The Pickens Plan...energy solutions?

I am not knocking the guy, but he knows how to promote exactly where he has interests. If we can use wind power, and natural gas to reduce dependence on foreign oil, great...but keep in mind the man behind the message.

T. Boone Pickens, founder and chairman, BP Capital Management, is principally responsible for the formulation of the energy futures investment strategy of the BP Capital Commodity Fund and the BP Capital Equity Fund. With more than $4 billion under management, BP Capital manages one of the nation’s most successful energy-oriented investment funds. Pickens frequently utilizes his wealth of experience in the oil and gas industry in the evaluation of potential equity investments and energy sector themes. He has not been shy in predicting oil and gas prices and — more often than not — has been uncannily accurate.

Pickens is also aggressively pursuing a wide range of other business interests, from water marketing and ranch development initiatives to Clean Energy, a company he founded and is the largest shareholder. Through Mesa Water, Pickens is the largest private holder of permitted groundwater rights in the United States. Clean Energy is advancing the use of natural gas as a cleaner-burning and more cost-effective transportation fuel alternative to gasoline and diesel.

"BigDogsHunt wrote:

I am not knocking the guy, but he knows how to promote exactly where he has interests. If we can use wind power, and natural gas to reduce dependence on foreign oil, great...but keep in mind the man behind the message.

Exactly, he is not performing a public service, he is trying to fill his wallet.

Like GE holding numerous patents on "green" Tech, and then running " a week of green" specials on their NBC affiliated channels.

Any guy that has given half a billion dollars to philanthropic enterprises has immediate credibility and I don't think anyone should just assume a guy like that is trying to line his pockets unless you actually are able to explicitly connect A to B to C, which nobody in this thread has done.

However, his plan may be misguided for a number of reasons.

Carnegie and Rockefeller gave away hundreds of millions, too. :wink2:

Specifically, Carnegie was a huge pioneer in the steel industry and it's many uses. If you look back, for a while around the turn of the 20th century we were dependent on foreign iron and steel for a majority of our market. It was Carnegie that conveniently found and implemented solutions to switch the country from iron to steel and wean us from foreign products. Doesn't mean he wasn't 'looking out for #1', as it were. I would suspect the same was the case here as well.

For wind power to generate 20% of the country's energy, we would have to sacrifice tremendous amounts of real estate, including federally protected land, to set up the necessary wind farms. The return on investment is absurdly low.

Natural gas is fine, but good luck getting that past the envirowackos.

Back to the realm of realistically feasible alternative energy. Nuclear power is clean, safe, and efficient, but good luck getting a permit to build one--then good luck getting through the lawsuits to block it.

"Desides wrote:

For wind power to generate 20% of the country's energy, we would have to sacrifice tremendous amounts of real estate, including federally protected land, to set up the necessary wind farms. The return on investment is absurdly low.

Natural gas is fine, but good luck getting that past the envirowackos.

Back to the realm of realistically feasible alternative energy. Nuclear power is clean, safe, and efficient, but good luck getting a permit to build one--then good luck getting through the lawsuits to block it.

why would we have to sacrifice tremendous amounts of real estate? you can farm under these things all day long.. the farmers would get a stipend, and we would get the energy.

Next, why would the envirowacko's (great word bro) protest natural gas ?? it is less polluting than diesel and gasoline..

I think the guy is right in his thinking. We need to think outside the box here. I don't care if its a combination of weeds, Biotech, wind power, Nuclear, natural gas, or hydrogen out of water and baking soda; we are in grave trouble. For the sake of our children, grandchildren, and countless others I, for one, am willing to at least listen to any wacko idea that has merit. Don't forget what seems wacko today will be normal or outdated 100 years from now.:wink2::up:

Sorry Desides but with gas climbing to $5.00 a gallon the time for "Realm of Realistically feasible" just took a flying leap into Grand Canyon on a wing and a prayer!! :hi5:

"cnc66 wrote:

why would we have to sacrifice tremendous amounts of real estate? you can farm under these things all day long.. the farmers would get a stipend, and we would get the energy.

I don't know the specifics, but I doubt that's possible for a variety of reasons; legal disputes over who owns the land for starters, potential lawsuits over the safety of food grown literally next to power currents, slim profit margins, and again, the land required to generate 20% of our energy through wind power is just absolutely immense. We're talking state scale.

Next, why would the envirowacko's (great word bro) protest natural gas ?? it is less polluting than diesel and gasoline..

You tell me. They're opposed to procurement of natural gas with every bit the venom they normally reserve for oil drilling.

There is a lot of land that could be used which is of little agricultural value particularly in hilly or mountainous land.

.Having said its improbable that wind power will ever fill 20 pct of our needs.

Gas and nuclear power seems to be methods that could bide us over until such time as we have a viable ,clean and renewable energy sources available.

However both are based on finite sources of energy.There is only so much Uranium and gas available.

"Desides wrote:

I don't know the specifics, but I doubt that's possible for a variety of reasons; legal disputes over who owns the land for starters, potential lawsuits over the safety of food grown literally next to power currents, slim profit margins, and again, the land required to generate 20% of our energy through wind power is just absolutely immense. We're talking state scale.

You tell me. They're opposed to procurement of natural gas with every bit the venom they normally reserve for oil drilling.

we grow oranges under power transmission lines all the time.. it's a win/win for the land owner.. they can continue doing whatever with the land and PLUS they get a stipend.

The Pickens plan

Interesting.

already had one going De..

"cnc66 wrote:

already had one going De..

Sorry, didn't see it! ;)

"cnc66 wrote:

I just saw an amazing commercial that caused me to go look them up. T. Boone Pickens was yappin' about energy SOLUTIONS and it got my attention. I don't know anything more about this guy other than what I read tonight, I'd be interested in any insight. It sure seems like he gives back;

T. Boone Pickens has a plan :)

I read through his website and on the surface it looks like it IS a plan...

http://www.pickensplan.com/about/

This is an interesting page, addresses some questions

http://www.pickensplan.com/news/

anyway, WE have been yapping about this issue, here is something to sink our teeth into.

He also said he was a lifetime oil man. Guess there is a big difference between oil men and oil companies!! ;)

"BigDogsHunt wrote:

I am not knocking the guy, but he knows how to promote exactly where he has interests. If we can use wind power, and natural gas to reduce dependence on foreign oil, great...but keep in mind the man behind the message.

The biggest thing is that he said it was a 10 year immediate impact plan to reduce foreign oil dependence. His plan calls for diverting natural gas from generating electricity for use as motor fuel and then replace the gas generation with wind power. that is a fast way to halve the foreign oil, near term and all the while developing the alternate methods. at least his interests are just not all in oil.

"Desides wrote:

I don't know the specifics, but I doubt that's possible for a variety of reasons; legal disputes over who owns the land for starters, potential lawsuits over the safety of food grown literally next to power currents, slim profit margins, and again, the land required to generate 20% of our energy through wind power is just absolutely immense. We're talking state scale.

You tell me. They're opposed to procurement of natural gas with every bit the venom they normally reserve for oil drilling.

It doesn't have to all come from land windmills. The first off shore wind farm in the country was just approved 12 miles off the coast here.

I saw an interview with him on one of the morning shows last week. They asked if money was a motive. He said that he was a 80 year old with a net worth of 3 billion dollars. He said the didn't need the money -- and you know what? I believed him.

"cnc66 wrote:

why would we have to sacrifice tremendous amounts of real estate? you can farm under these things all day long.. the farmers would get a stipend, and we would get the energy.

Next, why would the envirowacko's (great word bro) protest natural gas ?? it is less polluting than diesel and gasoline..

Because at present, the areas that "need" alternative energies, have sprawled far enough out that wind farms will have a difficult time meeting the needs of a NYC or even a Tampa.

And the unsaid play here is that Pickens has also bought most of a aquafer, and intends to ship that water out of the wind farm region and into the Metroplex, meaning the area where the wind farm is will be bereft of water.

Pickens hijacked a local water board filling it with cronies to implement the plan, as the old proverb states "Fish see bait, not hook"

"Celtkin wrote:

I saw an interview with him on one of the morning shows last week. They asked if money was a motive. He said that he was a 80 year old with a net worth of 3 billion dollars. He said the didn't need the money -- and you know what? I believed him.

Yup, there are ways of oil men making money on something besides oil. I put alot of the blame for our mess with the oil companies, not the oil men, who are selling their oil to the companies. These are the guys squelching alternate progression.

"Celtkin wrote:

I saw an interview with him on one of the morning shows last week. They asked if money was a motive. He said that he was a 80 year old with a net worth of 3 billion dollars. He said the didn't need the money -- and you know what? I believed him.

Why? I'm not opposed to alternative energy, the US infrastructure is not designed to fill tanks with LP, and wind farms are not exactly proven tech either.

I like the McCain plan to switch the largest autofleet in the US to LP, the federal government has more vehicles then any other single entity, such a plan is workable and would make a dent in the use of gasoline, and it would not require a re-tooling of our infrastructure, we have 169 million cars or more, a statiscally insignificant number of them run on lp gas, how would any plan account for that many cars outside of banning non LP gas vehicles?

For me, Nuclear and Clean(er) Coal make far more sense then pie in the sky..

"padre31 wrote:

Why? I'm not opposed to alternative energy, the US infrastructure is not designed to fill tanks with LP, and wind farms are not exactly proven tech either.

I like the McCain plan to switch the largest autofleet in the US to LP, the federal government has more vehicles then any other single entity, such a plan is workable and would make a dent in the use of gasoline, and it would not require a re-tooling of our infrastructure, we have 169 million cars or more, a statiscally insignificant number of them run on lp gas, how would any plan account for that many cars outside of banning non LP gas vehicles?

For me, Nuclear and Clean(er) Coal make far more sense then pie in the sky..

Why do I believe he says that he is 80 years old and, with a 3 billion net worth, that his primary goal in this venture is not to become wealthier?

Was the the question?

"Celtkin wrote:

Why do I believe he says that he is 80 years old and, with a 3 billion net worth, that his primary goal in this venture is not to become wealthier?

Was the the question?

Indeed, why would Pickens do this if his own profit was not involved? Is he giving the power and water away to the metroplex?

"padre31 wrote:

Because at present, the areas that "need" alternative energies, have sprawled far enough out that wind farms will have a difficult time meeting the needs of a NYC or even a Tampa.

he addresses that, and has sough government co operation.. it is a one time expense at any rate

And the unsaid play here is that Pickens has also bought most of a aquafer, and intends to ship that water out of the wind farm region and into the Metroplex, meaning the area where the wind farm is will be bereft of water.

so what.. we are talking a great BIG chunk of the midwest for wind farm.. you act like he owns the entire Ogallalla aquifer.

Pickens hijacked a local water board filling it with cronies to implement the plan, as the old proverb states "Fish see bait, not hook"

If you want to see mismanaged water and packed water managments come to Florida and see what the bushes have done for us.

"cnc66 wrote:

he addresses that, and has sought government co operation.. it is a one time expense at any rate.

We'll see, the devil is always in the details, look at the proposed wind farm off of Cape Cod and the opposition to it and who is doing the opposing.

so what.. we are talking a great BIG chunk of the midwest for wind farm.. you act like he owns the entire Ogallalla aquifer.

I would call piping the water into the Dallas metroplex acting as if he owns all of the water in the Ogallalla aquifer.

After all, you can only sell what you own..right?

If you want to see mismanaged water and packed water managments come to Florida and see what the bushes have done for us.

Non-sequitur CNC, but I'll play along, "if" the Bushes have done a terrible job in Florida, then it would make sense to avoid the same thing happening in TX, if the Bushes have not done a bad job in FL, then it would make sense to see what if anything they did correctly in FL, either way, the packaging and shipping of water is an issue in this, especially in view of Picken's subverting the local water board to do so.