Join PickensPlan

Jul 19th, 2008 by Dave

Join me in signing up to support PickensPlan, a real energy solution for America. T. Boone Pickens gets an official Dave Burris “Revolutionary Reform” stamp of approval for this one.

Posted in Alternative Fuel, Bluewater Wind, Change, Environment, Reform, Revolutionary Reform, Wind Power

15 Responses to “Join PickensPlan”

on 19 Jul 2008 at 11:53 am1DavidAnderson

Ah Dave, now you are going to make me study the plan. I am just on lunch break now. I’ll do it later. It must be good to bring you back. Glad to see it even if it is less frequent.
on 19 Jul 2008 at 12:09 pm2noman

You don’t need to study it - I’ll summarize:

“I can’t find any more oil to sell. Therefore America should switch to other Pickens-owned energy sources.”
on 19 Jul 2008 at 12:16 pm3DavidAnderson

Works for me. Pickens has invested in alternatives, he is not shy of telling you that. The only question that counts is this one, is he right? The man is willing to put his money where his mouth is. That counts for something in my book.

If someone does something good for America, I hope they get rewarded. I am a true believer that we need to do it all. Wind, natural gas, nuclear, improve solar cells and electric storage, drill for more oil, hydrogen cells, and give prizes for new breakthroughs. Unlike Al Gore, I know that we can’t switch 100% in 10 years no matter how much we spend. Pickens seems at once both bold and realistic. I do fault him for not talking about nuclear power. There is no complete solution without it.
on 19 Jul 2008 at 12:23 pm4noman

Actually I am in favor of Pickens ideas as part of the larger energy plan, but not as the whole plan.
on 19 Jul 2008 at 12:26 pm5Perry Hood

At first glance this looks like a terrific plan: Wind to replace coal for electricity generation, and domestic natural gas to replace gasoline to fuel our motor vehicles.

I did not know this about global wind: “Studies from around the world show that the Great Plains states are home to the greatest wind energy potential in the world — by far.”

On the subject of US on-land wind power, this is key: “Building wind facilities in the corridor that stretches from the Texas panhandle to North Dakota could produce 20% of the electricity for the United States at a cost of $1 trillion. It would take another $200 billion to build the capacity to transmit that energy to cities and towns.
That’s a lot of money, but it’s a one-time cost. And compared to the $700 billion we spend on foreign oil every year, it’s a bargain.”

Note that there is no time-line for wind in this plan, nor is there a cost estimate for the end users, the rate payers.

On natural gas for transportation fuel, I did not know this: “Natural gas is the cleanest transportation fuel available today.
According to the California Energy Commission, critical greenhouse gas emissions from natural gas are 23% lower than diesel and 30% lower than gasoline.”

This is appealing because it would be a contribution to reducing global warming, as also would wind replacing coal for electricity.

Moreover, I can see a use and a market for natural gas fueled hybrid plug-ins, quickly developing, as there is no dependence on developing new technology. Fascinating!

Finally, I can envision solar panels or small wind turbines installed on roofs, feeding the grid to lower costs and/or charging batteries to fuel plug-in vehicles.

Now all this said about the Pickens plan, it must be noted that it is self-serving as well as serving the nation. I call that win-win. And think of all the new construction and engineering jobs being created.

Even though we need more details, nevertheless, sign me up!!!
on 19 Jul 2008 at 1:12 pm6FrankKnotts

First let me say that at this time wind and solar on a large scale are still not the answers to our energy needs. However wind and solar on the individual level are a great way to offset energy cost for homes and businesses.
As for Mr. Pickens or any other invester who wish to invest their own money into research an developement of these sources, it is a great idea and the American way, and if they make huge profits from them , again wonderful. But if they lose their shirts ,well to bad for them , that is the chance investers take when investing in unproven technologies and there should be no propping up a failed investment by government.
Now if Mr. Pickens plan includes any and I mean any public money such as subsidies then I say no way. And if it involves any of the government mandates that we have been blindsided here in Delaware with, where government tells private companies they “MUST” buy from these sources then this country is doomed to fail in its attempt to solve its energy needs. If Mr Pickens can create a sytem that works at a profit that does not need government to back it , then it will sell its self , if not then it must not be a good idea to start with.
Also remember for Mr. Pickens and others like him , they need not make these energy sources work to turn huge profits. They need only to run up the price of and then sell the stock in the companies they create. And since the mania is spreading like the Flu that won’t be hard to do.
on 19 Jul 2008 at 2:08 pm7Perry Hood

Right, Frank, let’s just go on subsidizing Big Oil companies and forget about viable alternative approaches to our energy crisis, let alone the extremely serious global warming issue!

You might answer me this, Frank: If drilling for more oil is the ultimate solution, why is Big Oil not planning to do so on a large scale? You might want to give this some thought and research.

Here is a starter for you:
http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/23/news/economy/oil_drilling/index.htm?cnn=yes
on 19 Jul 2008 at 2:09 pm8Perry Hood

Here’s another one for you Frank, to stir up the grey matter:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/11397.html
on 19 Jul 2008 at 4:13 pm9FrankKnotts

Okay Perry I won’t play your usual game of attack the sources , but CNN and The Politico ? Okay I’ve stopped laughing now !
First do you read the entire article or just scan for the parts where they blame America and “BIG OIL” ?
In the CNN article, Oppenheimer analyst Fadel Gheit states that he feels that it is unlikely that oil companies are hording, that at $135 a barrel everyone is trying to pump as much oil as possible. But are lerry to put more investments into the fields they now hold , many of which are in deeper water, and are hoping government will open fields closer to shore.
In the Politico article the United States Energy Information Administration admits that lifting the ban would reduce prices but that it would take years, so why wait why not do it now? I believe it would be an immediate effect and not the 20 yrs. they predict. Also they suggest we sell our E.O.R ,so what do we do when we have an emergency? The rest of their suggestions are the usual liberal smoke and mirrors.
Let me say that I have said many times that I am against subsidies of any kind for anyone, including “BIG OIL”. Also I have no problem with reasonable time limits on companies to use it or lose it, on leases.
As for global warming , that has nothing to do with the topic of high gas prices, global warming is the liberal tactic to spin the conversation away from the fact that more supply will lower the cost. Let us solve one real problem first and then we can address the imaginary ones.
on 19 Jul 2008 at 5:23 pm10Perry Hood

I wish it were imaginary, Frank, it’s not! The preoccupation of some Conservatives with the status quo intellectually inhibits their moving forward with new knowledge. You might fit that category.

My concern is that there is a body of economic opinion that predicts that drilling for more oil will have very little impact on oil prices, and very little impact on energy independence. Ideas like the T Boone Pickens plan, involving natural gas for transportation and on-land wind for electricity generation, have a great deal of appeal to me, both for more energy independence and less global warming impact considerations. Ultimately we will likely need to ween ourselves off of natural gas, substituting more wind, solar, geothermal and nuclear sources for electricity generation and battery operated vehicles for transportation.

Finally, drilling for more oil will merely fuel our oil addiction, taking our eyes and investments off of the real need, which is for alternatives for fossil fuels.

We can put windmills and wires up much faster than more oil would be available from more drilling, the latter taking anywhere from 10 to 20 years. Natural gas, 98% of our current use comes from domestic sources, currently costs about $1 per gallon. One question not answered by Pickens is the cost of natural gas if it is phased in as a transportation fuel. Also, would our domestic supply reserves be enough to make us more energy independent as natural gas replaces gasoline and diesel?
on 21 Jul 2008 at 12:45 pm11anon

First let me say that at this time wind and solar on a large scale are still not the answers to our energy needs.

What planet are you on Frank. Wind energy is not only a start, but it is going to be a significant player within the decade in energy production, both offshore or onshore. It decreases our reliance on oil (therefore it’s a national security issue), provides stable pricing, decreases pollution, creates new jobs and new income and works both in the United States and around the world. Your hatred of anything “liberal” smart, new, creative and new industries are fascinating. I guess that’s why you’re a conservative. You’re living in the past, and thus, a fantasy world.
on 21 Jul 2008 at 6:20 pm12FrankKnotts

Perry and anon, I hope you come back to this post. First I won’t be dragged into the round and round about how wind and solar will save the world , at least not until you invent a way to store the energy generated on an industrial scale, until then it is only a bandage at best or more likely a complete waist of time and money.
As for natural gas for transportation, again not likely on a large scale for average citizens. Let me tell you as someone who handles LPG for a living and has fueled vehichles with LPG, it can be a dangerous task and should only be done by trained personell, not by mom in the mini-van. Just go to your local WAWA and watch how many people get out of their cars smoking , now imagine a natural gas station. So either we go back to full service stations or the best you are going to get from natural gas is fleet fueling.
As for Mr. Pickens plan , it would seem he may be playing both sides of the street, wind and solar for the greenies, and natural gas for his big oil friends. Also as I said above he need only get the price of his stock to go up and then sell it to make huge amounts of money which after all is the real business that he is in. Check it guys , it has gone up over 50% in recent weeks.
You guys are so easy , all anyone need say is that they are going to save the planet and you are on board .
Pers. Bush lifted the presidential ban on off shore drilling and prices fell ten dollars a barrel, imagine if congress lifted its ban?
on 21 Jul 2008 at 9:18 pm13noman

Pickens wants us to lock in our transportation infrastructure to energy sources that he owns. If your car burns natural gas, you pay Pickens. But if you have a plug-in hybrid, you can get electric from any one of a number of sources (theoretically). Pickens wants the lock-in, because he doesn’t make as much under the second more flexible option.
on 22 Jul 2008 at 12:11 am14meatball

Bob Brinker had an author on the other day who interviewed Pickens for the book ‘pickens’ brain” or something like that. Anyway, it came out that Pickens purchased the land for the water rights with an eye toward pumping toward Houston. How to get the water to Houston?
I know, I’ll build renewable energy collectors on the surface, the state will gather right of ways to move the electricity out and build my water pipeline on so I can sell my products. Built in subsidy.
on 23 Jul 2008 at 5:12 am15FrankKnotts

I saw part of Mr. Pickens testimony before a Senate comm. yesterday 7/22/08 and he did mention the need for government to clear the corridors for him to put in the transmition lines . But more troubling than that was he stated that to force the use of natural gas by fleets such as police and bus lines the federal government need only to “MANDATE” that use. Any time you have a market that mandates the use of any product , that product will cost more. This will lead to higher not lower prices for natural gas , also our chemical industry relies greatly on natural gas and will now compete for this resource.
This is clearly not a case of a private business man attempting to start up a new project . This is a very smart man attempting to take advantage of a national government suffering from dementia. If he is allowed to put this plan into effect with the aid of government through subsidies and mandates it will be a crime against the free market and only worsen our energy problems, as we will see here in Delaware with BWW.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

DelawarePolitics.net

15 Responses to “Join PickensPlan”

Leave a Reply

Our Sponsors

Get DP.net via Email!

Latest Comments

Topics

Blogroll

Contributors

Tags