I am all in favor of developing alternative forms of energy, however after registering on Picken's website (WAY slick, by-the-way) I was sad that it seemed really self serving. I had thought him to be a patriot, but it seems that his personal financial interests are the things that he is mostly promoting. Why does the Picken's Plan ONLY include energy sources that Mr. Pickens is heavily invested in personally? (e.g. no mention, that I could see of clean burning coal, did I hear geo-thermal? NO.)
I stated my concerns on his website, hoping I was wrong but was attacked immediately as an unbeliever... but alas... no answers from his people.
Why does his plan NOT include cost projections?
Why does his plan NOT include who will pay for the infrastructure (we will of course) and what is the cost benefit analysis of doing it now rather than letting these energy sources rise to the top of their own worth?
I am a believer in getting out of Arabia, and drilling more in the US, etc. but why does this plan from such a smart and resourceful man seem less than comprehensive and lacking in detail.
I visit Palm Springs often. There have been windmills there for years, thousands of them -- it looks like about HALF of them are inoperable! They went from being a marvelous curiosity to a blight. Why are half of them inoperable if they are so cost effective?
WE NEED TO TAKE aggressive action as quickly as possible and was excited when I saw this on TV. I am frustrated by the way we are "locked in" to a single way of doing things, and hopeful that finally someone with some financial clout and a VERY slick marketing idea, would be able to light a fire under Washington's butt. I am now unhappy that instead what I seem to find is half of an idea cemented in the financial holdings of the promoter.
Hey, I could care less if Mr Pickens made billions from this, IF ALL alternatives were explored as part of the answer.
What I have learned is that wind power is great -- When the wind blows. BUT the wind does NOT always blow, and often it does not blow with sufficient force to make the generators cost effective or provide sufficient power. WHAT happens then? No answers.
The interesting thing about his 4,000 Megawatt wind power farm is that it will take nearly 800 square miles in order to have room for these wind turbines and I am told they only operate at 20% efficiency (I hope I am wrong about that). For the same amount of money as the proposed wind farm, you can build a 4,000 megawatt nuclear reactor that will take up on 1 square mile and operates at 97% efficiency. The difference is one of subsidies and tax breaks. It would take 10 - 20 years to permit and build a reactor while it would only take a few years to build the wind farm and start reaping the tax benefits.
What would MY plan be? I am a long way from being an expert. But like I said, someone with the resources of Mr. Pickens should have been more comprehensive and reached beyond his own investments to INCLUDE nuclear, solar, geothermal, and clean coal as well as off-shore and Anwar drilling. Lets get the truth out about Anwar proposals - the foot print is small, risks are minimal, and the benefit is HUGE.
I had a small hope that Mr Pickens would look at what I have written and provide the detail and include other alternatives to give his plan more clout. I WANT him to be successful at this, but if you read the pundits, they are saying what I have been saying and his Plan is being dismissed as self serving.
I am sorry, but a man with the means of Mr. Pickens could have and should have done a better job providing detail. Instead, I am getting a real feeling that this website is a FANTASTIC advertising and marketing ploy for his businesses, rather than an attempt at finding real solutions? To be taken seriously by more than just frustrated people who have no "leader" it needs to have meat.
I stated my concerns on his website, hoping I was wrong but was attacked immediately as an unbeliever... but alas... no answers from his people.
Why does his plan NOT include cost projections?
Why does his plan NOT include who will pay for the infrastructure (we will of course) and what is the cost benefit analysis of doing it now rather than letting these energy sources rise to the top of their own worth?
I am a believer in getting out of Arabia, and drilling more in the US, etc. but why does this plan from such a smart and resourceful man seem less than comprehensive and lacking in detail.
I visit Palm Springs often. There have been windmills there for years, thousands of them -- it looks like about HALF of them are inoperable! They went from being a marvelous curiosity to a blight. Why are half of them inoperable if they are so cost effective?
WE NEED TO TAKE aggressive action as quickly as possible and was excited when I saw this on TV. I am frustrated by the way we are "locked in" to a single way of doing things, and hopeful that finally someone with some financial clout and a VERY slick marketing idea, would be able to light a fire under Washington's butt. I am now unhappy that instead what I seem to find is half of an idea cemented in the financial holdings of the promoter.
Hey, I could care less if Mr Pickens made billions from this, IF ALL alternatives were explored as part of the answer.
What I have learned is that wind power is great -- When the wind blows. BUT the wind does NOT always blow, and often it does not blow with sufficient force to make the generators cost effective or provide sufficient power. WHAT happens then? No answers.
The interesting thing about his 4,000 Megawatt wind power farm is that it will take nearly 800 square miles in order to have room for these wind turbines and I am told they only operate at 20% efficiency (I hope I am wrong about that). For the same amount of money as the proposed wind farm, you can build a 4,000 megawatt nuclear reactor that will take up on 1 square mile and operates at 97% efficiency. The difference is one of subsidies and tax breaks. It would take 10 - 20 years to permit and build a reactor while it would only take a few years to build the wind farm and start reaping the tax benefits.
What would MY plan be? I am a long way from being an expert. But like I said, someone with the resources of Mr. Pickens should have been more comprehensive and reached beyond his own investments to INCLUDE nuclear, solar, geothermal, and clean coal as well as off-shore and Anwar drilling. Lets get the truth out about Anwar proposals - the foot print is small, risks are minimal, and the benefit is HUGE.
I had a small hope that Mr Pickens would look at what I have written and provide the detail and include other alternatives to give his plan more clout. I WANT him to be successful at this, but if you read the pundits, they are saying what I have been saying and his Plan is being dismissed as self serving.
I am sorry, but a man with the means of Mr. Pickens could have and should have done a better job providing detail. Instead, I am getting a real feeling that this website is a FANTASTIC advertising and marketing ploy for his businesses, rather than an attempt at finding real solutions? To be taken seriously by more than just frustrated people who have no "leader" it needs to have meat.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment