As I wrote earlier today, I am at a business editors and writers conference in Kansas City. T. Boone Pickens talked about his energy plan during an afternoon session.
I’m not going to go into his plan in depth. You’ve probably read about it already. If not, you can get details at the Pickens Plan Web site. You also can watch a video from his visit to The Eagle.
In my earlier post, I asked if anyone had questions for me to ask Pickens. Unfortunately, he took only about three questions before running out of time, and I didn’t get a chance. However, I think he did answer BTH’s question:
BTH: Ask him to compare the technical difficulty of his plan compared to putting man on the moon with early 60s technology. Note that we succeeded in realizing JFK’s dream.
Pickens: “This is a simple problem. When I walk up to a pool table, I never see a combination shot. I only see straight-in shots. This to me is a straight-in shot.”
That about sums it up. Here are some more lines from quotable Pickens:
The moderator asked him why he rolled out the plan now. “A guy recently said the best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The second-best time is now.”
He said corn-based ethanol will never be much more of a factor than it is now. “Ethanol is an ugly baby, but it’s ours. I’d rather have ethanol than foreign oil.”
On why he feels so strongly about natural gas: “Natural gas is cleaner, it’s cheaper, it’s abundant, and it’s ours.”
When talking about how the United States is trailing other countries in developing wind energy: “Germans are the most highly developed for wind, and they don’t have any wind.”
And on why his plan is the right plan: “If you don’t like my plan, get a plan. … I’ll go for a better plan. Thing about it is, I have the only plan.”
Anyone have any thoughts on the Pickens Plan?
6 Comments
I think it’s a good plan. Boone is floating it all with his own money, so that is a plus. He’s putting his money where his mouth is.
He pretty much hit my point. We HAVE all the technology today to accomplish his plan and more. Thus it is a straight shot. Compare that to the situation when JFK said we would go to the moon. That was a six-ball three-bank combo! I remember that – watching our rockets blow up on the launch pad at Canaveral and this guy says WHAT? To the moon? HE’S CRAZY!!!!! And we did it.
If America commits to energy independence we can do it by 2015. As a scientist myself I know the technology is there – unlike when JFK challenged us. All we have to do is DO IT!
While I think it is highly admirable what Pickens is doing, I would simply prefer nuclear power to wind power. I do not see an adequate ROI on wind power at this time and I have seen the large wind farms in California and found them visually awful.
I would personally like to see a handful of the smaller reactors built in western Ks. I think it would create many jobs and allow the state to sell the excess energy to neighboring states while lowering our energy costs (and taxes overall).
Combined with our vast natural gas fields this would allow Kansas to be a true energy leader.
It might not be cost effective to build new nuclear power plants, because of the enormous cost involved and the taxpayers footing the bill for the waste (half the DOE budget is on monitoring and storing nuke waste.)
Nuke plants won’t work in western Kansas either, because of the water supply issue.
But a great plan would be to expand and update current nuclear sites. Basically all current nuke plants have the capability to expand and to output 2 to 3 times their electric generation capacity. The logistics, site permits and staff are all there.
I imagine you’re correct Ict, and expanding current capacity really makes sense.
Do the smaller, compact nuclear facilities use more/less water than current ones? Could we get just one built out west?
I think the compact ones use less water. In afct, I suspect that with some real good engineering they might be able to be designed with no ‘disposable’ water use. Think a car radiator that just transferes the heat to the air.