PDA

View Full Version : T. Boone Pickens Wind/Solar Plan



mike60
07-16-2008, 08:02 PM
This is awesome: The Pickens Plan. Come on dittotwits tell us what's wrong with this. Watch it though T Boone is a tough oilman.



America is addicted to foreign oil.
It's an addiction that threatens our economy, our environment and our national security. It touches every part of our daily lives and ties our hands as a nation and a people.
The addiction has worsened for decades and now it's reached a point of crisis.
In 1970, we imported 24% of our oil.
Today it's nearly 70% and growing.
As imports grow and world prices rise, the amount of money we send to foreign nations every year is soaring. At current oil prices, we will send $700 billion dollars out of the country this year alone that's four times the annual cost of the Iraq war.



Projected over the next 10 years the cost will be $10 trillion it will be the greatest transfer of wealth in the history of mankind.
America uses a lot of oil. Every day 85 million barrels of oil are produced around the world. And 21 million of those are used here in the United States.
That's 25% of the world's oil demand. Used by just 4% of the world's population.
Can't we just produce more oil?
World oil production peaked in 2005. Despite growing demand and an unprecedented increase in prices, oil production has fallen over the last three years. Oil is getting more expensive to produce, harder to find and there just isn't enough of it to keep up with demand.
The simple truth is that cheap and easy oil is gone.
What's the good news?
The United States is the Saudi Arabia of wind power.

Studies from around the world show that the Great Plains states are home to the greatest wind energy potential in the world by far.
The Department of Energy reports that 20% of America's electricity can come from wind. North Dakota alone has the potential to provide power for more than a quarter of the country.
Today's wind turbines stand up to 410 feet tall, with blades that stretch 148 feet in length. The blades collect the wind's kinetic energy. In one year, a 3-megawatt wind turbine produces as much energy as 12,000 barrels of imported oil.
Wind power currently accounts for 48 billion kWh of electricity a year in the United States enough to serve more than 4.5 million households. That is still only about 1% of current demand, but the potential of wind is much greater.
A 2005 Stanford University study found that there is enough wind power worldwide to satisfy global demand 7 times over even if only 20% of wind power could be captured.
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.
An economic revival for rural America.
Developing wind power is an investment in rural America.
To witness the economic promise of wind energy, look no further than Sweetwater, Texas.
Sweetwater was typical of many small towns in middle-America. With a shortage of good jobs, the youth of Sweetwater were leaving in search of greater opportunities. And the town's population dropped from 12,000 to under 10,000.
When a large wind power facility was built outside of town, Sweetwater experienced a revival. New economic opportunity brought the town back to life and the population has grown back up to 12,000.
In the Texas panhandle, just north of Sweetwater, is the town of Pampa, where T. Boone Pickens' Mesa Power is currently building the largest wind farm in the world.
At 4,000 megawatts the equivalent combined output of four large coal-fire plants the production of the completed Pampa facility will double the wind energy output of the United States.
In addition to creating new construction and maintenance jobs, thousands of Americans will be employed to manufacture the turbines and blades. These are high skill jobs that pay on a scale comparable to aerospace jobs.
Plus, wind turbines don't interfere with farming and grazing, so they don't threaten food production or existing local economies.
A cheap new replacement for foreign oil.

The Honda Civic GX Natural Gas Vehicle is the cleanest internal-combustion vehicle in the world according to the EPA.
Natural gas and bio-fuels are the only domestic energy sources used for transportation.
Cleaner
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.
Natural gas vehicles (NGV) are already available and combine top performance with low emissions. The natural gas Honda Civic GX is rated as the cleanest production vehicle in the world.
According to NGVAmerica, there are more than 7 million NGVs in use worldwide, but only 150,000 of those are in the United States.
The EPA estimates that vehicles on the road account for 60% of carbon monoxide pollution and around one-third of hydrocarbon and nitrogen oxide emissions in the United States. As federal and state emissions laws become more stringent, many requirements will be unattainable with conventionally fueled vehicles.
Since natural gas is significantly cleaner than petroleum, NGVs are increasing in popularity. The Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach recently announced that 16,800 old diesel trucks will be replaced, and half of the new vehicles will run on alternatives such as natural gas.
Cheaper
Natural gas is significantly less expensive than gasoline or diesel. In places like Utah and Oklahoma, prices are less than $1 a gallon. To see fueling stations and costs in your area, check out cngprices.com.
Domestic
Natural gas is our country's second largest energy resource and a vital component of our energy supply. 98% of the natural gas used in the United States is from North America. But 70% of our oil is purchased from foreign nations.
Natural gas is one of the cleanest, safest and most useful forms of energy residentially, commercially and industrially. The natural gas industry has existed in the United States for over 100 years and continues to grow.
Domestic natural gas reserves are twice that of petroleum. And new discoveries of natural gas and ongoing development of renewable biogas are continually adding to existing reserves.
While it is a cheap, effective and versatile fuel, less than 1% of natural gas is currently used for transportation.
The Mechanics

We currently use natural gas to produce 22% of our electricity. Harnessing the power of wind to generate electricity will give us the flexibility to shift natural gas away from electricity generation and put it to use as a transportation fuel reducing our dependence on foreign oil by more than one-third.
How do we get it done?
The Pickens Plan is a bridge to the future a blueprint to reduce foreign oil dependence by harnessing domestic energy alternatives, and buy us time to develop even greater new technologies.
Building new wind generation facilities and better utilizing our natural gas resources can replace more than one-third of our foreign oil imports in 10 years. But it will take leadership.
On January 20th, 2009, a new President will take office.
We're organizing behind the Pickens Plan now to ensure our voices will be heard by the next administration.
Together we can raise a call for change and set a new course for America's energy future in the first hundred days of the new presidency breaking the hammerlock of foreign oil and building a new domestic energy future for America with a focus on sustainability.
You can start changing America's future today by supporting the Pickens Plan. Join now.

How many blowhards belittled wind and solar power on this forum? You know who you are.

mike60

sack316
07-17-2008, 12:23 AM
yeah I heard about this. The first big forum I saw him get to talk about this on was Fox News, actually, believe it or not. And I like it... especially him being in it I'm telling folks to follow him on investing /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

I'm all for using any and all forms of energy we can use. It just so happens the realistic side of me knows oil will have to still be a major part of it for some time to come as we develop these alternative means. Oil, wind, hydro, nuclear, hamsters on wheels... whatever we can use go for it and quickly!

Sack

LWW
07-17-2008, 03:18 AM
It's weak point is that the leaders of the far left oppose every single point of it ... now that alt energy is finally nearing viability ... after years of bleating we should do this.

LWW

Deeman3
07-17-2008, 07:23 AM
Hate to break it to T. B. Pickens but a bird was struck and killed in 1983 by a windmill in Southern California and that will probably doom any chance of this going over big. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

LWW
07-17-2008, 07:32 AM
And we just put solar on hold so we could study how damaging it was to the Norwegian desert screamapillae ... or some such rodent that nobody gave a ding - diddly - darned about until <span style='font-size: 17pt'>EEEVILLL</span> capitalists were about to make a buck by enhancing the lives of humans.

LWW

Gayle in MD
07-17-2008, 07:37 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">On January 20th, 2009, a new President will take office.
We're organizing behind the Pickens Plan now to ensure our voices will be heard by the next administration.
Together we can raise a call for change and set a new course for America's energy future in the first hundred days of the new presidency breaking the hammerlock of foreign oil and building a new domestic energy future for America with a focus on sustainability.
You can start changing America's future today by supporting the Pickens Plan. Join now.

</div></div>

I'm all for it! This is the reason why we have to hope the McSame loses. He has already shown his colors on this when he stated that we should allow them to drill off our beautiful shorelines, when they aren't even using the leases on millions of acres both on and off shore, which they have not bothered to drill, and failed to build refineries, which is a great part of the problem.

We're subsidizing a corporate cabal of big oil, and they're screwing us left and right.

I'm all for the Democratic plan, use it or lose it. Let them drill where they already have the leases. McSame AND BUSH, are both idiots to suggest that giving them offshore drilling rights now, will accomplish anything that will aid us in this present highway robbery of Americans at the tanks.

Gee, ya think the right may have learned that oilmen/woman in the White House was a bad choice?

When the reporters told Bush that the gas was predicted to go to four dollars a gallon within the week,(a few weeks ago)...and he said, "Oh, I hadn't heard that," who did he think he was kidding? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif


Is there anyone dumb enough to think that even if they did drill offshore, it would be a timely answer to our problems with energy? Anyone stupid enough to think that what oil they got, they would preserve it all for America, and not put it on the open "Free Market"


Pahleeeze!

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/cry.gif

eg8r
07-17-2008, 08:34 AM
I think Pickens is quite a smart guy. He is pushing this at a time when it would be inconvenient for both sides to reject it.

My question is just how soon will all you libs be whining and crying about his millions/billions he is going to make from this venture. You know that he is only doing it to get in first to make the most money, but that seems to be ok with the lefties since it is something they currently support.

eg8r

eg8r
07-17-2008, 08:37 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Is there anyone dumb enough to think that even if they did drill offshore, it would be a timely answer to our problems with energy? Anyone stupid enough to think that what oil they got, they would preserve it all for America, and not put it on the open "Free Market"</div></div>
Is there anyone dumb enough to think Gayle could stay on subject. Hey gayole, this is not about bush and his oil cronies it is about Pickens.

eg8r

LWW
07-17-2008, 09:47 AM
[quote=Gayle in MD] <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">On January 20th, 2009, a new President will take office.</div></div>
You are all for it so you oppose the only candidate which supports it?

LWW

LWW
07-17-2008, 09:49 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">McSame AND BUSH, are both idiots to suggest that giving them offshore drilling rights now, will accomplish anything that will aid us in this present highway robbery of Americans at the tanks.</div></div>
Yet merely dropping the EO caused the barrel price to drop $10 in 2 days.

Gayle, do the have newspapers and cable TV where you live?

I suggest you check the news before you babble.

LWW

sack316
07-17-2008, 11:54 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> ... when they aren't even using the leases on millions of acres both on and off shore, which they have not bothered to drill, and failed to build refineries, which is a great part of the problem.
</div></div>

I think it's actually 68 million acres or so (?) you speak of here. My curiosity is out of these "unused" acres, how much of that land is tied up in bureaucracy, lawsuits, and protest and currently unable to be used?

Sack

mike60
07-17-2008, 01:08 PM
This is too easy: "I think Pickens is quite a smart guy. He is pushing this at a time when it would be inconvenient for both sides to reject it."

Would that be maybe "an inconvenient Truth"?

have fun,


mike666 james kopp murdering scum doing forever as some guy's bitch

sack316
07-17-2008, 01:20 PM
maybe not as much of an inconvenient truth as it is an inconvenient time frame... election time.

Sack /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

mike60
07-17-2008, 02:05 PM
Sack, Too true.


mike60

eg8r
07-17-2008, 02:39 PM
This was the point of my post. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

eg8r

pooltchr
07-17-2008, 05:05 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> ... when they aren't even using the leases on millions of acres both on and off shore, which they have not bothered to drill, and failed to build refineries, which is a great part of the problem.
</div></div>

I think it's actually 68 million acres or so (?) you speak of here. My curiosity is out of these "unused" acres, how much of that land is tied up in bureaucracy, lawsuits, and protest and currently unable to be used?

Sack </div></div>

Sack,
I believe that 68 million acres represents about 3% of the area that the government holds. Oddly enough, the areas where there are proven oil reserves aren't included in those leased acres. The areas Gayle is talking about may or may not have any oil. The areas where we know oil is located are off limits. But these are the kind of facts that the liberal left don't want to hear.
Steve

mike60
07-17-2008, 05:10 PM
Steve, I would like to know why proven oil fields are off limits. Not the hair on fire right wing paranoia reason. The geologist-actual why not reason.


mike60

pooltchr
07-17-2008, 05:24 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mike60</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Steve, I would like to know why proven oil fields are off limits. Not the hair on fire right wing paranoia reason. The geologist-actual why not reason.


mike60 </div></div>

I guess you would have to ask the people who have placed them off limits. Try asking your congressman/woman.
Steve

mike60
07-17-2008, 05:31 PM
Thanks Steve, I will and i'll try teh GOOGLE.

mike60

mike60
07-17-2008, 05:43 PM
Suprise-suprise. It's the Republicans leading the resistance: June 22, 2005 NYT.

Some people are filing lawsuits, challenging federal authority to drill in certain areas. Others are protesting new gas and oil leases. Federal officials say they have received thousands of letters opposed to drilling in areas like the Roan Plateau. One state, Wyoming, has passed legislation giving landowners more say in how mineral rights beneath their property are tapped.
The battle cry is the same as in past movements: a call for local control over a distant federal landlord. But for the first time, it is the Republicans who find themselves the target of angry speeches about lost property rights and tone-deaf federal land managers. And people who have been on opposing sides of the major land battles in the West - mainly property owners and ranchers versus environmentalists - are now allies.
"The word from Washington is drill, drill, drill, and now they've basically destroyed our ranch," said Tweeti Blancett, a coordinator for George Bush's presidential campaign in San Juan County, N.M. "We've been in a firestorm down here. A lot of Republicans are upset."
The 32,000 acres of public land that Ms. Blancett and her husband, Linn, have long used for grazing cattle is now riddled with gas wells and pipelines. Petroleum byproducts have poisoned the water, she said, killing animals and causing the fertility rate to plummet.
The couple has hired Karen Budd-Falen, one of the best-known lawyers in fights over federal land policies. They have sued to try to force the federal Bureau of Land Management to clean up the land. Ms. Budd-Falen got her start working against environmental restrictions with the Mountain States Legal Foundation, an intellectual incubator for such property rights stalwarts as James Watt, the former interior secretary under President Ronald Reagan.
A prominent Republican from Cheyenne, Wyo., Ms. Budd-Falen said the drilling boom had turned the political world upside down in the West, home to the sagebrush rebellion of the 1970's and other later battles against federal government restrictions on development of public land. Now property owners, ranchers and home builders are worried about overdevelopment.
"I'm amazed at the number of calls we're getting from landowners who are really frustrated with what's going on," Ms. Budd-Falen said.
The fight has drawn in what is called the world's biggest Boy Scout ranch, the Philmont in northeast New Mexico; ranchers from Montana's Front Range and Wyoming's high desert; and retirees who have bought into the West's real estate boom only to find gas derricks blocking their mountain views.
For the Bush administration, the dispute poses a conundrum. The president has made oil and gas drilling a priority on federal lands. Last year, the Bureau of Land Management issued 6,052 permits to drill oil and gas wells, triple the number from 10 years ago. Nearly 40 million acres of public land outside Alaska now have oil and gas leases on themWith natural gas prices more than doubling over the last five years, market demand is driving the boom, administration officials say. This region, sometimes called the Persian Gulf of gas, has enough natural gas to heat 55 million homes for almost 30 years, the government says.



But by pushing for so much drilling close to national parks, wilderness areas and favored hunting grounds, the administration has angered many communities.
In this valley along the Colorado River, a Bush stronghold all the way to the Utah border and beyond, several counties and small towns have passed resolutions urging the administration to keep the industrial rigs out of some of the remaining wild land.
Colorado and New Mexico, in the center of the boom, are also where Democrats hope to tip the balance of the national electoral map. The oil and gas drilling, while providing jobs and an infusion of money to some areas, is seen as a threat to other regions that have prospered by catering to tourism and retirees.
"We hear those concerns and we are trying hard to address them," said Rebecca Watson, the assistant secretary of the interior for lands and mineral management. "We're trying to balance the concerns of property owners with wildlife and the environment and our energy needs."
What makes the fight particularly bitter is the nature of land ownership in much of the West. Because of the legacy of the homesteading era, people may own the land on which they live or graze livestock, but not own the mineral rights below the surface. Typically, the Bureau of Land Management sells leases for those mineral rights, which often results in energy companies putting up small industrial camps to get the gas beneath somebody's home.
These so-called split-estates properties cover 58 million acres in the West.
"We moved out here for peace and privacy, and now they trying to surround us with gas well pads," said Nancy Jacobsen, who owns 47 acres of high country just outside the town of Silt, not far from here.
Ms. Jacobsen is a leader in an effort to get an initiative on the state ballot that would give property owners more say in how oil and gas companies use their land. Five state legislatures took up bills on similar issues this year, but only Wyoming passed one.
Ms. Jacobsen said she registered as a Republican in the last election, but now considered herself an independent because of this issue. She said her property value fell by $300,000 in the last assessment because of the nearby gas development.
"What this industry is doing right now to people's property is unbelievable," she said.
Despite such discontent, Republican Party officials liken the issue here to a family fight, and say it is not likely to alter long-term political alliances.
"It's complicated, because what you have is a collision of two strong Republican ideals: respect for property rights and the need for a national energy policy," said Rachael Sunbarger, a spokeswoman for the Colorado Republican Party." But I don't think anyone changes their party affiliation over a single issue."
Of course, many people own both property and mineral rights. And very few of them have complained about an energy policy that has brought so much money to an area that looked to be played out nearly 30 years ago, during the last energy boom.
The Interior Department says it has issued new guidelines to ensure that energy companies are more responsive to property owners, give adequate notification of drilling, and minimize scars to the land.
"I have every empathy in the world for someone who has just found a dream home in the West and then an oil and gas company man knocks on their door and says we're going to start drilling," Ms. Watson, the interior official, said.
But the Interior Department came under sharp criticism a few months ago when it tried to auction a new round of natural gas leases in Colorado without telling the surface owners about it. The department blamed an agency Web site that used to post such notices but was down because of security concerns.
The other major issue involves drilling on large pieces of public land that have long been used by outdoor enthusiasts.
"It's tough to beat the federal government," said Gordon Johnston, a lifelong Republican and three-term county commissioner in Sublette County, Wyo. "But there are a lot of us who feel we have to fight them, because they're wrecking
this land."
I'm proud to be a Republican.

mike60

mike60
07-17-2008, 11:21 PM
Ah teh GOOGLE, ya got to love it.

mike60

mike60
07-21-2008, 06:47 PM
Bump for T Boone.