T. Boone Pickens Speaks

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sounds like as good an excuse as any to have some people over, drink some ice cold beers and fire up the barbecue.

I should get one of these for my yard.

3105pic.jpg
 
Last edited:
Quote:
Yep ..most businesses are grabbing NOW and failing later.

Business is created to make it's owners money. Those owners get to set their business model. If getting in and out of a market to make a quick buck is what they want, that is their prerogative. People that buy bank repo homes on the cheap and sell them high after fixing them are perfect examples. You never hear of them being called out as evil speculators or capitalizing on others misfortunes, but that is exactly what they do.
Quote:
I don't care if every wind turbine produced ever makes a profit.

Exactly my point and the problem. Why would someone invest in a money looser? Having the government bolster up loosing propositions because they are PC at the moment is a gross misapplication of resources designed to get people elected on feel good legislation. There are plenty of examples of this through out history and ethanol is a perfect recent one. How many people said that they didn't care how much that one costs as long as we are saving the plant from evil SUV's?
Benefit the American people, society, etc..etc...
blahblah.gif


How very socialist of you Gary. How is mis-allocating resources time and time again for political gain benefiting the American people? The free market model is PROVEN to be what has made this country great. Government interference and policies are causing just about every problem currently. That fact is indisputable.

If these windmills were economically viable they would have been built long ago as the technology has been around forever (yes, the tech has improved). Pickens needs help and he is buying the advertisements and minds he needs to get it.
 
Windmills economically viable - when crude oil was $10/barrel? Good one.
33.gif


You do realize that wind energy is but a small part of Picken's plan - he's also advocating and investing in mass solar power throughout the southwest.

What's your solution for solving our energy crisis Tempest (other than [censored] and moaning about others willing to put forth real ideas and real money towards long term solutions)?
 
Quote:
Windmills economically viable - when crude oil was $10/barrel? Good one.

So where is the cutoff point? At what oil price point do windmills become viable? There is a lot of price volatility right now.
And to some, as long as we are supposedly saving the environment, who cares how much it costs?

My ideas?

Coal. Cheap, readily available, reliable, and in abundant supply. I believe Shannow said 40+% efficiency plant designs are realistic.
Nuclear is another one, but I bet they cannot compete with the coal plants. IF there are to be subsidizes, I would prefer they go this direction.
The Brits have a prototype fusion reactor they are working on. Getting these on line would solve the electric generation problems permanently. Gov. R&D dollars might be well spent here, but this is more long term.
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Gov. R&D dollars might be well spent here, but this is more long term.
]
Ummmm..that's "Subsidies".. something you were against with windpower. And bearing in mind Windpower is proven technology (For anyone except you). Fusion will not be available large scale in less than 30+ years at least. Its a pig in a Poke.
 
Quote:
Exactly my point and the problem. Why would someone invest in a money looser?


Who says it's a loser. You obviously don't have a clue about utilities. I'm paying as a captive audience for a $4B nuke plant that makes electricity for south Jersey. Peco plays Hollywood accounting and the PUC allows them to bill me for the cost and, regardless of outcomes, give their stockholders a 12% rate of return on no risk investment.

I would think you would be in hog heaven having a major leveraged advantage over others and their wallets and having them have absolutely nothing that they could do about it. How anti big business of you, Tempest
grin2.gif



LOL.gif
 
Quote:
The Brits have a prototype fusion reactor they are working on.


..so this isn't developed ..and isn't "economically viable" yet? I guess T. Boone Pickens just chose the wrong way to produce power. If he'd chosen a current loser..fusion power, instead of a proven technology, he would have been much wiser in your eyes.

Do you own any shares in Fusion Futures?
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest
I believe Shannow said 40+% efficiency plant designs are realistic.


They're banging on 50%.

But private industry is only putting in the cheapest, nastiest plant that they can get their hands on, and often running it in the least efficient manner, to maximise MW output.

They aren't even putting in double redundent conveyors anyymore, meaning that if something as simple as conveyor maintenance is required, the plant needs to be shut down.

Only people who built high efficiency, highly reliable plants in Oz were the Govt.
 
Tax laws imposed on private enterprise tends to look at the medium term by having depreciation curves that end up favouring quick returns, instead of 30 year life cycles and highest efficiency. The same is true of end users. Houses are taxed here, according to their value, not according to the services they consume. An energy efficient house is more expensive to build, and gets hit with higher taxes.
 
Quote:
And are you sure coal will be cheap when proper emission controls and regs are used, or would you ditch that and to H3ll with clean air and non-acid rain?

All for clean air and there should be reasonable regulation on emissions. As stated, I would prefer fusion as a long term solution so the coal plants would be a stop gap measure.
Quote:
Ummmm..that's "Subsidies".. something you were against with windpower.

I prefer no subsidies, but as I stated, IF there are going to be any, why not put them into a permanent, reliable, and long term solution?
Quote:
And bearing in mind Windpower is proven technology (For anyone except you). Fusion will not be available large scale in less than 30+ years at least. Its a pig in a Poke.

Al, I have said that wind power is old tech and that fusion is a long term solution. Not sure the point you are making here.
Quote:
Fusion Futures

Now that is funny. Fusion is a long way off, but it is the best technology that has any promise to provide large amounts of power, cleanly and reliably.

What is the service life of a windmill? What will we do with 10's of thousands of windmills after they have out lived their usefulness or just become technologically obsolete?
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest

Al, I have said that wind power is old tech and that fusion is a long term solution. Not sure the point you are making here.
Quote:
Fusion Futures

My point is that a windmill gfarm can be put in place in 1 year. Its proven technology. What's not to like?
Now that is funny. Fusion is a long way off, but it is the best technology that has any promise to provide large amounts of power, cleanly and reliably.
You are acting like we have 30 years to solve this problem. Fusion is probably long into the future. Without renewable, cheap energy sources like windmills we will have no future, no money, and no country. Its that serious.

What is the service life of a windmill? What will we do with 10's of thousands of windmills after they have out lived their usefulness or just become technologically obsolete?

I would think that on the average the service life with normal replacements should be 50+ years easily..bearings, rotors, parts of generator, electrical distribution, etc. Any machine requires replacement. In 50 years the wind will still be free. There is no guarantee that fusion will ever work. There are too many roadblocks in the technology. Unless you are 2 years old you won't ever see it on a meaningful scale.

And if the windmill has paid for it self many times over..disposal is cheap compared to decomisioning a coal plant or a refinery what with all of the toxic chemicals. I am just amazed that someone is against the best power generation that will be available in the next 30 years.
21.gif
Fortunately most people see the light.


.................
 
Last edited:
Quote:
I am just amazed that someone is against the best power generation that will be available in the next 30 years

Al, please read my posts a little closer and please stop putting words in my mouth. I have said nothing of the sort. I simply want to see this done by the private sector and have stated that multiple times.
And the German report clearly states that it is not the panacea that many believe it to be and it will only provide ~20% of the power at best, depending on the weather and time of day. Other more reliable sources of energy will be required no matter how many wind mills are put up. What do you propose those sources to be?
Quote:
You are acting like we have 30 years to solve this problem. Fusion is probably long into the future. Without renewable, cheap energy sources like windmills we will have no future, no money, and no country. Its that serious.

Coal plants can provide energy for a long time, reliably. Somewhere beyond 100 years...forget the exact number. And as I clearly stated, these would be a stop gap measure. Fusion is not guaranteed but it is the best technology on the horizon that I am aware of to provide our energy needs.

How many people saw the light on ethanol?
 
Wind turbines are easier to decommission than nukes. When enough electric cars join the grid, there will be a much larger market for intermittent power, such as wind.
 
This story is from my favourite place in the (well my) world...where my parents grew up, and I spent 3 days a fortnight up until I was about 4.

http://www.theage.com.au/environment/the-winds-of-change-20080701-303d.html

Quote:
A proposal for turbines in Daylesford had locals up in arms at first, but now it has them linking arms in Australia's first community-owned wind farm.
.
.
.
Hepburn Wind is now open to investors and expects its turbines will be in the ground sometime during 2009. Ownership is structured to prevent a takeover by a large corporation.

About half the investors will be local residents interested in supporting a secure and clean local energy supply. The State Government has pledged close to $1 million, and other investors and a bank loan will cover the project's total cost of $9 million.


http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2008/07/25/2314473.htm?site=science&topic=latest

Quote:
Making the most of wind energy in Australia could depend on the community owning and operating small-scale wind farms, say some experts.

The comments come as a cooperative in Daylesford, Victoria seeks support for their proposal to build and operate Australia's first community-owned and operated wind farm.


Of course big business will trash community owned power gen, like they did rooftop solar, as they aren't the ones making the money.

As to the Govt footing 10% of the bill potentially, when that state Govt privatised their coal generators, they promised them $45/MWhr, and topped them up to $45 for 9 years, even when the spot price was around $20/MWHr.
 
Al, Johnny and Drew, I hope that you have a great weekend.

I think people will be much more accepting of that rather than R/P/telephone salesmen.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Al, Johnny and Drew, I hope that you have a great weekend.
I think people will be much more accepting of that rather than R/P/telephone salesmen.

Thanks. I'll just have to make sure Tempest isn't in the area.
wink.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

dave1251
  • Locked
Exxon Mobil
Replies
19
Views
14K
MolaKule
P
  • Locked
We spend $500,000 a minute on foreign oil.
2
Replies
36
Views
14K
pondfishr
V
  • Locked
"Victory Will be Mine!" "Blast!"
2
Replies
26
Views
7K
wantin150
C
  • Locked
Buy American Mention of the Week
2
Replies
38
Views
11K
cousincletus
Schmoe
  • Locked
WOW! CBS let him say this????????
Replies
3
Views
791
Jaybird
Back
Top