Slashdot Mirror


Pickens Plans On Wind Power

Hugh Pickens writes "T. Boone Pickens (no relation) has launched an energy plan and social-networking campaign that calls for replacing Middle Eastern oil with Midwestern wind. The Pickens Plan would exploit the country's 'wind corridor' from the Canadian border to West Texas to produce 20 percent of the country's electricity and provide an economic revival for rural America. Transmission lines would be built to transport the power where the demand is and natural gas, now used to fuel power plants, would instead be used as a transportation fuel, which burns cleaner than gasoline and is domestic. Pickens proposed that the private sector finance the investment, which would result in a one-third reduction, equal to $230 billion, in the U.S.' yearly payments to foreign countries. Pickens has already invested heavily in wind, notably a planned 4,000-megawatt wind farm in his native Texas. 'We've got to get renewable into the mix. The problem for this country is that we're paying $700 billion — you heard that — $700 billion a year,' Pickens says. 'We can't afford that. In 10 years we'll be broke if we continue that.'"

23 of 587 comments (clear)

  1. Get off his nuts by hdon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It could *EASILY* turn out that Pickens is just another participant in the public relations campaign that big oil is putting on to convince Americans that big oil isn't out to get them.

    People are angry at the pump, and the more people who identify oil companies as enemies, the more people are exploring alternative fuels.

    While his emphasis on America's trade deficit and, apparently, the economy seems to be a new tune for an oil man, he has plenty of others with whom to share the oil-going-green spotlight with.

    1. Re:Get off his nuts by volcanopele · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't think it is so much a plow to make oil look more "green," but for the oil companies to position themselves to be the ones who provide the alternative energy sources. If we switch to wind energy, they will run the turbines. If we switch to solar, they will run the solar panel farms. Why get rich off just one energy source, when you can monopolize others.

      --
      The Gish Bar Times - Blog covering Jupiter's moon Io
    2. Re:Get off his nuts by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't think so,I just think he is going where the money is. Yes,he made his money in oil,but anyone with a brain can see that the oil money is headed out of the country like a black hole on our economy. Mr. Pickens knows that domestic production of energy will not only help out our economy,but put more cash in his pocket as well. This is the kind of capitalism we need to see more of. The man sees we have a problem and develops ways to help us out of that problem while increasing jobs domestically and making a nice profit for himself. I think it is a great idea. But as always this is my 02c,YMMV

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    3. Re:Get off his nuts by Yold · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Nah.... Pickens is already set for life, I doubt he is looking to financially profit from this campaign. He is a respected philanthropist, but he is old, and I think he is just throwing his money around trying to secure his legacy, much like Rockafeller did at the end of his life, and like Gore did at the end of his political career.

      We all know a silver-bullet is unlikely for the energy "crisis". It is a looming inevitability, but media scare-mongering has the average american thinking that something has to be done NOW (but how many are willing to trade those SUVs?). Changing the world takes time...

      The best short-term solution is government regulation of automobiles, through taxation and incentives. Offer an incentive to drive ULEVs, put additional sales tax on anything that averages less than 22 mpg on the highway. Offering subsidized motorcycle/SmartCar parking in urban centers would be a wise incentive as well.

    4. Re:Get off his nuts by zippthorne · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We all know a silver-bullet is unlikely for the energy "crisis"

      Incorrect. A silver bullet is exactly what we need.

      The problem at the moment (i.e. timescales of at least 10,000 years) is NOT a lack of energy sources. We've got the means to tap the water cycle, air currents, hot rocks, fissionable metals, trapped hydrocarbons, coal, extra-planetary radiation, ocean currents, angular momentum, and probably a dozen things I can't think of off the top of my head.

      The problem is that nearly every time we try to exploit one of those resources, the project is stymied by bureaucratic regulators more concerned with placating NIMBYs and BANANAs than facilitating a responsible plan to supply our nation's ever-growing need for energy.

      The silver bullet is not technological. It's political. We need only one thing: the will to start new energy projects. Nearly ANY new energy projects at the moment are an improvement.

      Let me be the first to say, "Yes, I do want a Nuclear Power plant in my back yard. Or a wind farm. Or a solar farm. Or a deep hole. or a Dam. Or even a coal plant (I'm not real keen on the coal plant, for aesthetic reasons but if we must, we must). And turn those ugly condos that replaced the tank farm into a refinery."

      Conservation is good too. It's just another angle, but it's not sufficient on it's own.

      Re: motorcycle parking, you don't even need to subsidize it, just splitting some spaces to allow more motorcycle parking closer to places is probably enough. But ban "cruisers" from the spaces. No bike that weighs as much as, costs more than, and gets worse gas mileage than a jeep wrangler ought to be treated like a bike.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    5. Re:Get off his nuts by MikTheUser · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That is why people should realize that renewable energies are best run independently. Solar panels on rooftops or a small wind farm can easily be paid for and operated by households or small communities and make them more independent of the energy corporations.

    6. Re:Get off his nuts by lancejjj · · Score: 4, Insightful

      but anyone with a brain can see that the oil money is headed out of the country like a black hole on our economy

      Excellent point. And it doesn't stop with oil. In fact, nearly all manufactured products are now in that same condition. Margins on such products are super-low; in the end, a huge proportion of the money you spend on your iPod, car, or even tooth brush is basically money that is leaving the country permanently.

      Oh, and it doesn't stop there. Food? Don't kid yourself - although the US has many farms, a huge proportion of our food comes from overseas. And most food grown here goes to migrant workers who send the money back home. Again, slim margins and foreign connections mean that the US is retaining a very tiny amount of the money spent on a product.

      And it gets worse. Many of the largest, fastest growing companies are now overseas, in China and India and other third world countries. The investment banks aren't stupid - they're investing more into overseas corporations than in US startups. If you're an American startup, you're at a gross disadvantage versus having your operations in India or China or Taiwan. And yes, even that mutual fund that your 401k is invested in is primarily about pumping the value of companies with foreign assets or foreign operations. Why invest in a US company that gets 5% return when you can invest in a Chinese company that is more likely get a 25% return? The only answer is "diversification", which is more of a self-insurance strategy versus a way to maximize return.

      At the end of the day, Pickens should invest wherever he wants to invest - its his money. But he is looking out for himself, as he is an investor looking for a money-maker in energy or any other sector. If he needs to convince the market that wind is a good investment, then he has already made his investment and is looking to pump its value for his own profit.

    7. Re:Get off his nuts by Beyond_GoodandEvil · · Score: 4, Insightful

      . My blue-collar neighbors still have 2 - 3 vehicles in their driveways...Lots of SUVs are still carting fat asses to work at various non-union machine shops and department stores on the other side of town.
      Well I don't know where you live but in my neck of the woods one of those SUVs in the driveway has a for sale sign on it. And is it your supposition that only non-union workers drive SUVs?
        But, if you're going to subsidize low-energy travel don't forget us poor bastards on bicycles.
      Only if you promise to remember that stop signs apply to you as well.

      --
      I laughed at the weak who considered themselves good because they lacked claws.
    8. Re:Get off his nuts by Socguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You forgot the most economical viable but somewhat paradoxically unpopular course of action: Get serious about efficiency and simply use less energy.

    9. Re:Get off his nuts by SydShamino · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think it's more likely that, as Mr. Pickens is a wealthy man, as opposed to a wealthy corporation, he's facing the reality that all humans face: he no longer cares about acquisition of wealth, he cares about being remembered after he's dead.

      This fundamental drive of human nature (for most people) is one of the ways that corporations will never be like humans, and is one of the reasons that corporations should never be given the rights of humans, since they can't face all the responsibilities.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    10. Re:Get off his nuts by Demarche · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Efficiency is fine and good but it doesn't solve anything in the long run. The world needs enough clean energy that we can afford to waste it. I don't see anything wrong with expecting the future to be a place where I can turn on a big-ass air conditioner without feeling guilty. Abundant, cheap energy is necessary for a modern economy to prosper, and I expect public policy to focus on responsibly improving my quality of life, not forcing me into some Luddite lifestyle.

  2. I saw that commercial too by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In 10 years we'll be broke if we continue that.

          There are some that would argue that the US is already broke. The creditors just hadn't started calling yet. But they are now. Take a look at the S&P 500 over the past couple months, then zoom out and compare it to 2001. Yes, friend, right here is the abyss. Not later - right now. 1250 is where it stopped a few months ago. 1250ish is where we are now. After that it's 800 and we're back to the low point of the dot-com crash, and after that there's only the floor. It goes all the way down.

          No, America doesn't have 10 years. Oil is going to break America long before that. Europeans are paying $9 US or more per gallon of gas and although they don't like it, they manage. What happens to the US economy when gas doubles again? You're having trouble at $4/gallon.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    1. Re:I saw that commercial too by doC15+'-_-' · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Remember that many Europeans also have access to free healthcare and higher education. They also have much better public transportation systems in Europe, so they are not as dependable on gas as Americans. Also, cars in Europe are much smaller and much more fuel efficient than cars driven in America. Therefore, Americans are absolutely in trouble as the the gas prices keep rising.

    2. Re:I saw that commercial too by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not only that, but America has been DESIGNED for the automobile. It's almost impossible to live in the US without a car - at least if you want any quality of life. The scale of the towns, the distances to supermarkets, restaurants, schools, workplaces boggle the mind. In Europe everything is fairly close unless you live way out in the country, public transport is, with few exceptions, excellent, etc. In the US you have to wait for buses that come every half hour instead of every 5 minutes, you have to walk 1km or so to the bus stop (unless you're lucky and live near a major route), and everything you need it at least 3 or 4 km away. It's amazing how you don't notice the distances in the US until you try to walk it.

      Yes it makes for nice, clean, tidy towns, with beautiful roads, ample living space, etc. But take away the automobiles and people are screwed.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    3. Re:I saw that commercial too by rcw-home · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Take a look at the S&P 500 over the past couple months, then zoom out and compare it to 2001. Yes, friend, right here is the abyss. Not later - right now. 1250 is where it stopped a few months ago. 1250ish is where we are now. After that it's 800 and we're back to the low point of the dot-com crash, and after that there's only the floor. It goes all the way down.

      Stocks are cyclical.

      1974 brought the S&P down to 1962 values - off 25% in less than a year too - and it was back up 25% in 18 months.

      The fun part is that at any point in time, no one really knows where the top and bottom of the market will actually be. Sure, you can cry wolf, and once in a while you might actually be right, but to come out ahead in such a situation you not only need to know that it's inevitable but know when. For example, many saw the dot-com bubble popping years before it did - but those who sold right then missed out on a lot of market gain.

      I think it's far more likely that our inability /unwillingness to pay off our national debt will cause further devaluation of the dollar (or increased inflation, however you want to look at it) over a long period of time - decades perhaps. I don't think anyone will call it hyperinflation, but it will be a period of relative economic stagnation. This devaluation will discourage foreign investors from using dollars or buying US bonds, which will eventually forcefully curb federal spending.

      It won't be a good time to sock away dollars under the bed, but it will be a good time to have a fixed-rate mortgage.

  3. Do It. by LoudMusic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's really simple. Build windmill farms. Build solar collecting power plants. Build the variety of hydro electric generators.

    Run everything from electricity including water heaters, building heaters, and cars.

    Stop sending money to the other side of the world.

    --
    No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
    1. Re:Do It. by LoudMusic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As well, we once we start distancing ourselves from the middle east and their oil, they wont be pleased. We do not have the coordination, drive, or will-power to start a massive reorganization of what the united states runs on.

      Apparently we run on doubt and a weak backbone.

      --
      No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
  4. 20% wind is about right. by Animats · · Score: 5, Insightful

    20% wind is about right. More than that, and there are problems during periods of no wind. There's a study on wide area wind averaging (need source) which has a table of percent of installed wind capacity vs. percentage of time available. Even averaging over the entire midwestern US only gets something like 80-90% uptime.

    Base load should be nuclear, since that's all fixed cost. Peak air conditioning load should be solar. In between, whatever works.

    California needs a major effort to install enough solar panels to power the Southern California air conditioning load. The numbers actually work for this. The nice thing about solar is that you get the power during peak hours. You're guaranteed that bright sun and peak air conditioning load come at the same time. Wind is somewhat random on an hourly scale, and hydro is somewhat random on a seasonal scale.

  5. Re:Good to see by runningduck · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The reason why the entrenched oil industry is uninterested in alternative energy is because with oil they control the supply chain. Many alternative forms of energy are difficult to control. Without this firm grip of control on the industry any investment will ultimately lead to a net loss for these powerful few and a chaotic reorganization for all others in the energy industry.

    --
    -rd
  6. Re:Good to see by Yold · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He is already a rich hedge-fund manager. He wants recognition for philanthropy, not money.

  7. Re:What about??? by maackey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Where do you think wind comes from ... magic? No. The sun heats up the atmosphere which causes a temperature (and thus pressure) differentiation which balances itself out by mixing with the surrounding atmosphere, thus producing wind.

    So by your definition, ALL wind power is really solar power, which makes your statement kind of contradictory. Not that it really matters, but since you were being a semantic pedantic, I might as well be too.

  8. Re:HUH? by RustinHWright · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ya see, I *thought* that might have been it but since wind turbines have been working and turning profits for years now, utterly unlike cold fusion, I thought perhaps you had something a bit more reasonable in mind. By what standard has wind power "failed to deliver"?

    --
    It's all about the information. And what we do with it.
  9. Re:Good to see by Atzanteol · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Or maybe it's because until recently it hasn't been profitable? No. That can't be. You go with your "control" theory...

    --
    "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"

    - Charles Darwin