Comments on: Picking at Pickens’ Plan

By: scotty

scotty — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 17:47:39 +0000

There is a public Forum for discussions about Pickens plan :
www.pickensenergyplan.com
Cheers.

By: reddog

reddog — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 06:18:38 +0000

Sorry to those who are sold on windpower, but T. Boone is full of it. Wind has a huge, and I mean huge, drawback. It is called rotating reserve and it is required as a backup for when the main source fails–and wind tends to fail at the times when you need it most–when it is especially hot or cold. Something has to be spinning to take up the slack immediately, and in most of the U.S. that is coal or gas powered steam turbines. You can’t just fire up a steam turbine and put it on line–that is a process that takes 8 to 12 hours. What this means is that the boilers at these plants must be kept hot and the turbines have to be turning. Hydro power is an exception–hydro turbines can be spun up and on line in under a minute, but with the exception of the TVA and the Pacific Northwest there isn’t a lot of hydro available. Furthermore, a lot of the wear and tear on a hydro turbine occurs at startup so there are increased maintenance costs involved and these costs are borne by the hydro operators, not the windpower investors. And steam is essentially the same–if the steamers aren’t producing near capacity and selling power they are operating at a low margin while the wind folks are raking in the bucks, but yet they have to be available when the wind dies. The lack of reliability is wind’s Achilles heel and the grid cannot rely on wind turbines for more than supplemental electricity production.

By: wigwam

wigwam — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 04:30:07 +0000

I don’t particularly like T Boone. But, his proposal makes a lot of sense, and it’s isn’t an all or nothing thing.

T. Boone’s proposal is based on two concepts, both accurate:
— Wind is right now the lowest cost of the easily expandable sustainable energy sources.
— Natural gas is our most efficient way to transport and store energy.
There are some additional facts to consider:
— Natural gas is delivered to the home, eliminating some middle men in most transactions.
— Current automobiles can be inexpensively converted to run on natural gas.
— Natural gas (aka farts) can easily be made via bacterial digestion from almost any biological material (stored sunlight) including sewage.

IMHO, T. Boone is on a good track, and it’s a path that doesn’t preclude others.

By: rwcole

rwcole — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 03:56:28 +0000

Notice that the PRIUS DOES make immediate economic sense as long as you keep it for seven years or more.

By: rwcole

rwcole — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 03:54:16 +0000

Well it’s what I consider in making a decision. Do you have a plug in hybrid?

You can have one if you take your Prius to a place in LA that installs a bigger battery and a charger. It’s 10 grand.

By: A Siegel

A Siegel — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 03:50:21 +0000

“Won’t make sense economically …”

This argument can be tiresome.

There is an assumption that the only thing to consider is the gasoline price.

Okay, in terms of costs, the electric vehicles are showing themselves to have far less cost in terms of maintenance/repairs. Saved money.

But, let us move past cash. There are many “values”. Does it “make sense economically” to have spoilers? Racing stripes? Leather seats? A high-quality radio?

What value to place on driving a car that doesn’t make noise and you can stop at a stop sign with silence? What value to be placed on not having to go to a gas station as frequently? What value to be able to put on a bumper sticker “Obama bin Laden Hates This Car” (like Jim Woolsey has on his PHEV)?

By: cinnamonape

cinnamonape — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 03:49:01 +0000

Interestingly these ideas are pushed by the Creationist movement…gets away from believing that those vast oil and coal-bearing Pennsylvanian, Carboniferous and Permian deposits have anything to do with ancient life that is transformed to mineral deposits.

Some creationists claim to have actually created oil from inorganic materials…but have never actually done so in a reproduceable experiment that would indicate it was a common event.

By: rwcole

rwcole — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 03:21:45 +0000

If you assume that gas goes to $10 per gallon- then you save $100 per month with the plug in vs. the standard hybrid and the whole thing makes better economic sense.

(that’s the current cost in Germany right now..)

By: rwcole

rwcole — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 03:12:02 +0000

Must be the Lexus?

That thing only saves 4 mgp against the standard Lexus RX..makes no sense.

By: rwcole

rwcole — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 03:10:45 +0000

Well- roughly

If you trade a 20 mpg vehicle for a 50 mpg vehicle at 15,000 miles a year you save about $2,400. (from $300 per month to about $100.

Going to a plug in saves you another $50. (but at the moment costs you $10,000 out of pocket..)

Even if the added cost is only $3,000 up front- it won’t make sense economically.