OT Looks like T Boone has switched from win to natural gas


OT Looks like T Boone has switched from wind to natural gas
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

CNG as a transportation and heating fuel makes great sense, we are wasting CNG when we use it to make electricity. Electricity is better made with nuclear, wind, hydro or coal. I think T Boone is still pushing wind for electricity so we could eliminate NG power generation. A good idea considering todays combustion engines with computer controls can be easily re-adapted for NG and filling stations can just as naturally add CNG pumps. CNG is portable and produces a lot of energy to replace gasoline and maybe diesel in medium duty trucks. An piston engine that can burn both CNG or gasoline is feasible with todays technology, making NG a great clean bridge fuel for transportation use.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

CNG as a transportation and heating fuel makes great sense, we are wasting CNG when we use it to make electricity. Electricity is better
"made with nuclear" better my bottom end
To Mr. McCain
According to recent paper publishing you have stated that:
You are looking to build additional 45 nuclear power plants
I believe it was said by year 2020.
Dear Sir: at present time according to news media we have
77,000 tons of nuclear waste that we have no ability to get read
of, we have no way to store it, no State in the Union wanted in
their back yard, perhaps Sir we should dig couple tunnel in your
Back yard to store it. Anywhere that is not my point, may I ask Sir
Why we can use coal, we can clean it we have technology and use
it for many years to come, but it seems to me that power hungry
politicians all they look how to make quick buck. A another thing
we don't want other Countries to have nuclear plants because
they can not be trusted I agree! But that is all based on assumptions
that is nowhere to have good relation with any country. If we go back
to basic and build power plants burning coal we would be solving
a more then one problem; having better relations with some countries
that presently practically don't exists and at same time employing
more people, saving on fuel and less dependent on forging oil.
Thank you Sir.
Tony
wind, hydro or coal. I think T Boone is still pushing wind for electricity so we could eliminate NG power generation. A good idea considering todays combustion engines with computer controls can be easily re-adapted for NG and filling stations can just as naturally add CNG pumps. CNG is portable and produces a lot of energy to replace gasoline and maybe diesel in medium duty trucks. An piston engine that can burn both CNG or gasoline is feasible with todays technology, making NG a great clean bridge fuel for transportation use.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Old and Grunpy wrote:

The disposal of nuclear waste is a completely phony issue. We haven't decided how to dispose of nuclear waste, not because there are no good solutions, but because we don't have to make that decision now.
Shoot it into the sun, encase it in molten glass and dump it five miles down in the ocean, inject it into salt domes, reprocess it into new fuel, and about a dozen others are all "good" solutions. But here's the unknown part: an even better solution may be proposed tomorrow!
So, then, why commit to a path that might prove second best if you can delay the decision?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Reprocessing is the best short term solution. Yet another legacy from the Jimmy Carter days (who should have known better). Pretty much the entire rest of the planet uses reprocessing yet that is closed off to American companies.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote Re Re: OT Looks like T Boone has switched from win to natural gas:

Indeed. Just like no oil drilling. Although I agree with that. Not because of environmental concerns, but I believe more oil isn't a solution. We need to break that addiction. Nuclear would help with that.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

If you don't have evironmental concerns, then what's the need to break this "addiction" to oil? I would say that just as we're "addicted" to oil, we're addicted to food, the internet, computers and most everything else. Should we give all that up too, just because one day you decide it's an "addiction"?
Nuclear would help with

Nuclear by itself isn't going to help much with the demand for oil. Only a small amount of electric power is generated from oil.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

shooting nuke waste to sun isn't as easy or cost effective as it sounds, ocean disposal is kinda scary
dry retrievable storage and / or reprocess are better bets
cheers Bob
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes we can delay decision but more we delay more expensive it gets So that your kids and grand my children will be paying for it for they entire life. in mean time our crooked politicians getting their packets lined, and needless to say back to waste that our kids in few years can be cooking in the wasted crap that no-one wants. Some of you telling me that nuclear energy is good or better yet it is great. You dumb asses I wonder who the hell have programmed you brain because you having got any.
HeyBub this does not pretend only to you but to any one who may think otherwise specially to trader4 who may have
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That nuclear waste would have been either reprocessed or stored in Yucca Montain years ago, if guys like you hadn't done everything possible to block it.
Anywhere that is not my point, may I ask Sir

It's not the power hungry politicans that are blocking coal. It's economics and guys like you who demand it be "cleaned" to such an extent that it becomes uncompetitive compared to other alternatives. In particular, "cleaning" it now means preventing the principle byproduct, carbon dioxide, from entering the atmosphere, which is no trivial matter.
A another thing

That's not true. We have no problem with any country using nuclear power plants for power generation, as long as it's open to international inspection. And as for the ones that won't co-operate and have active nuke weapons development programs, you think they give a damn if the US gets it's power from coal or nuclear?

Yes, a lot of faulty assumptions.

Yeah, I'm sure the US announcing we won't build any nukes for civilan power will have a real impact on what Iran, North Korea and Pakistan does. You must have gone to the Jimmy Carter school of foreign policy.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Old and Grunpy wrote:

We have ways to get rid of it, through reprocessing, and if we had no way to store it, what have we been doing with it for the past half- century? The fact is that almost all nuclear waste is stored in welded stainless steel cylinders at the reactor sites.
OTOH the goal of building 45 new reactors by 2020 is probably unrealistic because of the finances and short supply of production capacity. It's possible that even the supply of cement and water won't be sufficient -- back when the US was thinking of building 1,000 super-hardened missile silos, it was estimated the effort would take 10-20% of the water in the western states and maybe as much as half of the cement.

Probably the biggest problem. The proposal to put all nuclear fuel and waste under UN control should be implemented, even though it won't prevent the most ardent nations from producing nuclear weapons.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 08 Sep 2008 15:27:55 -0700, RickH wrote:

If I understand it correctly, CNG is a Liquid form of NG. Similar to LPG or propane. That bums me out! I was hopping to just fill up a car with NG that I have piped into my home. My home NG is in the gaseous state, not compressed liquefied state that a CNG .
I really would like to get away from the Gas Station routine of filling up my car. After all these years of pumping gas at a station, I would be willing to give that up for sake of Energy Independence.
{with tongue in cheek} Maybe a Sears power tool that would hook up to my home's NG, compress the the NG and pump the liquid CNG to my car. Keep the compressor in the garage, right next to the Lawn Mower.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

CNG is compressed to about 3000psig but it is still in vapor form.It is not liquified at these pressures. It's range is limited because of this so it requires filling the tank(s) frequently.It takes about 4 hours of filling to get enough cng to drive 50 miles. The compressor is available for home use but is expensive and requires rebuilding about every 6000 hours of operation. After 24000 hours (3 rebuilds) it needs to be replaced.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What?? Wikipedia might have something Wrong??? OMG, will the sky fall down tonight???
But seriously, thanks for the info. I didn't know about the 3K psi vapor pressure. Thanks.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

T Boone was always planning on selling natural gas, it is a byproduct of his oil business. The wind nonsense was just obfuscation.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote: ...

Yep, mostly...
CNG for auto transportation is also a waste of NG (as well as is central station generation) as it is _far_ more valuable to use as the most convenient residential heating source and as chemical feedstock, etc., rather than for automotive use.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
dpb wrote:

Also, owing to the nature of wind as a power supply, any generation from wind which is intended to offset other baseload generation (say, coal) will require an equivalent amount of standby generation, the most likely for that being gas turbines. Wonder how that fits into a gas man's future???? :)
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I wonder how many people who are big fans of Pickens realize where he made a lot of his money. In the 80's he was a corporate raider who would buy up the stock of companies, make demands on them, threaten to take them over, etc. In many cases, the companies wound up entering into a settlement with Pickens. He agreed to go away and the companies bought back his stock at far more than he paid for it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

Buy low, sell high. It's the American way.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
metspitzer wrote:

Actually he never switched. His primary goal all along was to greatly increase the demand for natural gas, and his wind power campaign was just a cover to make him seem eco friendly so he could greatly increase drilling for gas. Why would somebody as smart and ruthless as T. Boone Pickens want to settle for wind power when the really big money is in natural gas?
His plan to require all transportation to be powered by natural gas is silly because it would be just an interim solution until all but the largest vehicles on our highways use only electricity.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.