Just for the Ethanol acres. 30 million acres for a small fraction of fuel. Instead use the same acres for solar panels.

Annual Electricity Generated is 26,300 TWh/year.

Over 6× total U.S. annual electricity consumption (~4,100 TWh/year). This is enough to electrify everything in US.

Don't do the math for homeless people. Most people live in homes. Homes usually have electricity, unless you live in a 4th world country. All buildings have electricity. Just park and plug in.

You need to go to a gas station BECAUSE there is no supply of gasoline straight to home. Homes have electricity. Even in sub-Saharan Africa, South Sudan, Yemen, remotest village in India. I don't know where you live, but if your home doesn't have electricity, your country has bigger problems to deal with than buying Teslas and DC Fast Chargers.

I've done the math. The average car in Canada does 11,000 miles a year. A Tesla isn't great efficiency, it uses about 3.5 miles per kWh. Throw in inefficiency of charging and you're talking about 3MWh per car per year, and with about 25 million vehicles that means about 75TWh a year

Travers Solar in Alberta generates about 2.5TWh a year from under 14 sqkm.

Build 30 of them and that's 400 sqkm.

A 20sqkm by 20sqkm solar plant would power every car and light van in Canada forever (setting aside seasonality).

Factor in lower generation in December, you'd need 10 times that amount of solar, about 70km by 70km, 5000 square km.

That's less than 1 quarter of 1 percent of the land in Alberta alone.

(Of course you wouldn't put it in one location, it would be spread out across the country)

Funnily enough 5000 square km is about the total land use of Canada's oil land use (surface use)

You'd have a lot of excess power in the summer -- you'd be generating 650TWh of excess power a year

Its okay, you don't need to believe it.

Solar panels work even if its cloudy: Power generation typically drops to 10% to 25% of normal capacity under heavy, grey overcast skies, but can reach 40% to 60% (or higher) under thin or partly cloudy skies.

Most countries do not have enough to independently supply their own energy needs from fossil fuels, and they need to import more or less continuously, while renewable energy infrastructure needs building out and then lasts a very long time. This massively affects the strategic effects of losing your supply: one becomes an acute problem very quickly while the other is still a problem but it takes a lot longer to become a real problem.

I don't think the main focus is on converting military operations themselves to work without fossil fuels, but more that if you can convert your civilian industry then you have a much better overall strategic position because your total demand for fossil fuels is much lower. (Strategy is a lot more than just your military)

You only need solar panels once. They do not need fueling, refueling, lubricants, anything at all.

Solar panels have 25 year warranty. Can you think of anything that you have bought or can buy with a 25 year warranty?

At the end of 25 years, they will produce 92%. Perfectly acceptable for a few more decades. The latest panels produce 740 - 800W+/panel, this is sufficient for a lifetime without ever having to think of upgrades.

> If you want to look at the geopolitics of it, all of the bigger countries do in fact have their own sources of oil and their own refineries.

That won't help you if you can't refine it. Russia has more oil than most and has/had lots of refineries. Ukraine has taken out so many of them that Trump is complaining it's affecting the price of diesel (even though the US also has lots of oil and lots of refineries).

Oil infrastructure is temporary, expensive and fragile whereas panels work for 30 years.