see http://www.popsci.com/article/technology/army-truck-shoots-drones-mortarslasers?dom=PSC&loc=recent&lnk=1&con=army-truck-shoots-drones-mortars-with-lasers

282 See http://rt.com/usa/navy-warfare-laser-ponce-454/

283 See: http://www.csbaonline.org/publications/2012/04/changing-the-game-the-promise-of-directed-energyweapons/
68

operational strategies, and some feel that they could redress the increasing parity of other

nations and non-state actors with the United States, entities who can, for example, leverage

cheap drones. Some forms of DE weapons also provide unique non-lethal capabilities that

can create new options for force protection and civilian applications.

National Security Implications: Energy availability is at the core of modern society, and energy

security will continue to be a national priority in the coming decades. A focus on demand

reduction and incorporation of energy considerations in to DoD business practices is the place to

start. The development of a broad spectrum of energy sources and smart infrastructure is a

judicious path for the United States; however, the release of vast stores of fossil fuels from shale

deposits remains a wild card, and may in fact mean that major investments in some alternative

energy technologies should reasonably be delayed, as they become less economically

competitive in the near term. This general investment scenario will likely hold for DoD as well,

particularly as it attempts to maximize efficiency during future budget constraints. However,

development of new technologies for smaller scale systems, such as solar energy plants for

facilities and energy harvesting for individual soldiers, will likely remain a high impact

investment.