should we listen to this guy?

[gotr1?]

it makes sense to me.. we do need something to boost this economy and stop relying on foreign oil...

We as Americans have to pursue a initiative such as this one...

your thoughts?

watch the video

http://www.pickensplan.com/

[pwang]

eyeup, my attention span is too short to click and watch the whole video.

Blame it on MTV and the internets. shrug. shorry.

[SPL170db]

it makes sense to me.. we do need something to boost this economy and stop relying on foreign oil...


http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/07/300_bush-saudi.jpg

It's gonna take some mighty strong initiatives to break that chain, believe me.

[jimbojimmy]

I think the guy is a fear monger, and doesn't get some pretty basic economic principles.

For one, so what if we spend $7 trillion on oil over 10 years?... if we didn't produce over $7 trillion of wealth using the oil we wouldn't have spent the money in the first place.

So what if we use a disproportionate amount of the world's oil supply per capita? As prices rise we adjust our behavior. If this guy can make a business that provides a better alternative when oil prices get super high then (making his alternatives look good in comparison), then good for him and good for us. We don't need a "policy" – someone just has to do it when the time is right.

The whole dependence on foreign oil thing is a red herring too. There's a global oil market - US oil enters that market and prices are set on the world stage. There is no such thing as energy independence if you are in the world market. The only way not to be in the world market is to legislate that you can't be, then you guarantee we will pay more. All his alternate fuel sources will also appear on the world stage, so don’t think prices of his silver bullets won’t be affected just like oil.

My thoughts anyway…

[AFS23 100%]

this is stuff that just should not be stupid crazy sh*t

[gotr1?]

I dont know, to me he seemed genuine and cared about the US more then his own interest... If we do reduce the demand the price should eventually go down and that would be on a global scale as well.

I wonder if the next guy in the office will actually do anything or as usual its hot air to get elected...

[Lorenzo]

Pickens is a brilliant and experienced businessman who doesn't fail to understand anything, much less basic economics. That doesn't mean his motive is purely in the country's interest.

Pickens owns several companies that manufacture, develop and sell wind energy. Go figure, the guy who will profit from wind power is saying we should all use more wind power? Sort of like Jiffy Lube saying you should change your oil more often.

Like any good marketing campaign, there is plenty of truth in what he says but wrapped up and spun into a package designed for a purpose that is not necessarily in your interest. So think critically about what he is saying.

[skid vicious]

Pickens is a brilliant and experienced businessman who doesn't fail to understand anything, much less basic economics. That doesn't mean his motive is purely in the country's interest.

Pickens owns several companies that manufacture, develop and sell wind energy. Go figure, the guy who will profit from wind power is saying we should all use more wind power? Sort of like Jiffy Lube saying you should change your oil more often.

Like any good marketing campaign, there is plenty of truth in what he says but wrapped up and spun into a package designed for a purpose that is not necessarily in your interest. So think critically about what he is saying.
Exactly. Kind of like Al Gore telling everyone to buy carbon credits when he owns the company. bunch of suckers you dummycrats are.

Funny thing about wind energy though, it usually isn't profitable without gov't subsidies. Maintenance costs are high. It chews up a lot of real estate, acres and acres for not very much wattage. If you want to glimpse into our wind powered future, look at Denmark.

http://www.moneyweek.com/file/49881/wind-power-is-it-a-realistic-option.html
Demark is the world’s most wind-intensive state with more than 6,000 turbines generating 19% of its electricity. But this figure is misleading, says Tony Lodge of the Centre for Policy Studies. Not one conventional power plant has been closed in the period that Danish wind farms have been developed.

In fact, the Danish grid used 50% more coal-generated electricity in 2006 than in 2005 to cover wind’s failings. The quick ramping up and down of those plants has increased their pollution and carbon dioxide output – carbon emissions rose 36% in 2006.

Meanwhile Danish electricity costs are the highest in Europe. The Danish experience suggests wind energy is “expensive, inefficient and not even particularly green”

The “alternative-energy” folks are just avoiding what is patently obvious. If you want energy independence, the answer is coal or nukes. If you want clean energy, the answer is nukes. Wasting time, tax money, and real estate on solar and wind is just delaying the day you do what we needed to do from the beginning. We should be building about fifty nukes right now.

[skid vicious]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/07/300_bush-saudi.jpg

It's gonna take some mighty strong initiatives to break that chain, believe me.
how come the kooks at DU never post pics like this? probably cause it wouldn't fit in too well with their hate/blame bush for everything plan they got goin
http://publiuspundit.com/Clinton%20Saudi.jpg

According to a 1993 New York Times article (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0CE3DE1531F930A1575BC0A965958260), Prince Turki bin Feisal was a college classmate of Bill’s at Georgetown University and (at the time of the article’s writing) was the head of the Saudi Arabian intelligence service. While he was still governor of Arkansas, it looks like Bill Clinton cashed in on that relationship, “work[ing] hard to secure a multimillion-dollar Saudi donation to a Middle Eastern studies program at the University of Arkansas.” Due to the intervention of the Gulf War, the first installment of $3.5 million didn’t arrive until 1992, with another $20 million arriving after Bill Clinton’s first inauguration.
So a Clinton connection to the Saudis and their money goes back nearly 20 years, hmmmmmmmmmmm?

[Lorenzo]

In the 1960's there were pioneering visionaries who saw the benefits of computers. But anyone looking for an immediate benefit would be badly disappointed since it took decades to develop the technology to a point where it really was a net benefit to productivity. Smart companies carefully invested research dollars into developing the future technology while making current technologies work in the near term.

I am confident that wind, solar and wave power will be developed over the long term to become viable sources of energy. But anyone looking to those as a magic pixie dust to save us immediately is unrealistic. Effective research takes time, planing and rational management. Poorly organized, panic-driven efforts to rush them into production will be a waste.

The cornerstone of a rational energy policy has to be conservation and reduction of consumption. Every source of energy comes at a cost, whether that cost is economic, strategic or environmental. This is the area where our nation is failing miserably because reducing consumption is just no fun.

[Spockalypse]

Statistics can used to prove anything - 90% of people know that...

I say we go with Pickens, because Pickens will be slim...

In all seriousness, dummycrats, and re-boob-licans, Global Warming/Climate Shift is real, and will doom us for generations to come. Coal, Oil, Oil Shale, what-have-you, is not the way to go. I think if we could get the oil companies to understand that they are basing their business on a non-replenishable resource and instead could, and should invest their windfall profits in renewable energy sources (I think wave and nuclear are the way to go - solar and wind are expensive, inefficient and not worthwhile).

[skid vicious]

Statistics can used to prove anything - 90% of people know that...

I say we go with Pickens, because Pickens will be slim...

In all seriousness, dummycrats, and re-boob-licans, Global Warming/Climate Shift is real, and will doom us for generations to come. Coal, Oil, Oil Shale, what-have-you, is not the way to go. I think if we could get the oil companies to understand that they are basing their business on a non-replenishable resource and instead could, and should invest their windfall profits in renewable energy sources (I think wave and nuclear are the way to go - solar and wind are expensive, inefficient and not worthwhile).
While global warming may be real, MAN MADE global warming is not. don't for get that. And don't go making energy policy based on junk science.

[Supreme 1]

Statistics can used to prove anything - 90% of people know that...

I say we go with Pickens, because Pickens will be slim...

In all seriousness, dummycrats, and re-boob-licans, Global Warming/Climate Shift is real, and will doom us for generations to come. Coal, Oil, Oil Shale, what-have-you, is not the way to go. I think if we could get the oil companies to understand that they are basing their business on a non-replenishable resource and instead could, and should invest their windfall profits in renewable energy sources (I think wave and nuclear are the way to go - solar and wind are expensive, inefficient and not worthwhile).

I kinda agree. Its really not about the profit anymore, but some sharks will never see it that way. We, as an intimidating nation, must lead the change into a brighter and better furure for all of us. Resources are not replacable, not the ones we're talking about. And give it another 100 years, where will we stand?

The beautiful thing about this is that our Technology advancing beyond the rate of decline in our resources. Now Scientist even 'is coaxing bacteria into producing hydrocarbons that could be processed into fuels like those made from petroleum."

http://www.technologyreview.com/files/11700/LS9_x220.jpg

Alt. Resources are there. Options will be placed on the table. Its the choice thats gonna fuc> us over. We as common jo's and smoe's gotta have the right voice when it comes to the world energy crisis. It starts with you and I.

[saxon]

In the 1960's there were pioneering visionaries who saw the benefits of computers. But anyone looking for an immediate benefit would be badly disappointed since it took decades to develop the technology to a point where it really was a net benefit to productivity. Smart companies carefully invested research dollars into developing the future technology while making current technologies work in the near term.

I am confident that wind, solar and wave power will be developed over the long term to become viable sources of energy. But anyone looking to those as a magic pixie dust to save us immediately is unrealistic. Effective research takes time, planing and rational management. Poorly organized, panic-driven efforts to rush them into production will be a waste.

The cornerstone of a rational energy policy has to be conservation and reduction of consumption. Every source of energy comes at a cost, whether that cost is economic, strategic or environmental. This is the area where our nation is failing miserably because reducing consumption is just no fun.

+1 with furture developement all three could go a very long way

[gotr1?]

great ideas by most of you, being nukes, solar, wind or less consumption.. bottomline we need to pick a plan and stick to it considering it's gonna take a long time before we reap it's benefits...

[jimbojimmy]

No Subsidies for Pickens Plan (http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=9558)

The Cato Institute - to the rescue. When in doubt check the Cato, or http://www.reason.com/ :D

[skid vicious]

No Subsidies for Pickens Plan (http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=9558)

The Cato Institute - to the rescue. When in doubt check the Cato, or http://www.reason.com/ :D
great find! I wish more people would research these things before jumping on the bandwagon.

[gotr1?]

great find! I wish more people would research these things before jumping on the bandwagon.

that's why we have TSSB !

[gotr1?]

Interesting article about oil in North Pole...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601082&sid=aqEDMhrCvp28

[skid vicious]

Interesting article about oil in North Pole...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601082&sid=aqEDMhrCvp28
heard about this today too. unfortunately, the radical environmentalists have hijacked the dummycrat party and don't want energy independence or anybody drilling anywhere. don't forget, we have china and cuba drilling in the gulf of meheeco. but we can't put anymore rigs there. outer continental shelf too.
what a fantastic party the dims are. they truly want to hamstring our economy and ruin our nation. I hope they all catch AIDS and anthrax.

[AFS23 100%]

the next guy will be a dill hole anyway soon there will be littel change who evers in office

[Lorenzo]

Yeah, so, it turns out Pickens has even more to benefit from his wind plan than we thought. Through brilliant and strategic maneuvering he will also make a killing from the water rights in the areas where he will make another killing from the wind rights.

http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/columns/TimothyCarney/T_Boone_Pickens_wants_your_water.html

"Pickens’ scheme is a perfect demonstration of why it’s worth asking cui bono — who benefits — from regulatory and environmental initiatives... This is why, when presented with some big government program, it’s worthwhile to ask who’s getting rich — because you may find something interesting when you look below the surface."

Haliburton isn't the only game in town when it comes to getting rich from people's lake of attention.

[skid vicious]

Yeah, so, it turns out Pickens has even more to benefit from his wind plan than we thought. Through brilliant and strategic maneuvering he will also make a killing from the water rights in the areas where he will make another killing from the wind rights.

http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/columns/TimothyCarney/T_Boone_Pickens_wants_your_water.html

"Pickens’ scheme is a perfect demonstration of why it’s worth asking cui bono — who benefits — from regulatory and environmental initiatives... This is why, when presented with some big government program, it’s worthwhile to ask who’s getting rich — because you may find something interesting when you look below the surface."

Haliburton isn't the only game in town when it comes to getting rich from people's lake of attention.
I thought this story was broken ages ago. While I don't mind him getting rich, I don't hink it should be at the expense of gov't subsidies aka the tax payers.

[jimbojimmy]

While I don't mind him getting rich, I don't hink it should be at the expense of gov't subsidies aka the tax payers.

Hear Hear.