T. Boone Pickens, Bush & peak oil

What a marvelously-written article! An intriguing story of a unique man.

I'm not sure that wind farms are the answer to the energy problem, but it's pretty hard to argue with the idea expressed by Boone that a less than perfect idea is better than no idea.

Rod, I wonder if you've noticed a trend in Texas that I've seen in my own state. I live in an oil-producing state - and lately I've seen activist members of the GOP here attacking the Pickens Plan. They've started a whispering campaign that he's a liberal, that he's grown senile in his dotage, or even more bizarrely, that this is all part of some elaborate con job on unsuspecting consumers. It's one of the things that has caused me to reassess my own membership in the Grand Old Party of late.

I spent some time convincing a liberal friend of mine (a former neighbor) to embrace the Pickens Plan. I'd been arguing to her that we need an all-of-the-above approach to our energy needs (including ANWR and offshore) and that the Pickens Plan was a good starting point for all sides to gather around.

After I'd finally convinced her, she emailed a conservative college classmate of hers who lives in yet another state, asking for the friend's take on the Pickens Plan. She got an attack email in reply, essentially calling her a communist.

In short, It seems that anything that smacks of "green" policies is to be viewed with suspicion, or worse, paranoia.

As an addendum, I've noticed many suburban homeowners I live around (and I myself live in a suburb) tend to see any attempt to discuss the validity of other energy sources as a left-wing conspiracy to take away their cars. It is disheartening, and I wonder when aspiring to own a Hummer became the grand goal of "conservatives" (who really aren't). It's one of the reasons why I've become convinced that the GOP is nearly as full of materialists and utopian humanists as the DNC.

I am surprised to hear that T. Boone has decided that global warming is real. Maybe he sees business opportunities in getting in on the ground floor of alternative energy sources. I don't think big oil will ever go away but hopefully it will have some competition.

Garve:
Rod: You are just dying for "peak oil" to be true.

I really can't speak for Rod personally,but if you think that those of us who buy into peak oil theory do so because we have this secret wish to live in Laura Ingalls Land you are, as a general rule, mistaken. I am a thoroughly modern guy and I have my personal technological addictions, but I can also see the forest for the trees. The facts are pretty plain and the implications are not that difficult to ascertain: demand outstrips supply and will continue to do so. When enough people figure that out, the price goes through the roof and there are spot shortages in the places that lose out. Its that second part that's the scariest-- not that we can't afford the gas, but that there just isn't any to afford. At that point, it wouldn't be long before the infrastructure that supplies the gas, and most of our other supplies, just withers on the economic vine so that even if supply were to surge later, it just won't be available. If some of us get ourselves prepared for the idea, maybe we wont' be so shocked at what reality really throws at us.

Or, as my supervisor at work said about something else unrelated, expect worst case so you can be pleasantly surprised.

It constantly amazes me how many people seem to believe each avenue of energy production is all-or-nothing. The the notion that wind power can't replace natural gas because wind power is intermittent (although if you've spent any time in West Texas, you know it's nearly constant there). Well, wind power replaces other methods when the wind is blowing--and natural gas is not the only steady-feed method of power generation. Solar power isn't generated at night, either, but that doesn't mean it's useless.

As for Pickens pursuing wind power because it's profitable, I think he's admitted as much. Does alternative energy have to be free, too?

I do find it odd that people claim that someone making 'billions off of alternative energy' is a bad thing. After all, one of the big issues with replacing oil was the economic hit. Surely, if it is being merely replaced, and even replaced not by one, but dozens of industries, all percolating, hiring, building, buying and competing, that is a good thing, economically, right? It is good old fashioned Capitalism at its finest.

Surely no good conservative is going to protest a man getting rich off of his work and his ideas, by supplying a product or service to the public. Right?

The point is that wind power is NOT profitable: Pickens only stands to make billions from it because of government subsidies. On its own, wind is not an efficient or reliable power source --- which is why the fossil fuel plants (whether they be coal or natural gas) must be constantly running as a backup. Nuclear is a much more efficient and reliable source of electricity, but it lacks the government subsidies which make wind so attractive to Pickens.

Does that lack of 'creative government regulations' also include all the subsidies, all the perks that have been, and were, given to the current conventional energy companies over the decades?

We can level the field either by giving the same to the alternatives, or taking them away from the current corps.

I'm good either way.

I find it fascinating that anyone could really think that an 80-year-old billionaire who can write blank checks for a brand new stadium at his alma mater would have anything other than his legacy in mind here as a primary motivation. Can anyone really argue profit motive and "scam" as a motive with a straight face? Look folks, stating the obvious here, but he's 80 years old. And a billionaire.

Also, I invite the skeptics to simply stay a few days in pretty much any town on the Great Plains if they fear "dead calm" days. Sure, it happens, but frankly not enough, and it's a relief when it does. One of the persistent complaints you'll hear from Great Plains folks, and I grew up here - the wind blows all the dang time!

There's a grandness and majesty about the Plains and all that wind. But take it from a lifelong resident, every back yard project I attempt in some way gets wrecked by the wind. I've watched as poor little seedlings in my garden regularly get flattened by the wind year after year. I finally gave up and started buzzing my hair so I could stop trying to control the wind 'fro that results from walking to the parking lot into my office. It slams your car around the highway on the commute. An attempt at a pleasant bike ride becomes a herculean struggle to move forward at a bare three miles an hour through the tundra-scouring blast. Three residential turbines near my house never stop spinning. They whizz along happily ... because in fact, it rarely stops blowing!

Early pioneers were driven nuts by it! This unstoppable force comes sweeping down the plain to damage the mental faculties of hardened frontiersmen, and you're telling me it's a "scam" to rely on it for regularity? It's a scam not to. Go tell that "scam" nonsense to someone who doesn't live out here. And when the wind isn't blowing, the sun is shining. Brutally. Day after day. To the point where you want to crawl inside your house and hide in a cave from that orb in the sky that won't quit shining. Cloudy days are a break, a respite, even in the winter.

Look up the stats on wind and sunny days for places like Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas.

And I will agree with Houghton here.

I live in Minnesota. Depending on where you live, wind can be pretty darn reliable. And nobody is looking for the next 'one size fits all'.

Myself, I DON'T want one, unless it is something that is renewable and easily available, or we'll end up where we are now. Literally held over a barrel, held hostage to our dependence on one single limited substance.

Wind some places, solar, some places. Nuclear, thermal, water, natural gas.. as they stated, all of the above, and leaving room for others we haven't found yet.

There is an abundance of energy on this old world. Man uses a relatively minute amount. Consider how much electric power it would take to generate the wind, the rain, the tides, and the solar heating we see every day. All we have to do is figure out how to tap into all that power. And we will figure it out. It is just a matter of time.

Houghton, you've read far too much into my post.

Well, I admire Mr. Pickens for his initiative, however, he has been a lifelong Republican and will always vote Republican. Really!!!??? He really believes John McCain will take the initiative to push development of alternative energy, such as wind and solar. Well, after the 2002 election John McCain wrote a book. That book has also become a book on tape. I heard the tape in which he said that when he ran for the Republican nomination in 2002 (I voted for him)he didn't have any(I will paraphrase this)lofty goals that he wanted to achieve, and didn't run because of his patriotism. He ran for the presidency because he wanted to be president. Good reason, don't you think? Same as he became a fighter pilot (turns out he was a lousy pilot, and also graduated at the bottom of his class)because the Navy loved his daddy and granddaddy. He got the nod to run for Barry Goldwater's seat, not because Goldwater took a liking to him (he couldn't stand him), but because Goldwater liked John's daddy. Seems like an empty suit who has for too long ridden on the coat tails of his family name. Now, does anyone out there think a McCain presidency will bring us energy salvation. Ha, prepare for more wars, $12 per gallon gas and the disintegration of the late, great United States empire.

And most oil wells are far away from where the energy ends up.

A windmill doesn't have to be next door for it to provide energy.

Infrastructure is always an unavoidable cost of using ANY new technology. Including when we switched over to oil in the first place.

Highways and paved roads, refineries, and gas stations were all a 'massively expensive' cost of the development of the auto.

Same goes for radio, television, computers..

If the power is there, it IS constant, and it provides the power we need, the lines will be more than worth it. We won't have to go, hat in hand, or gun in hand (depending) to people in other countries who don't like us much in order to GET it.

I think that's a distinct benefit.

Yes, all of the above, I agree. Of course, change is hard. Inertia rules, things fall apart. They don't get better on their own. It's going to take a lot of lobbying and public awareness campaigns to even get people to get over their prejudices against all things "Green." But they may listen up if you tell them it's for the good of our national security. Which is it is.

Secondly, don't forget cutting back and living more simply. Sure, no one wants to be TOLD to do it. But if everyone who cares starts to do it, it will make a difference. Well, hopefully. I can see certain anti-environmentalists UPPING consumption and energy use just to spite us. But time is not on their side and at some point they will be poorer that people who saved and cut back. Maybe. Justice doesn't always happen though, does it?