T. Boone Pickens' Energy Plan

[Ravi]

Baron, honestly, I could live without power for 73 minutes a day...after living without it for a couple of weeks during hurricane season, it isn't that horribly difficult. And I think the battery makers want to make money in the long run, so it is hopefully in their best interests to solve that problem.

You seem quite sensible...what do you see, given current technology, is the way to go?

 

[Chris]

First of all, 95% of the time appears to be a number you pulled out of your ass. No offense.

Second of all, 95% uptime for residential housing needs would be rather irritating. It would amount to almost an hour and fifteen minutes a day. For heavy industry it would be a lot worse though. Shut down the power to a manufacturing plant, or a microchip factory, or a foundry, and you end up scrapping an awful lot of product. I know this, because the company I work for scraps product once or twice a year when the power goes out.

Thanks for the link though. I always like it when opponents help me prove my point!



Translation: they don't have to bear the full cost of wind power, because they can just buy electricity from France's nuclear plants (which run 24/7) when the wind is not blowing very strongly.



Suppose I came over to your house every day, and flipped off the main breaker in your electrical panel. Then I put a padlock on it, and kept it off for 73 minutes. Every day. Or instead of every day, let's say that I did it for 18 days out of the year. 18 full 24 hour days, with no power.

You'd be okay with that? No, you'd be fighting mad.



It's certainly doable for residential, if you're willing to make certain sacrifices. The main obstacle isn't even the cost of a battery stack, it's the fact that lead-acid batteries only last 4~5 years. Hopefully Firefly's batteries will cure that: NiMh performance at lead-acid prices, in a battery that lasts for decades.



Don't be too hasty. Rising energy prices combined with nanotech have produced a wave of new storage devices. And even if the carmakers had no interest in battery tech (not true), the laptop and cell phone industry certainly does.

Google the following:

firefly battery
A123 battery
altairnano
EEStor (this one will really make you shit a brick)

You are missing the point. Wind power is reliable and works well when done right.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Pickens' plan will have little or no effect on our dependence on foreign oil.

The main thrust of his plan is to replace foreign oil in electricity production. But only about 2% of our electricity is produced using oil.

Industry Statistics

In 2007:

48.6 percent of our nation's electricity was generated from coal. Nuclear energy produced 19.4 percent. Natural gas supplied 21.5 percent. Hydropower provided 5.8 percent of the supply. Fuel oil provided 1.6 percent of the generation mix. Other renewable resources, such as geothermal, solar, and wind, provided 2.5 percent, with other miscellaneous sources providing the balance.
The following amount of electricity, in gigawatt-hours (GWh), was generated from the nation's fuel mix:
Coal: 2,020,572 GWh
Nuclear: 806,487 GWh
Gas: 893,211 GWh
Hydro: 241,319 GWh
Fuel Oil: 65,708 GWh
Other renewables (geothermal, non-wood waste, wind, and solar): 102,988 GWh
Other: 29,230 GWh

While I am all for renewablwe energy, let's not fall for the hype here.

 

[Foxfyre]

One can be pretty darn sure that any business decision promoted or advocated by T Boone Pickens will enormously benefit T Boone Pickens. He doesn't need the money, of course, but like Donald Trump, making money is his hobby. So, he is always looking for a new scheme or gimmick that will pull in a whole lot more millions if not billions.

The wind turbine scheme is his latest gimmick and he started laying the ground work for it several years ago when gasoline prices started inching up into 'unacceptable' levels in the minds of the American people. You can bet he started some investment projects then, and waited until the current 'sky high prices crisis' to make his big move. Every one of those ads I think is an ad specifically targeted to enrich T Boone Pickens.

His first wave was here. . . (just about the same time he started investing in wind energy):

“Never again will we pump more than 82 million barrels.”
-- T. Boone Pickens, 9th August 2004. On the Kudlow and Cramer Show, CNBC.

“Global oil [production] is 84 million barrels [per day]. I don't believe you can get it any more than 84 million barrels."
-- T. Boone Pickens, addressing the 11th National Clean Cities conference in May 2005.

"I don't believe that you can increase the supply beyond 84 or 85 million barrel as day."
-- T. Boone Pickens, on "CNN In the Money", June 25, 2005.

"Supply is—you‘ve just about had it on supply; 85 million barrels a day world supply is about it. "
-- T. Boone Pickens, on Hardball with Chris Matthews, MSNBC, Aug. 26, 2005

Is there anything wrong with what he is doing? Absolutely not. . .UNLESS. . .the gullible and foolish among us buy into it to the point that we do not do what is necessary to decrease our dependence on foreign oil that we are going to need in the foreseeable future.

 

[Chris]

One can be pretty darn sure that any business decision promoted or advocated by T Boone Pickens will enormously benefit T Boone Pickens. He doesn't need the money, of course, but like Donald Trump, making money is his hobby. So, he is always looking for a new scheme or gimmick that will pull in a whole lot more millions if not billions.

The wind turbine scheme is his latest gimmick and he started laying the ground work for it several years ago when gasoline prices started inching up into 'unacceptable' levels in the minds of the American people. You can bet he started some investment projects then, and waited until the current 'sky high prices crisis' to make his big move. Every one of those ads I think is an ad specifically targeted to enrich T Boone Pickens.

His first wave was here. . . (just about the same time he started investing in wind energy):



Is there anything wrong with what he is doing? Absolutely not. . .UNLESS. . .the gullible and foolish among us buy into it to the point that we do not do what is necessary to decrease our dependence on foreign oil that we are going to need in the foreseeable future.

There is nothing gimicky about wind power. The Danes already get 20% of their power from wind. Pickens has invested $10 billion dollars of his own money in it, because he is a smart businessman and a patriotic American. But the most important thing he is doing is raising the awareness of the American people to the greatest security threat this country faces. A threat that is a thousand times more important than "terrorism." God bless T. Boone Pickens.

 

[Foxfyre]

I didn't say that wind power is gimmicky. I AM saying that there is nothing altruistic or magnificent in Pickens' game plan here. He's out to enrich T Boone Pickens, pure and simple. You can buy the 'save American' gimmick--and that IS a gimmick--if you want to, but I think I won't.

 

[Epsilon Delta]

Aren't people acting in their self-interest the entire ideological basis of the capitalist system?

 

[Foxfyre]

Aren't people acting in their self-interest the entire ideological basis of the capitalist system?

Those who are capitalists, absolutely, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. I just have a problem with making gods or gurus or messiahs out of people who are simply being capitalists in their own interests. And I think that is a smart way to look at it before we buy into their sermons to the point where we go against our own self interests.

Oil is the fuel of freedom, security, democracy, and hope for billions on the Earth. Look how long it took to go from foot power to horsepower. And the long transition from a cart and oxen and sailing ships world to one that is mechanized and industrialized. To presume that we won't need oil during the next long transition in which the world slowly but surely comes up with something better to replace it is absurd. And T Boone Pickens knows it.

 

[Chris]

I didn't say that wind power is gimmicky. I AM saying that there is nothing altruistic or magnificent in Pickens' game plan here. He's out to enrich T Boone Pickens, pure and simple. You can buy the 'save American' gimmick--and that IS a gimmick--if you want to, but I think I won't.

If he is promoting wind power over foreign oil he IS saving America.

That is the point.

 

[Charles_Main]

Yes because wind power alone will save us all.

LOL!!

 

[sealybobo]

Yes because wind power alone will save us all.

LOL!!

No, we need battery, hydrogen, ethanol, gas and coal too. Did I forget any?

 

[Charles_Main]

No, we need battery, hydrogen, ethanol, gas and coal too. Did I forget any?

Holy crap I agree with you, well mostly, I hope you mean clean coal technology though.

I also think we need solar, and nuclear more hydro electric, And geo-thermal power, and while we are developing all these other things More oil.

I also think we need to form an inter-national Effort to speed along the development of cold fusion, and what ever that thing they are building in the UK is called that uses plasma to create and reaction that mimics the dynamics of the Sun in a chamber and produces an enormous amount of cheap, clean electric power.

 

[Paulie]

Holy crap I agree with you, well mostly, I hope you mean clean coal technology though.

I also think we need solar, and nuclear more hydro electric, And geo-thermal power, and while we are developing all these other things More oil.

I also think we need to form an inter-national Effort to speed along the development of cold fusion, and what ever that thing they are building in the UK is called that uses plasma to create and reaction that mimics the dynamics of the Sun in a chamber and produces an enormous amount of cheap, clean electric power.

Why do we need to form an INTERNATIONAL effort? I think we have our work cut out for us enough HERE, don't you think? Why must we be so in bed with the international community on everything?

 

[Charles_Main]

Why do we need to form an INTERNATIONAL effort? I think we have our work cut out for us enough HERE, don't you think? Why must we be so in bed with the international community on everything?

We don't have to be in bed with the international community on everything.

I feel the way I do about this one particular thing, because the scientist say it will take them at least 50 years to perfect the technology, and Trillions of Dollars, And I would like to see it take far less time than that, and I would like to see the cost of it spread out and not solely on us, and ONE way to do that is to get everyone in on it.

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

Baron, honestly, I could live without power for 73 minutes a day...after living without it for a couple of weeks during hurricane season, it isn't that horribly difficult. And I think the battery makers want to make money in the long run, so it is hopefully in their best interests to solve that problem.

You seem quite sensible...what do you see, given current technology, is the way to go?

I could live without it too. Lots of people could. Well, if it was actually 73 minutes a day...and not 3 days straight for a month. That would pretty much suck. My main point is, while you can I can put up with it, most people would be annoyed and switch providers. Profit seeking capitalists know this, and that's why wind power doesn't dominate (it's taking bigger and bigger shares though). There might be some conspiracy out there, but I doubt it. If/when windmills can produce reliable power for less than conventional plants, the money hungry capitalists will switch to it.

What do I think would work instead of fossil fuels? Probably a model based on what France has done, actually. Nuclear for fixed power (the new stuff is far improved, pebble-bed reactors and new thorium reactors solve virtually all previous problems). Electrified rail--passenger and freight. More compact cities, without our current barbaric waste of land for oversize parking lots and single-story single-use buildings. Keep it so that most people are within walking distance of where they're going, or a transit stop. That way, gas is a luxury, not a necessity.

Normally most people advocating this are pushing for a big government role; however I think you could make an equally good free-market case for the above. At any rate, things need to change. Each american town has hundreds of pages of building codes that need to be utterly scrapped. Read some books by James Kunstler, it will blow your mind.

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

Oh yeah, I forgot this:

The US economy loses approximately $200 billion (source: EPRI - The Cost of Power Disturbances to Industrial & Digital Economy Companies, page ES-3) each year due to power outages and equipment failures caused by poor power quality. The Northeast Blackout of August 2003 is estimated to have affected 10 million people in Ontario (one third population of Canada) and 40 million people in eight U.S. states.

RPM

They link the study they're quoting there if anyone's interested.

Two hundred billion lost to power outages. Ouch. And that's with today's conventional power sources. We're just talking about grid failures from storms here. Power outages from storms are nowhere near 5%. So yeah, intermittent power would be a hell of a problem for industry. France exports lots of power to Germany for a reason--they chose nuclear, Germany chose solar.

Hopefully that company's invention will do some good. Something's bound to turn up; cleantech has been the new hotness for venture capital ever since the internet bubble popped. Just like the internet bubble, there will inevitably be lots and lots of failures; but then again there were a few which succeeded. Cross your fingers and hope that two successes are blacklight power and EEStor. We would have cheap travel, clean air, no more wars for oil...and every air force on earth would be obsolete.

 

[Paulie]

Oh yeah, I forgot this:



RPM

They link the study they're quoting there if anyone's interested.

Two hundred billion lost to power outages. Ouch. And that's with today's conventional power sources. We're just talking about grid failures from storms here. Power outages from storms are nowhere near 5%. So yeah, intermittent power would be a hell of a problem for industry. France exports lots of power to Germany for a reason--they chose nuclear, Germany chose solar.

Hopefully that company's invention will do some good. Something's bound to turn up; cleantech has been the new hotness for venture capital ever since the internet bubble popped. Just like the internet bubble, there will inevitably be lots and lots of failures; but then again there were a few which succeeded. Cross your fingers and hope that two successes are blacklight power and EEStor. We would have cheap travel, clean air, no more wars for oil...and every air force on earth would be obsolete.

Where does that 200 billion go? Back into the market, I presume? At least a lot of it, anyway, no?

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

It's just plain lost for the most part, I assume. Like paying a guy to dig a pit one day, and fill it the next. You produce something, but it's totally useless.

I suspect the numbers may be slightly fuzzy; for example the company I work for machines big huge chunks of metal for use in the oil pipelines. When the power dies, the CNC machines end up gouging the parts and they're scrapped. But the metal can be recycled so it's not a 100% loss, yeah. On the other hand, it still takes plenty of energy to melt that scrap part down again. Energy that could have gone to something more productive.

 

[Charles_Main]

It's just plain lost for the most part, I assume. Like paying a guy to dig a pit one day, and fill it the next. You produce something, but it's totally useless.

I suspect the numbers may be slightly fuzzy; for example the company I work for machines big huge chunks of metal for use in the oil pipelines. When the power dies, the CNC machines end up gouging the parts and they're scrapped. But the metal can be recycled so it's not a 100% loss, yeah. On the other hand, it still takes plenty of energy to melt that scrap part down again. Energy that could have gone to something more productive.

Isn't the bigger problem lost production time? and not some damaged parts? Besides this is silly they are not going to sit and let the power go out, they will simply switch on the old Gas fired plants and pump CO2 into the air when the wind and solar is not cutting it.

 

[Ravi]

I could be wrong, but something about nuclear feels wrong to me.

How about a solar/wind grid with oil used for the inevitable down time?

I think your ideas about more compact cities are spot on, and actually a pretty green solution as land would be freed up for the pure enjoyment of nature and agriculture.