Policy no image

Published on November 15th, 2008 | by Anthony Cefali

Optimistic: T. Boone Pickens Expects Obama Administration to Implement Pickens' Plan

November 15th, 2008 by  
 

Billionaire American entrepreneur T. Boone Pickens is optimistic that the Obama administration will bring the United States’ energy infrastructure into the new millennium by implementing his plan for energy independence.

After eight long years there is finally a cause for hope here in the United States. George Bush may still be in office, but right now all America’s problems are President-Elect Obama’s to solve (see Obama Recession, thanks Rush), but he seems ready for them.

[social_buttons]

As New York Times columnist and Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman says, it is time for Obama to act swiftly and implement New Deal policies for the new millennium. Many have said that FDR’s borderline socialist policies failed because he spent too much money, Krugman feels that he did not invest enough. The Pickens’ Plan, as it is so poetically called, may be the starting point for such an investment.

Why is Pickens’ Plan important? Simply because it’s main goal is to divert all of our oil and natural gas to the transportation sector. Factories will no longer use natural gas because they will be powered either on site or through an electric grid powered by wind and solar. The plan stresses efficiency and centrality. It could also potentially save the US $300 billion in oil expenditures. Citing Obama’s plan to end dependency on foreign oil in the next ten years, Pickens expects that the first step will be implementing major parts of his plan.

The major parts of the plan involve the US specially equipping larger vehicles (buses, trucks, etc.) to run on natural gas. This would take a huge load off of our dependence on oil, in turn causing prices to drop because factories and businesses will have no need for it. Demand for oil would come solely from consumers, as would carbon dioxide emissions (the nitrogen oxide emissions will come from the natural gas burning buses).

Pickens has been criticized for the plan, but has responded “If you don’t like my plan, get a plan.” Of course he is a businessman trying to make money, but he does drive a hard bargain. During a recession time like this, a wind initiative would be a huge help to the country. It would create jobs as well as help stabilize our energy future. Pickens has also promised to invest $1 trillion in the project, which should certainly make it easier for the Obama administration to begin implementing the plan.

The plan can work, but only time will tell if some or all of it gets implementes. Pickens cannot do it alone, he needs the government to help. The Obama Administration seems to be attacking the transition with tenacity, which is a good sign for the plan and our energy future as well. I really hope that Obama’s message of change wasn’t just a campaign slogan. So far he has hit the ground running and I look forward to seeing where his administration will go from here.

Want more to read? Check out these links on economics and US energy policy:

Source: Yahoo! News (via Biofuels Digest)

Photo Credits: Thanks to Tom Saint‘s Flickr photostream under a Creative Commons License.





Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,


About the Author

Anthony is a student at the University of Wisconsin-Madison majoring in biology as well as English. He became interested in the biofuel initiative after getting a job in the Raines Lab of Petroleum Alternatives at the university turning sugars into biofuels. He is the first to admit that he doesn't fully understand everything that he does or is trying to do, but enjoys doing his bit to help the environment. Anthony has very few plans for his future, but is interested in how natural systems work and how urban development changes these systems. On a good day, Anthony enjoys riding his bike really far away and reading Kurt Vonnegut books.



  • Anthony

    Thanks for the post!

    I do take a slightly different angle on things… I think we do need to look more critically at Pickens’ assumptions and the challenges they must overcome. Namely the grid won’t change without federal regulatory changes, we should kill the combustion engine- not try to substitute natural gas for engines (that still can’t use electrons from the grid), and how does natural gas really save the country money? It’s likely that natural gas will be cheaper via LNG sources from regions outside the US.

    But the upside is that Pickens is starting a conversation that embraces a complex / comprehensive set of strategies! I just think we need to dig deeper and think ahead about the challenges…

    I wrote a recent post about 5 major challenges to the Pickens Plan:

    http://www.theenergyroadmap.com/futureblogger/show/1281-picking-apart-the-pickens-plan-5-big-challenges

    Garry Golden

    Brooklyn, NY

    Editor

    The Energy Roadmap.com

  • Anthony

    Thanks for the post!

    I do take a slightly different angle on things… I think we do need to look more critically at Pickens’ assumptions and the challenges they must overcome. Namely the grid won’t change without federal regulatory changes, we should kill the combustion engine- not try to substitute natural gas for engines (that still can’t use electrons from the grid), and how does natural gas really save the country money? It’s likely that natural gas will be cheaper via LNG sources from regions outside the US.

    But the upside is that Pickens is starting a conversation that embraces a complex / comprehensive set of strategies! I just think we need to dig deeper and think ahead about the challenges…

    I wrote a recent post about 5 major challenges to the Pickens Plan:

    http://www.theenergyroadmap.com/futureblogger/show/1281-picking-apart-the-pickens-plan-5-big-challenges

    Garry Golden

    Brooklyn, NY

    Editor

    The Energy Roadmap.com

  • Bill

    First, all wind generated energy requires a reliable base load backup. If a backup (in a running ready state) is required for wind power, why build the wind power at all?

    Second, what’s included in the $1 trillion cost? Is this for the wind turbines, transmission lines, property acquisitions, and fleet conversion from diesel to natural gas? Or are some of these items extra?

    Third, “If you don’t like my plan, get a plan.” How about spending $1 trillion on nuclear, coal and natural gas plants as well as grid upgrades? This will produce not only more energy, but more reliable energy.

    Fourth, “Pickens has also promised to invest $1 trillion in the project…” Where’s Pickens going to get a $1 trillion? His hedge fund has lost something like half its value recently and it was never anywhere near a trillion. He’s going to get it from taxpayers; no one would invest in wind farms based solely on economics.

    Fifth, how many gigawatts will the Pickens plan produce? Why is this never stated? Wind turbines are notorious for only producing 25 to 40% of their stated output (i.e., a “one megawatt” wind farm produces between 250 and 400 kilowatts of power). Much of this would be produced at night and in the winter and spring when demand is relatively low. The wind blows least in the summer.

    Sixth, how much energy will be lost transmitting the energy from Kansas to San Francisco?

    Seventh, how much will it cost to maintain tens of thousands of wind turbines and transmission lines spread over thousands of miles?

  • Bill

    First, all wind generated energy requires a reliable base load backup. If a backup (in a running ready state) is required for wind power, why build the wind power at all?

    Second, what’s included in the $1 trillion cost? Is this for the wind turbines, transmission lines, property acquisitions, and fleet conversion from diesel to natural gas? Or are some of these items extra?

    Third, “If you don’t like my plan, get a plan.” How about spending $1 trillion on nuclear, coal and natural gas plants as well as grid upgrades? This will produce not only more energy, but more reliable energy.

    Fourth, “Pickens has also promised to invest $1 trillion in the project…” Where’s Pickens going to get a $1 trillion? His hedge fund has lost something like half its value recently and it was never anywhere near a trillion. He’s going to get it from taxpayers; no one would invest in wind farms based solely on economics.

    Fifth, how many gigawatts will the Pickens plan produce? Why is this never stated? Wind turbines are notorious for only producing 25 to 40% of their stated output (i.e., a “one megawatt” wind farm produces between 250 and 400 kilowatts of power). Much of this would be produced at night and in the winter and spring when demand is relatively low. The wind blows least in the summer.

    Sixth, how much energy will be lost transmitting the energy from Kansas to San Francisco?

    Seventh, how much will it cost to maintain tens of thousands of wind turbines and transmission lines spread over thousands of miles?

  • Bill

    Eighth, what’s the useful life of a wind turbine? “After the industry’s recent boom years, wind power providers and experts are now concerned. The facilities may not be as reliable and durable as producers claim. Indeed, with thousands of mishaps, breakdowns and accidents having been reported in recent years, the difficulties seem to be mounting. Gearboxes hiding inside the casings perched on top of the towering masts have short shelf lives, often crapping out before even five years is up. In some cases, fractures form along the rotors, or even in the foundation, after only limited operation. Short circuits or overheated propellers have been known to cause fires. All this despite manufacturers’ promises that the turbines would last at least 20 years.” Spiegel Online August 20, 2007.

    http://tinyurl.com/23kkfq

    Ninth, how many years will it take to manufacture and install tens of thousands of turbines? Will the Pickens Plan turn out to be like painting the Golden Gate Bridge – once the last turbine is installed, will it be time to replace the first turbine? If so, it will never end.

    Here are some quotes from the summary of a recent report by the Industrial Wind Action Group:

    “In Texas, however, wind blows

    the least during the summer

    months when we need power the

    most. The Electric Reliability

    Council of Texas (ERCOT) relies on just 8.7 percent of wind power’s installed capacity when determining available power during peak summer hours.”

    “Due to wind’s intermittency,

    wind turbines have much lower

    capacity factors-measures of generating units’ actual energy output divided by the energy output if the units operated at its rated power output 100 percent of the time-than conventional (thermal) power sources. As such, wind is not a baseload resource and cannot deliver a large portion of the demand for energy.

    “Without adequate windpower storage, wind-generating units must be backed up by units that generate electricity from conventional sources ….Thus, wind energy is an inherently less valuable resource than fuel sources requiring no backup.”

    “Another major issue surrounding wind-energy development is electric transmission capacity.”

    “Cost estimates for wind-energy generation typically include only turbine construction and maintenance. Left out are many of wind energy’s costs-transmission, grid connection and management, and backup generation-that ultimately will be borne by Texas’ electric ratepayers.Direct subsidies, tax breaks, and increased production and ancillary costs associated with wind energy could cost Texas more than $4 billion per year and at least $60 billion through 2025.” [That’s in addition to turbine construction, maintenance, transmission, operations and backup generation for just for part of Texas. Extrapolate that to the continental United States and you have one hell of an expensive supplemental power grid.]

    Texas wind energy: Past, Present, and Future – September, 2008. (emphasis added) http://tinyurl.com/5akyx7

  • Bill

    Eighth, what’s the useful life of a wind turbine? “After the industry’s recent boom years, wind power providers and experts are now concerned. The facilities may not be as reliable and durable as producers claim. Indeed, with thousands of mishaps, breakdowns and accidents having been reported in recent years, the difficulties seem to be mounting. Gearboxes hiding inside the casings perched on top of the towering masts have short shelf lives, often crapping out before even five years is up. In some cases, fractures form along the rotors, or even in the foundation, after only limited operation. Short circuits or overheated propellers have been known to cause fires. All this despite manufacturers’ promises that the turbines would last at least 20 years.” Spiegel Online August 20, 2007.

    http://tinyurl.com/23kkfq

    Ninth, how many years will it take to manufacture and install tens of thousands of turbines? Will the Pickens Plan turn out to be like painting the Golden Gate Bridge – once the last turbine is installed, will it be time to replace the first turbine? If so, it will never end.

    Here are some quotes from the summary of a recent report by the Industrial Wind Action Group:

    “In Texas, however, wind blows

    the least during the summer

    months when we need power the

    most. The Electric Reliability

    Council of Texas (ERCOT) relies on just 8.7 percent of wind power’s installed capacity when determining available power during peak summer hours.”

    “Due to wind’s intermittency,

    wind turbines have much lower

    capacity factors-measures of generating units’ actual energy output divided by the energy output if the units operated at its rated power output 100 percent of the time-than conventional (thermal) power sources. As such, wind is not a baseload resource and cannot deliver a large portion of the demand for energy.

    “Without adequate windpower storage, wind-generating units must be backed up by units that generate electricity from conventional sources ….Thus, wind energy is an inherently less valuable resource than fuel sources requiring no backup.”

    “Another major issue surrounding wind-energy development is electric transmission capacity.”

    “Cost estimates for wind-energy generation typically include only turbine construction and maintenance. Left out are many of wind energy’s costs-transmission, grid connection and management, and backup generation-that ultimately will be borne by Texas’ electric ratepayers.Direct subsidies, tax breaks, and increased production and ancillary costs associated with wind energy could cost Texas more than $4 billion per year and at least $60 billion through 2025.” [That’s in addition to turbine construction, maintenance, transmission, operations and backup generation for just for part of Texas. Extrapolate that to the continental United States and you have one hell of an expensive supplemental power grid.]

    Texas wind energy: Past, Present, and Future – September, 2008. (emphasis added) http://tinyurl.com/5akyx7

  • Martin K.

    Bill, what are you babbling about? This is a great idea. We just need to get a few of those pesky inhabitants off their land. Pickens needs the government’s help to force them off their land. I guess it wouldn’t exactly be for public purposes, but the public will definitely benefit from it. In San Antonio, we’re already paying more for this cleaner energy. The cost of everything else is going up, so at least energy costs are going up for a good reason. Furthermore, those people are sitting on a gold mine that is an aquifer. They’re not smart enough to do anything about it so Pickens needs to move in and put that water to some good use. With all the money he makes off that deal we can definitely reach energy independence in 10 years. Oh, wait, Obama changed the plan to double clean energy in 10 years. Well, either way it’s a step forward.

  • Martin K.

    Bill, what are you babbling about? This is a great idea. We just need to get a few of those pesky inhabitants off their land. Pickens needs the government’s help to force them off their land. I guess it wouldn’t exactly be for public purposes, but the public will definitely benefit from it. In San Antonio, we’re already paying more for this cleaner energy. The cost of everything else is going up, so at least energy costs are going up for a good reason. Furthermore, those people are sitting on a gold mine that is an aquifer. They’re not smart enough to do anything about it so Pickens needs to move in and put that water to some good use. With all the money he makes off that deal we can definitely reach energy independence in 10 years. Oh, wait, Obama changed the plan to double clean energy in 10 years. Well, either way it’s a step forward.

  • john0

    I believe that we need to explore new energy resources for automobiles as well. However, since 1966 the auto manufacturers have been avoiding the inevitable, fossil fuels are a finite resource. We need to ween our society off the use of oil and employ multiple sources of energy for our vehicles. Hydrogen fuel cell technology could be the next great source of energy. The question we have to ask is how long can we wait?

  • john0

    I believe that we need to explore new energy resources for automobiles as well. However, since 1966 the auto manufacturers have been avoiding the inevitable, fossil fuels are a finite resource. We need to ween our society off the use of oil and employ multiple sources of energy for our vehicles. Hydrogen fuel cell technology could be the next great source of energy. The question we have to ask is how long can we wait?

  • I have a plan that will make all of us here at digg.com rich. Seed me $100,000 dollars and I will send you my plan; send cash only.

  • I have a plan that will make all of us here at digg.com rich. Seed me $100,000 dollars and I will send you my plan; send cash only.

  • Tom

    As long as we get off our oil addiction crap then I’m happy!

    http://shoppingoak.com/freebies

  • Tom

    As long as we get off our oil addiction crap then I’m happy!

    http://shoppingoak.com/freebies

  • Craig

    First: GREAT Article. I’ve been following Pickens for a long time and I’m glad he’s got Obama’s ear.

    Second: Bill, your an idiot. The article didn’t note Pickens plan would cost $1 trillion. Instead the article stated, “Pickens has also promised to invest $1 trillion in the project”.

  • Craig

    First: GREAT Article. I’ve been following Pickens for a long time and I’m glad he’s got Obama’s ear.

    Second: Bill, your an idiot. The article didn’t note Pickens plan would cost $1 trillion. Instead the article stated, “Pickens has also promised to invest $1 trillion in the project”.

  • r

    “Pickens has also promised to invest $1 trillion in the project”

    hahahaa

  • clockwerkj

    HYdrogen & Electric vehicles are the logical end, but as you mentioned how long will it take to get a rollout of those vehicles from Detroit? Thats the point of the natural gas conversion. It buys that time. I would think that the electricity providers would do the same thing that cellular providers do, rent the space for the turbines while allowing the farmer to grow whatever crops they are comfortable with on the same land below?

    It’s time to move forward one way or another.

  • r

    “Pickens has also promised to invest $1 trillion in the project”

    hahahaa

  • clockwerkj

    HYdrogen & Electric vehicles are the logical end, but as you mentioned how long will it take to get a rollout of those vehicles from Detroit? Thats the point of the natural gas conversion. It buys that time. I would think that the electricity providers would do the same thing that cellular providers do, rent the space for the turbines while allowing the farmer to grow whatever crops they are comfortable with on the same land below?

    It’s time to move forward one way or another.

  • Bill

    Craig

    Very informative reply. Thanks!

    Here’s what the Pickens Plan says it will cost:

    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.

    http://www.pickensplan.com/theplan/

    But I’m sure you knew that since you’ve been following Pickens for a long time.

  • Bill

    Craig

    Very informative reply. Thanks!

    Here’s what the Pickens Plan says it will cost:

    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.

    http://www.pickensplan.com/theplan/

    But I’m sure you knew that since you’ve been following Pickens for a long time.

  • Reader

    Guess who owns the natural gas company? Pickens! Honestly I would rather wait for a sound plan than just go blindly with the first plan that sounds like it’s “green”. Come on people you have to read the facts. Being a California man I did that during the proposition for Pickens’ plan and did some research. Please do all the research before making comments on such a thing. In a rush to get obtain our own energy supplies lets not rush into something blindly and fall fat on our face and end up in an even larger whole (I.E. bank bail outs! . . execs still having retreats and getting bonuses! there has to be regulations). I hope Obama considers all options and if he thinks this is a great plan then that is what will be, but some how I highly doubt that since he does his research as well.

  • Reader

    Guess who owns the natural gas company? Pickens! Honestly I would rather wait for a sound plan than just go blindly with the first plan that sounds like it’s “green”. Come on people you have to read the facts. Being a California man I did that during the proposition for Pickens’ plan and did some research. Please do all the research before making comments on such a thing. In a rush to get obtain our own energy supplies lets not rush into something blindly and fall fat on our face and end up in an even larger whole (I.E. bank bail outs! . . execs still having retreats and getting bonuses! there has to be regulations). I hope Obama considers all options and if he thinks this is a great plan then that is what will be, but some how I highly doubt that since he does his research as well.

  • John JAmes

    Obama rocks. Should be interesting.

    james

    http://www.privacy.cz.tc

  • John JAmes

    Obama rocks. Should be interesting.

    james

    http://www.privacy.cz.tc

  • Dallas

    Keep it up Anthony, your writings are so cute!

  • Dallas

    Keep it up Anthony, your writings are so cute!

  • Anthony Cefali

    Hey guys,

    Thanks everyone for the input. I’m glad we all feel that any step away from this administrations energy plan is a good one (that’s what 8 years under this administration will do to you, any hope is better than having none at all).

    I don’t necessarily think that Pickens’ plan is the greatest, but he is putting his money where is mouth is and that counts. Someone needs to start pushing us in the right direction RIGHT NOW. My lab mentor’s dad works as a government advisor on oil supply and things are getting worse on a daily basis. If we don’t start doing something, we won’t have any gasoline to buy by the year 2050. I know that seems like it’s a long ways away, but if we don’t do something now we could be in serious trouble.

    I am of the understanding that Bill does not like the plan at all, I can tell because of his sarcastic tone (detecting sarcasm on the internet is a gift I have). I do think you have a point Bill, putting all our eggs in one basket could ruin us in the future. But again, we can’t just keep deliberating over the best way to achieve a sustainable energy future. Perhaps the plan works, perhaps it doesn’t, and we won’t know until we try. Plus the economic stimulus couldn’t hurt.

    Thanks for reading and discussing!

    ~anthony

  • ChuckL

    Anthony,

    You and (james.rainey@latimes.com) both need to drop the unnecessary political rants against politicians whose policies you do not like. You are aware that we did move 550 metric tons of yellow-cake nuclear fuel from 12 miles outside of Baghdad to Canada last summer, aren’t you?

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25546334

    Bush was correct. Saddam Hussein did have nuclear fuel and other weapons of mass destruction under construction.

    No on to what GAS 2.0 should be about rather than political rants.

    Pickens has a good idea, and he is positioned to make a bundle of money from it. That is NOT a reason to NOT do it. But, we should also pass a law prohibiting business taxes on any profits from any investment in biofuel, and at the same time prohibit government subsidies for the development of any particular biofuel. This must be for not less than 5 years after first profitability for both the tax elimination and the prohibition on subsidies. The eliminated taxes will act as a subsidy and the lack of government choice in the actual end product will allow a true business decision to be made with profitability as a reason to invest.

  • ChuckL

    Anthony,

    You and (james.rainey@latimes.com) both need to drop the unnecessary political rants against politicians whose policies you do not like. You are aware that we did move 550 metric tons of yellow-cake nuclear fuel from 12 miles outside of Baghdad to Canada last summer, aren’t you?

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25546334

    Bush was correct. Saddam Hussein did have nuclear fuel and other weapons of mass destruction under construction.

    No on to what GAS 2.0 should be about rather than political rants.

    Pickens has a good idea, and he is positioned to make a bundle of money from it. That is NOT a reason to NOT do it. But, we should also pass a law prohibiting business taxes on any profits from any investment in biofuel, and at the same time prohibit government subsidies for the development of any particular biofuel. This must be for not less than 5 years after first profitability for both the tax elimination and the prohibition on subsidies. The eliminated taxes will act as a subsidy and the lack of government choice in the actual end product will allow a true business decision to be made with profitability as a reason to invest.

  • What about alcohol? Its totally renewable, can be produced at home or locally, it runs 97% cleaner than fossil, and is compatible with current internal combustion engines with some timing modifications.

    There where model A’s that ran on alcohol up until prohibition. It was the first fuel used for an internal combustion engine.

  • What about alcohol? Its totally renewable, can be produced at home or locally, it runs 97% cleaner than fossil, and is compatible with current internal combustion engines with some timing modifications.

    There where model A’s that ran on alcohol up until prohibition. It was the first fuel used for an internal combustion engine.

  • “Pickens has also promised to invest $1 trillion in the project”

    lol

  • “Pickens has also promised to invest $1 trillion in the project”

    lol

  • It’s been said often, and in many circles, that we need to pursue a strategy that involves multiple solutions. Natural gas is one option for powering commercial trucks, but so is biodiesel, and many of the nation’s trucking fleets are moving in that direction.

    Apply wind in those areas best suited, same for solar, tides, geothermal. It’s true that the grid, for both transmission and storage, is in need of a major overhaul, but this can also be done in a fashion that is tuned to the specifics needs of a particular region.

  • It’s been said often, and in many circles, that we need to pursue a strategy that involves multiple solutions. Natural gas is one option for powering commercial trucks, but so is biodiesel, and many of the nation’s trucking fleets are moving in that direction.

    Apply wind in those areas best suited, same for solar, tides, geothermal. It’s true that the grid, for both transmission and storage, is in need of a major overhaul, but this can also be done in a fashion that is tuned to the specifics needs of a particular region.

  • Doug

    Oh great Obama please come and save us. We are your willing drones and now only your greatness can show us the way. I love how everyone assumes this guy is going to be any different than every other liar we elect. If anyone watched the 60 minutes interview should be proud to know that one of his most important issues is a college football playoff. Nice to see his priorities are in order. As for the Pickens’ plan, it has it good points, but as with all of the new freedom from petroleum plans it is vague and full of ifs. As to the people arguing over the 1 trillion dollars, please, anyone see a time frame mentioned. It is good to see a business man trying to use what is right to make money, but it will take more like minded capitalists to truly make this a reality. Socialism = Failure.

  • Doug

    Oh great Obama please come and save us. We are your willing drones and now only your greatness can show us the way. I love how everyone assumes this guy is going to be any different than every other liar we elect. If anyone watched the 60 minutes interview should be proud to know that one of his most important issues is a college football playoff. Nice to see his priorities are in order. As for the Pickens’ plan, it has it good points, but as with all of the new freedom from petroleum plans it is vague and full of ifs. As to the people arguing over the 1 trillion dollars, please, anyone see a time frame mentioned. It is good to see a business man trying to use what is right to make money, but it will take more like minded capitalists to truly make this a reality. Socialism = Failure.

  • Hmm.. After years of being an oil salesman, Pickens suddenly wants to be an “energy” salesman just as a new administration is coming in. I hope Obama sees through that nonsense and goes with somebody else.

  • DC Palmer

    Good article. I too am skeptical of some parts of the Pickens Plan but support it none the less. Wind mills are a god idea. Using natural gas in trucks is a good idea. Extended electric infrastructure is a good idea, though the people a Repower America are thinking about it more fully.

    H2 vehicles are coming. Solar concentrated steam generators are happening. Lots of good things are happening and need to happen faster. Government has a role to play.

  • DC Palmer

    Good article. I too am skeptical of some parts of the Pickens Plan but support it none the less. Wind mills are a god idea. Using natural gas in trucks is a good idea. Extended electric infrastructure is a good idea, though the people a Repower America are thinking about it more fully.

    H2 vehicles are coming. Solar concentrated steam generators are happening. Lots of good things are happening and need to happen faster. Government has a role to play.

  • LULZcat

    Right that’s why he donated all his money to McCain’s compaign.

  • LULZcat

    Right that’s why he donated all his money to McCain’s compaign.

  • The sooner we end our dependence on oil and coal the better. I applaud picks for coming up with a strong initiative. The more people that step up to the plate like this, the better off we will all be.

  • The sooner we end our dependence on oil and coal the better. I applaud picks for coming up with a strong initiative. The more people that step up to the plate like this, the better off we will all be.

  • Anthony Cefali

    Chuck,

    You’re absolutely right, this blog is not a place for criticizing the previous administration’s foreign policy decisions. It is a blog about alternate energy, and I accused the President of having a poor energy plan, not of disregarding our constitution to declare war on another country and have nothing to show for it after 5 years of occupation except some ‘nuclear cake’. If you want unbiased news, you maybe should consider the reading AP articles.

    The Pickens’ Plan is not the end all be all of our energy future. If it is our only plan then we are in a lot of trouble. You’re right that someone should help make alternate energy a safer investment so that more people will invest, but the government is not going to wipe their hands clean of this countries energy future and let the market decide. I think you know what happens when markets go unregulated for too long.

    Thanks for the input.

    ~anthony

  • Cameron

    I like Pickens. I empathize with his desire to get us off of foreign oil. Having said that, I’m not the biggest fan of this plan.

    1) It’s too expensive. A trillion and change for 20% of our electricity is hardly a paltry sum.

    2) Bringing power to population centers from the midwest is too problematic and a complete waste. Instead we should move people to the midwest. I’m not joking. We look at this problem the wrong way. The fact is many of our largest population centers are far away from proven renewable energy systems. If we are going to be serious about solving this problem than we have to think more radically than we are. BTW, Kansas is nice… a bit windy.

    3) By the time our cars are all set up to run on cng the ice will be an obsolete technology. We should be diving capital into the electric vehicle.

  • Cameron

    I like Pickens. I empathize with his desire to get us off of foreign oil. Having said that, I’m not the biggest fan of this plan.

    1) It’s too expensive. A trillion and change for 20% of our electricity is hardly a paltry sum.

    2) Bringing power to population centers from the midwest is too problematic and a complete waste. Instead we should move people to the midwest. I’m not joking. We look at this problem the wrong way. The fact is many of our largest population centers are far away from proven renewable energy systems. If we are going to be serious about solving this problem than we have to think more radically than we are. BTW, Kansas is nice… a bit windy.

    3) By the time our cars are all set up to run on cng the ice will be an obsolete technology. We should be diving capital into the electric vehicle.

  • Oh Dear, Oh Dear, Mr Pickens the problem is that you’re just moving the problem from the visible price of gasoline to the less visible price of natural gas. What will this plan do to the price of natual gas? Since most of the chemicals used in the US (polyester fibres, nylon, paints, coatings, plastics, fertilisers) is derived from natural gas then you’re going to increase the competition for this. A cent will get you a dollar that the prices of these items would rise.

    Wouldn’t it be better to simply use the gasoline more efficiently. Tie aid for the US auto sector with siginficant increases in fuel efficiency for ALL types of vehicles. Say a minimum 50% improvement over three years…

    @clockwerkj hydrogen and electric vehicles are not the logical end. You have to generate both using either nuclear, solar, wind or coal in any case you have to think about the cradle to grave costs of your suggestions. Hydrogen is inherently inefficient because it has to be generated from electricity at the moment.

  • Oh Dear, Oh Dear, Mr Pickens the problem is that you’re just moving the problem from the visible price of gasoline to the less visible price of natural gas. What will this plan do to the price of natual gas? Since most of the chemicals used in the US (polyester fibres, nylon, paints, coatings, plastics, fertilisers) is derived from natural gas then you’re going to increase the competition for this. A cent will get you a dollar that the prices of these items would rise.

    Wouldn’t it be better to simply use the gasoline more efficiently. Tie aid for the US auto sector with siginficant increases in fuel efficiency for ALL types of vehicles. Say a minimum 50% improvement over three years…

    @clockwerkj hydrogen and electric vehicles are not the logical end. You have to generate both using either nuclear, solar, wind or coal in any case you have to think about the cradle to grave costs of your suggestions. Hydrogen is inherently inefficient because it has to be generated from electricity at the moment.

  • robtr

    I failed to see one quote from Pickens in your article. I did see an interview with Pickens 2 days ago on FOX where he said he was drastically scaling back his plans because he cannot get financing to move forward. He said he did talk with Obama but that Obama was not overly optimistic about his plan. He did say Obama understood the problem (duh) but he did not know which way he would go to solve it. You should have some facts before you write.

  • robtr

    I failed to see one quote from Pickens in your article. I did see an interview with Pickens 2 days ago on FOX where he said he was drastically scaling back his plans because he cannot get financing to move forward. He said he did talk with Obama but that Obama was not overly optimistic about his plan. He did say Obama understood the problem (duh) but he did not know which way he would go to solve it. You should have some facts before you write.

  • templar knight

    “…Obama to implement Pickens plan..”

    My advice to all you people is this. You need to go buy yourself a natural gas generator so you will be prepared for the blackouts that will inevitably come if this insane plan is implemented.

  • templar knight

    “…Obama to implement Pickens plan..”

    My advice to all you people is this. You need to go buy yourself a natural gas generator so you will be prepared for the blackouts that will inevitably come if this insane plan is implemented.

  • Gary

    “Demand for oil would come solely from consumers, as would carbon dioxide emissions (the nitrogen oxide emissions will come from the natural gas burning buses).”

    Google “natural gas combustion products” before you make this stupid statement again.

  • Gary

    “Demand for oil would come solely from consumers, as would carbon dioxide emissions (the nitrogen oxide emissions will come from the natural gas burning buses).”

    Google “natural gas combustion products” before you make this stupid statement again.

  • coggieguy

    I’ve heard about the gearbox failures in wind turbines – apparently the lubrication and metallurgy problems haven’t been solved yet – kin dof liek the early dasy of steam boilers – BOOM! I expect htis wil get fixed- at a price. One aspect of Pickens plan seems fairly utopian ( at aleast as described in the post) – industry uses a lot of process heat – steam, hot air , flame treatment of metals etc – electricity is not an economical source of energy for these uses. The age of carbon fuels is not over yet – these applications are not going away soon. sure green chemistry is making advances, but on a gorwoth curve we are still in the lag phase. when exponential fgrowth occurs is anyone’s guess. those lag phases can last a long time.

  • Atomix

    “hydrogen and electric vehicles are not the logical end. You have to generate both using either nuclear, solar, wind or coal in any case you have to think about the cradle to grave costs of your suggestions. Hydrogen is inherently inefficient because it has to be generated from electricity at the moment.”

    Actually Hydrogen gas is produced from natural gas at the moment, which is even worse. Producing it from electricity or genetically modified algae actually isn’t too bad efficiency wise.

    Wind energy unfortunately is just not ever going to work on any appreciable scale, because the wind does not blow 24/7 nor can it be predicted on minute-scale accuracy required to regulate the power grid. Storing multigigawatt amounts of power to even out the flow is a pipe-dream. And then there is the trouble with transmission…

    Solar is better in somewhat this respect, but the sun is only overhead for about 1/6th-1/4th of the day (dawn and dusk there is little light to collect), so however many megawatts a panel makes divide by ~4-6. If that didn’t make you go “ouch,” then a reality check might be in order.

    So wind and solar are out for baseload power, we want to stop burning coal, and cut way back on burning gas (particularly imported gas), what does that leave?

    Nuclear

    Nuclear power plants are the only zero-emission gigawatt scale power source that can be run 24/7 reliably and predictably. Modern power plants are an order of magnitude or to safer than last-generation plants, and range from 50-150% bigger (AP-1000 1700MW model). And, coming in the near future, even more power from the same plants and fuel with advanced fuel rod designs.

    Nuclear waste scare you? Actually, ~95% of nuclear waste is “unburned” Uranium/Plutonium, which can be recycled. The other 5% can be “burned” in a specialty fast-neutron reactor or safely buried for the ~500 or so years it will take it to decay (not 25,000yrs). With proper recycling, nuclear waste is not a problem, since the really nasty waste decays relatively quickly.

  • coggieguy

    I’ve heard about the gearbox failures in wind turbines – apparently the lubrication and metallurgy problems haven’t been solved yet – kin dof liek the early dasy of steam boilers – BOOM! I expect htis wil get fixed- at a price. One aspect of Pickens plan seems fairly utopian ( at aleast as described in the post) – industry uses a lot of process heat – steam, hot air , flame treatment of metals etc – electricity is not an economical source of energy for these uses. The age of carbon fuels is not over yet – these applications are not going away soon. sure green chemistry is making advances, but on a gorwoth curve we are still in the lag phase. when exponential fgrowth occurs is anyone’s guess. those lag phases can last a long time.

  • Atomix

    “hydrogen and electric vehicles are not the logical end. You have to generate both using either nuclear, solar, wind or coal in any case you have to think about the cradle to grave costs of your suggestions. Hydrogen is inherently inefficient because it has to be generated from electricity at the moment.”

    Actually Hydrogen gas is produced from natural gas at the moment, which is even worse. Producing it from electricity or genetically modified algae actually isn’t too bad efficiency wise.

    Wind energy unfortunately is just not ever going to work on any appreciable scale, because the wind does not blow 24/7 nor can it be predicted on minute-scale accuracy required to regulate the power grid. Storing multigigawatt amounts of power to even out the flow is a pipe-dream. And then there is the trouble with transmission…

    Solar is better in somewhat this respect, but the sun is only overhead for about 1/6th-1/4th of the day (dawn and dusk there is little light to collect), so however many megawatts a panel makes divide by ~4-6. If that didn’t make you go “ouch,” then a reality check might be in order.

    So wind and solar are out for baseload power, we want to stop burning coal, and cut way back on burning gas (particularly imported gas), what does that leave?

    Nuclear

    Nuclear power plants are the only zero-emission gigawatt scale power source that can be run 24/7 reliably and predictably. Modern power plants are an order of magnitude or to safer than last-generation plants, and range from 50-150% bigger (AP-1000 1700MW model). And, coming in the near future, even more power from the same plants and fuel with advanced fuel rod designs.

    Nuclear waste scare you? Actually, ~95% of nuclear waste is “unburned” Uranium/Plutonium, which can be recycled. The other 5% can be “burned” in a specialty fast-neutron reactor or safely buried for the ~500 or so years it will take it to decay (not 25,000yrs). With proper recycling, nuclear waste is not a problem, since the really nasty waste decays relatively quickly.

  • JeanneB

    Bill:

    10th

    Has anyone heard Pickens say he would hold the price of natural gas at today’s levels.

    The last time government promoted natural gas was in the early 90’s. They were forcing generating plants to convert to “cheap and clean” NG. Many cities in California were converting city buses and other vehicles to natural gas.

    Well, have you looked at how natural gas prices have skyrocketed since then? If Pickens gets his way, what’s to say gas won’t double again in the next 10 years? Seems to me he’ll have a captive market.

  • JeanneB

    Bill:

    10th

    Has anyone heard Pickens say he would hold the price of natural gas at today’s levels.

    The last time government promoted natural gas was in the early 90’s. They were forcing generating plants to convert to “cheap and clean” NG. Many cities in California were converting city buses and other vehicles to natural gas.

    Well, have you looked at how natural gas prices have skyrocketed since then? If Pickens gets his way, what’s to say gas won’t double again in the next 10 years? Seems to me he’ll have a captive market.

  • Chaz706

    “It’s safe to assume that if government spends more than 8 figures on a ‘plan’ then what’s going on here is a power grab.”

    and if no one is on board to claim credit for this statement, I do.

    This has ‘LAND GRAB’ and ‘WATER GRAB’ written all over it. It’s a plot to take the means of production away from independent people to invest in an energy source that is only at best 8.7 percent RELIABLE. This isn’t a solution, it a statist power grab. It’s a 5 year plan straight from Animal Farm. Many may have issues with Bill’s statements, but the fact is, they’re all true. With this in mind, I’m calling this what it is: a Power Grab. A plan with a goal to take the means of production (some of our best farmland and the water to use it) away from independent people (the farmers) and give it to the government, who will put it to little/no productive use. This is communism in implementation.

  • Chaz706

    “It’s safe to assume that if government spends more than 8 figures on a ‘plan’ then what’s going on here is a power grab.”

    and if no one is on board to claim credit for this statement, I do.

    This has ‘LAND GRAB’ and ‘WATER GRAB’ written all over it. It’s a plot to take the means of production away from independent people to invest in an energy source that is only at best 8.7 percent RELIABLE. This isn’t a solution, it a statist power grab. It’s a 5 year plan straight from Animal Farm. Many may have issues with Bill’s statements, but the fact is, they’re all true. With this in mind, I’m calling this what it is: a Power Grab. A plan with a goal to take the means of production (some of our best farmland and the water to use it) away from independent people (the farmers) and give it to the government, who will put it to little/no productive use. This is communism in implementation.

  • John

    The pickens plan is rubbish. He wants the plan so that the heavy hand of government can appropriate all sorts of land to build windmill, mandate natural gas usage, etc, when a far, far, superior technology exists today–nuclear power. Current technology in nuclear power allows the construction of refrigerator size self-maitaining nuclear power plants that can supply energy for 20k people at a pop using far less space than the average windmill, at a far lower cost of operation per watt than a windmill, at a far higher availability than a windmill. They need to be refueled about once every ten YEARS, with about one truckload of fuel in that time frame. The only reason why we don’t have more nuclear plants now is because of scaremongering back in the 70’s the results of we are still living with today.

    As far as solar, I’ve had to deal with the issues involved with solar first hand while on a bike tour. Trying to ride as self-sufficient as possible, I placed two solar panels on my bike with the sole purpose of keeping my cell phone batteries charged, with a nominal capacity of 9W, which should have been more than enough to charge the phone.

    The panels received 8+hrs of sunlight/day charging the phone, and still the phone(a brand new phone and battery, BTW), couldn’t get a decent charge at the end of the day. If I couldn’t rely on solar power to charge a cell phone on a summer day, why would I rely on it to power the electrical grid?

  • John

    The pickens plan is rubbish. He wants the plan so that the heavy hand of government can appropriate all sorts of land to build windmill, mandate natural gas usage, etc, when a far, far, superior technology exists today–nuclear power. Current technology in nuclear power allows the construction of refrigerator size self-maitaining nuclear power plants that can supply energy for 20k people at a pop using far less space than the average windmill, at a far lower cost of operation per watt than a windmill, at a far higher availability than a windmill. They need to be refueled about once every ten YEARS, with about one truckload of fuel in that time frame. The only reason why we don’t have more nuclear plants now is because of scaremongering back in the 70’s the results of we are still living with today.

    As far as solar, I’ve had to deal with the issues involved with solar first hand while on a bike tour. Trying to ride as self-sufficient as possible, I placed two solar panels on my bike with the sole purpose of keeping my cell phone batteries charged, with a nominal capacity of 9W, which should have been more than enough to charge the phone.

    The panels received 8+hrs of sunlight/day charging the phone, and still the phone(a brand new phone and battery, BTW), couldn’t get a decent charge at the end of the day. If I couldn’t rely on solar power to charge a cell phone on a summer day, why would I rely on it to power the electrical grid?

  • buzz

    “If you want unbiased news, you maybe should consider the reading AP articles”

    HAHAHA. I love it when people drop a joke in the middle of a comment. Lessens the tension.

    So how much could we do with algae bio diesel with a trillion dollars? Seems like it is completely renewable, can burn in existing diesel engines, can be moved thru exiting diesel pipelines, stored in existing diesel tanks and pumped at existing diesel pumps at gas stations already located all over the country.

  • buzz

    “If you want unbiased news, you maybe should consider the reading AP articles”

    HAHAHA. I love it when people drop a joke in the middle of a comment. Lessens the tension.

    So how much could we do with algae bio diesel with a trillion dollars? Seems like it is completely renewable, can burn in existing diesel engines, can be moved thru exiting diesel pipelines, stored in existing diesel tanks and pumped at existing diesel pumps at gas stations already located all over the country.

  • willis

    “Many have said that FDR’s borderline socialist policies failed because he spent too much money, Krugman feels that he did not invest enough.”

    Or some, such as a group of economists from UCLA in a recently published book, said that FDR’s socialist policies prolonged the depression by 7 years.

  • willis

    “Many have said that FDR’s borderline socialist policies failed because he spent too much money, Krugman feels that he did not invest enough.”

    Or some, such as a group of economists from UCLA in a recently published book, said that FDR’s socialist policies prolonged the depression by 7 years.

  • Steve D

    The creating of jobs is a pile of stupidity. ‘During a recession time like this, a wind initiative would be a huge help to the country. It would create jobs as well as help stabilize our energy future.’ If we have to subsidize it, it will cost jobs from where the money would have been spent otherwise. Right now it has to be subsidized. That’s not to say there isn’t a good reason to subsidize some level of wind production but don’t make it out to be a win-win setup when there are real costs involved. Burning down and rebuilding your house would create jobs but it would be wrong and would destroy value.

  • Steve D

    The creating of jobs is a pile of stupidity. ‘During a recession time like this, a wind initiative would be a huge help to the country. It would create jobs as well as help stabilize our energy future.’ If we have to subsidize it, it will cost jobs from where the money would have been spent otherwise. Right now it has to be subsidized. That’s not to say there isn’t a good reason to subsidize some level of wind production but don’t make it out to be a win-win setup when there are real costs involved. Burning down and rebuilding your house would create jobs but it would be wrong and would destroy value.

  • Steve D

    Biology and English Major at UW-Madison – good for you. Go Badgers! However, can’t the publication find someone with a little more relevant knowledge and experience to cover this type of thing? Though compared to others in journalism covering scientific topics I guess Anthony is way ahead of the curve. . .

  • Steve D

    Biology and English Major at UW-Madison – good for you. Go Badgers! However, can’t the publication find someone with a little more relevant knowledge and experience to cover this type of thing? Though compared to others in journalism covering scientific topics I guess Anthony is way ahead of the curve. . .

  • DrBubba

    Hi, I’m “Big Gas,” and I embrace the Pickens Plan too. I used to be “Big Oil,” but with the new plan, I switched to drilling the hundreds of thousands of gas wells that will be required to fuel the plan.

    Oh, and by the way, drilling gas wells also creates thousands of good jobs.

  • DrBubba

    Hi, I’m “Big Gas,” and I embrace the Pickens Plan too. I used to be “Big Oil,” but with the new plan, I switched to drilling the hundreds of thousands of gas wells that will be required to fuel the plan.

    Oh, and by the way, drilling gas wells also creates thousands of good jobs.

  • Terrible article.

    Pickens plan will cost an order of magnitude more than promised and will not deliver energy independence or reliability of the power grid.

    You should study (and practice) engineering if you want to be taken seriously by knowledgeable people, not just regurgitate what you read over at the Utne Reader of Grist.

  • Terrible article.

    Pickens plan will cost an order of magnitude more than promised and will not deliver energy independence or reliability of the power grid.

    You should study (and practice) engineering if you want to be taken seriously by knowledgeable people, not just regurgitate what you read over at the Utne Reader of Grist.

  • michigan sceptic

    The T Boone plan is not based in reality. What about the millions of homes using natural gas the price rise will be as bad as the oil bump of the last 5 years. Who builds the swithcover infrastructure and how much does the T and Nancy P profit? Nuclear, clean coal and drill baby drill. Then lets see what our engineers can come up with in the meantime. Wind not consistent, solar on a sunny day. T Boone is in this to make money, my plan is outlined above find a better one. Global warming concerns step outside.

  • michigan sceptic

    The T Boone plan is not based in reality. What about the millions of homes using natural gas the price rise will be as bad as the oil bump of the last 5 years. Who builds the swithcover infrastructure and how much does the T and Nancy P profit? Nuclear, clean coal and drill baby drill. Then lets see what our engineers can come up with in the meantime. Wind not consistent, solar on a sunny day. T Boone is in this to make money, my plan is outlined above find a better one. Global warming concerns step outside.

  • freeremnant

    Do you know why Obama said 10 years to energy independence? Cause then he can waste taxpayer money for 8 years by giving it to his campaign contributors with green sounding projects. He’ll be gone in ten years with just a bunch of money wasted and no energy independence. Remember, he told a San Francisco paper he wanted electricity rates to skyrocket.

  • freeremnant

    Do you know why Obama said 10 years to energy independence? Cause then he can waste taxpayer money for 8 years by giving it to his campaign contributors with green sounding projects. He’ll be gone in ten years with just a bunch of money wasted and no energy independence. Remember, he told a San Francisco paper he wanted electricity rates to skyrocket.

  • This billionaire can’t possibly have any ulterior motives to switch our main energy source from something that’s made him rich to something else entirely. Naaawwwww

  • This billionaire can’t possibly have any ulterior motives to switch our main energy source from something that’s made him rich to something else entirely. Naaawwwww

  • LonnieB

    First, let me agree with those of you who say that this is not the right site for Bush blaming and Obama worship (they’re both maggots from similar political flies, IMHO). But having said that, and Athiony having set the tone, I will lower myself, but just a little.

    Anthony implies that our current state of energy dependence is solely the fault of the current administration, totally ignoring the fact that it took DECADES for us to get to this point, courtesy of both Democrats and Republicans (including Lord Clinton).

    But, that’s the typical Obamatron mentality. They can’t help having unrealistic expectations of their messiah, and they will learn that they were duped by an agenda-driven media to vote for the candidate they (the media) selected. There was nothing honest or fair on the part of the media during this election cycle. Since Vietnam and Watergate, the media has appointed itself guardians of what the American public should know, since we are obviously mere neophytes to their vision of a utopian Amerika!

    But don’t be too harsh on him. He is young and very likely has no political memory of the Carter years (he promised change, too, and boy, did we get it). Let’s just hope that the incoming administration isn’t Carter on steroids. I don’t think I could stand having that much fun again!

    As an American, I sincerely hope Obama doesn’t screw the pooch, and actually succeeds. But as a mature realist, I see a bad moon rising for our nation, with his quasi-socialist plans to transform OUR nation into what HE thinks it should be.

    The Pickens Plan has it’s pro’s and con’s, as does any plan (yes, including Obama’s).

    Shouldn’t our energy policy be “all of the above”? (I seem to recall one candidate running on that theme, and it wasn’t Obama). Why is so much mental and emotional energy spent shooting holes in ideas, instead of refining them into successful implementation?

    None of the alternatives can do it all, by themselves. They must be integrated to compliment each other. What’s so hard to understand about that? Haven’t we learned from overloading the petroleum basket with our fragile energy eggs?

    I really detest this “all or nothing” mentality our short-attention-span society has adopted (or been taught by college professors?). It’s intellectually dishonest and naively (and dangerously) short-sighted.

    It’s the same mentality that believes we are at war with Iraq, instead of terrorists, and that we are in two SEPERATE wars instead of one big, global, long-lasting one against extreme religious idealism on two combat fronts. (The very same idealism that would decapitate liberal scholars and Hollywood Halfwits, if they are allowed to succeed.)

    I have a questions for you, Anthony. You say we have “nothing to show” for our struggle against terrorists, so…what do we have to show for our struggle against fascism (you do know that Germany never attacked us, don’t you?), imperialism and communism?

    Finally, for all of you who fancy Obama as another FDR, remeber that he implimented policies to gaod Japan into attacking, so he could bring America into World War 2. Is that what you’re looking for in Obama? Or is the fact that FDR’s economic policies PROLONGED the Great Depression, forcing America into a Quasi-socialist way of life, dependent on the government?

  • LonnieB

    First, let me agree with those of you who say that this is not the right site for Bush blaming and Obama worship (they’re both maggots from similar political flies, IMHO). But having said that, and Athiony having set the tone, I will lower myself, but just a little.

    Anthony implies that our current state of energy dependence is solely the fault of the current administration, totally ignoring the fact that it took DECADES for us to get to this point, courtesy of both Democrats and Republicans (including Lord Clinton).

    But, that’s the typical Obamatron mentality. They can’t help having unrealistic expectations of their messiah, and they will learn that they were duped by an agenda-driven media to vote for the candidate they (the media) selected. There was nothing honest or fair on the part of the media during this election cycle. Since Vietnam and Watergate, the media has appointed itself guardians of what the American public should know, since we are obviously mere neophytes to their vision of a utopian Amerika!

    But don’t be too harsh on him. He is young and very likely has no political memory of the Carter years (he promised change, too, and boy, did we get it). Let’s just hope that the incoming administration isn’t Carter on steroids. I don’t think I could stand having that much fun again!

    As an American, I sincerely hope Obama doesn’t screw the pooch, and actually succeeds. But as a mature realist, I see a bad moon rising for our nation, with his quasi-socialist plans to transform OUR nation into what HE thinks it should be.

    The Pickens Plan has it’s pro’s and con’s, as does any plan (yes, including Obama’s).

    Shouldn’t our energy policy be “all of the above”? (I seem to recall one candidate running on that theme, and it wasn’t Obama). Why is so much mental and emotional energy spent shooting holes in ideas, instead of refining them into successful implementation?

    None of the alternatives can do it all, by themselves. They must be integrated to compliment each other. What’s so hard to understand about that? Haven’t we learned from overloading the petroleum basket with our fragile energy eggs?

    I really detest this “all or nothing” mentality our short-attention-span society has adopted (or been taught by college professors?). It’s intellectually dishonest and naively (and dangerously) short-sighted.

    It’s the same mentality that believes we are at war with Iraq, instead of terrorists, and that we are in two SEPERATE wars instead of one big, global, long-lasting one against extreme religious idealism on two combat fronts. (The very same idealism that would decapitate liberal scholars and Hollywood Halfwits, if they are allowed to succeed.)

    I have a questions for you, Anthony. You say we have “nothing to show” for our struggle against terrorists, so…what do we have to show for our struggle against fascism (you do know that Germany never attacked us, don’t you?), imperialism and communism?

    Finally, for all of you who fancy Obama as another FDR, remeber that he implimented policies to gaod Japan into attacking, so he could bring America into World War 2. Is that what you’re looking for in Obama? Or is the fact that FDR’s economic policies PROLONGED the Great Depression, forcing America into a Quasi-socialist way of life, dependent on the government?

  • LonnieB

    Keep repeating: Spell check is my friend!

  • LonnieB

    Keep repeating: Spell check is my friend!

  • Bob

    We can not continue to be dependent upon foreign oil and send billions of dollars to countries that could care less about us. We do have plenty of wind and always will. The power can be harnessed. No plan is perfect, but it is a start.

  • Bob

    We can not continue to be dependent upon foreign oil and send billions of dollars to countries that could care less about us. We do have plenty of wind and always will. The power can be harnessed. No plan is perfect, but it is a start.

  • You forgot the water rights issue he wants them.

  • You forgot the water rights issue he wants them.

Back to Top ↑