He's now saying it and he makes sense. The Harry Reeds in DC would prefer we sit around with our thumbs up our ass blaming oil company profits.
- Vote on answer
- posted
15 years ago
OT T Boone Pickens
Loading thread data ...
- Vote on answer
- posted
15 years ago
I suspected the ad, "next few weeks", would imply his web site as a start. Not been there yet.
He called history the largest transfer of wealth to foreigners...
- Vote on answer
- posted
15 years ago
Did you know Harry is AKA "Pinky", by his constituents?
Described as Pelosi in a dress (non-constituents), but his nic is really Pinky.
- posted
15 years ago
He has been telling us for quite a few weeks that he has a plan.
Why waste money on commercials saying you will be telling us something in the future?
I have something to say......I will be saying it in the next few weeks.
BTW it will be.............I want you tax payers to pay for the grid I need so I can start selling you wind power instead of oil.
- Vote on answer
- posted
15 years ago
He wants to build wind farms. Using his own, and investor, money. It won't cost the taxpayer anything - it will cost the consumer something like $3.00/month to pay for the transmission lines.
Not in Texas, though. Texas has its own electrical grid. It's not connected to the national grid. This means that one or two levels of regulatory approval are not necessary to build transmission towers.
Still, to build transmission lines from the wind farms to where the power will be needed will require rights-of-way. Because of fuddy-duddies, this will probably require imminent domain, court cases, new state laws, pay-offs, and mostly, time.
- Vote on answer
- posted
15 years ago
He has a website:
formatting link
- Vote on answer
- posted
15 years ago
formatting link
(wrong)
formatting link
(corrected)
- Vote on answer
- posted
15 years ago
It is physically connected.
Did you mean not connected in a regulatory sense?
- Vote on answer
- posted
15 years ago
Oooooooooooooo, metspitzer. I shall anxiously await your prophesy/spew.
Hand me a cold one.
Steve
- Vote on answer
- posted
15 years ago
the state of texas has its own seperate power grid not normally powering others or getting power from out of state.
since the first oil crisis of 1972 our country has ignored the problem almost entirely.
too much big business making money off the status quo..........
in 1972 a buddy of mine converted his vehicles to dual fuel and has run both primarily on compressed natural gas ever since.
works fine pollutes little, costs less to operate
part of pickens plan is converting to natural gas to power vehicles.
doing nothing is no longer a viable option, the high cost of energy is crippling our economy
- Vote on answer
- posted
15 years ago
I guess you haven't noticed that for the last 20 years or so both political parties have been steering us into a global market. (actually big business and the banks)
You want energy independence for the US? You want national security? Tell us how you plan to getting that, when open borders is clearly next on the agenda?
I missed the part about how you made your billions.
- Vote on answer
- posted
15 years ago
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote: ...
...
The operative word there is "normally" -- there are tieins of the ERCOT grid to the rest of the country, just not as extensive. There have been studies in the relatively recent past on increasing those ties but I haven't paid attention since I retired on what the status is.
--
- Vote on answer
- posted
15 years ago
ransley wrote: ...
I've seen nothing on anything other than installed capacity, nothing about what actual consumption percentages are. Assuming a summer day of (say) 15 daylight hours, 30% capacity if all online would translate to
- Vote on answer
- posted
15 years ago
So far, he seems to have a good idea. Is your plan better?
- Vote on answer
- posted
15 years ago
It is interesting that when they asked him if he had a wind generator on his ranch he said no, they are butt ugly.
- Vote on answer
- posted
15 years ago
Bwahahahaha! PT Barnum lives!
Yeah, that won't entail any cost to taxpayers!
- Vote on answer
- posted
15 years ago
Solar power does not have to be a total solution to the entire problem in order to be a huge help. We don't need one grand sweeping solution. We need many solutions that cumulatively put us on a better track.
BTW - I'm currently looking into coverting my home heating to Geo-Thermal. Expensive sounding up front, but even if the cost of fuel stabilizes (Yeah, right!) the roughly $25k system will be "break even" in less than 10 years, and after that, I'll be saving thousands a year. Possibly a lot less than 10 years if fuel prices continue to go up. A higher capacity system doesn't add cost at a
1-1 rate, so I may even join forces with my next door neighbor and we can feed both houses on one ground source. That would really make this a no-brainer as long as we get the legal part straight.- Vote on answer
- posted
15 years ago
Of course the same is being said for off-shore drilling. Interestingly, though, is that solar and wind power doesn't seem to haave gotten that much more traction than the drilling in real life. We are a nation of Scarlet O'Haras " I can't think about that right now. If I do, I'll go crazy. I'll think about that tomorrow."
- Vote on answer
- posted
15 years ago
I think your freckles are affecting your typing.
- Vote on answer
- posted
15 years ago
The point was that it isn't as much a major solution as the other poster seems to think...and the need for maintaining alternate generation capacity when either solar or wind _aren't_ available as they simply are not reliable sources makes them expensive. They're a piece, yes, but not nearly the panacea many wish them to be.
Did that almost 15 years ago. As compared to solar/wind, it's a very effective solution as it doesn't suffer the vagaries of wind nor does it go away at night when the sun goes down.
--