Forest fires that have endangered remote US Air Force sites equipped with radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs) has prompted the assessment of power generating systems as substitutes for RTGs in small scale (10–120 watt) applications. A team of scientists and engineers of the US Air Forces’ Wright Laboratory conductd an assessment of electrical power technologies for use by the Air Force in remote, harsh environments. The surprisingly high logistics costs of operating fossil fuel generators resulted in the extension of the assessment to non‐RTG sites. The candidate power sources must operate unattended for long periods at a high level of operational reliability. Selection of the optimum power generation technology is complicated and heavily driven by the severe operating environment and compounded by the remoteness of the location. It is these site‐related characteristics, more than any other, that drive the selection of a safe and economical power source for Arctic applications. A number of proven power generation technologies were evaluated. The assessment concluded that RGTs are clearly the safest, most reliable, and most economical approach to supplying electrical power for remote, difficult to assess locations. The assessment also indicated that the logistics costs associated with combustion driven generator systems could be substantially reduced through the use of conversion technologies which have been previously developed for space power applications. © 1995American Institute of Physics