Jump to content

Pickens Plan: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Added Text
Line 130: Line 130:
|publisher= Institute for Energy Research
|publisher= Institute for Energy Research
}}</ref>
}}</ref>

The Intelligent Community Website points out several problems with the natural gas portion of Pickens Plan, including the following: 1) Natural gas is not a renewable resource, so substituting one nonrenewable resource for another will ultimately subject the United States to the same issues presented by oil; 2) Natural gas, while cleaner than gasoline, still produces significant greenhouse gases, which will ultimately subject the United States to external costs which need to be paid by taxpayers; 3) A better use for natural gas is to provide a backup to wind power, not to power cars. 4) Natural gas is burned far more efficiently in power plants than in internal combustion engines, and would be better used to power electric cars. <ref>http://www.theintelligentcommunity.com/files/TheIntelligentCommunityResponseToThePickensPlan.pdf</ref>


==See also==
==See also==

Revision as of 14:18, 16 September 2008

The Pickens Plan is an energy policy proposal announced July 8, 2008 by American businessman T. Boone Pickens. Pickens' stated intention is to reduce American dependency on foreign oil imports by investing approximately US$1 trillion to build vast wind turbine farms for power generation, and then shifting the natural gas used for power generation to fuel trucks, buses and automobiles. Pickens claims that his plan could cut the amount the country spends annually on foreign oil from $400 billion to $700 billion.[1]

Proposal

Map of available wind power for the United States. Color codes indicate wind power density class.

The main proposals of the plan are::[2]

  1. Private industry would fund the installation of thousands of wind turbines in the Great Plains, which Pickens refers to as the potential "wind corridor" of the United States due to favorable wind resources and geographic location. Pickens estimates that these turbines could generate enough power to provide 20 percent or more of the country's electricity supply.
  2. Although the wind turbines would be built with private investment, all electricity users would pay for electric power transmission lines to connect the turbines to the power grid. They would provide energy to the Midwest, South and Western regions of the country.
  3. With wind energy providing a large portion of the nation's electricity, the natural gas that is currently used to fuel power plants could be used instead as a fuel for thousands of vehicles. To increase efficiency, the plan puts an emphasis on natural gas-burning fleets of trucks and buses.[3] Thus, the demand for petroleum products made from imported oil would be reduced.

Effects on the environment

By shifting a percentage of electricity production from natural gas combustion to carbon neutral wind generation, Pickens' plan could significantly reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Although vehicles using natural gas would still produce CO2, they would produce about 25% less than those using gasoline.[4] Combustion of gasoline also produces much larger amounts of nitrogen oxides (NOx, which cause smog) and other air pollutants than combustion of natural gas.[4]

Water transport through the wind corridor

According to an article in Popular Mechanics, if the plan is accepted, Pickens stands to reap a significant profit by building pipelines to pump billions of gallons of water from an aquifer under land in the Texas Panhandle, for which he controls the water rights. The proposed pipeline could follow the same 250-mile corridor as the electric transmission lines from the wind farm, which would be seized for utility use from private owners through eminent domain.[5] Pickens owns more water than anyone else in the U.S.[6] However, Pickens claims he has no need for the money,[7] and that Texas law provides alternative ways for public water supply districts (such as the one formed by Pickens[8]) to obtain pipeline right-of-ways.[5]

Support campaigns

Pickens anounced that he would spend $58 million on a multi-media effort to promote the Pickens Plan, not only through old media (such as newspapers and television), but also by using new media (including YouTube, Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter),[9] and the creation of a new social network on the Pickens Plan website (powered by Ning).[10] As part of this effort, Pickens has appeared on The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, ABC's Good Morning America, the CBS Evening News, CNN, The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, and Fox News.[11] Pickens' efforts are further supported by his spokesperson Jay Rosser and political ad firm Joe Slade White & Co.[11]

To raise political support, Pickens planned to organize supporters by Congressional districts[10] He has also met with the main party candidates for the 2008 United States Presidential election to discuss his plan. He met with Barack Obama on August, 17, 2008,[12] and with John McCain on August 15, 2008.[13]


Endorsements

Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club, has expressed support for the Pickens Plan[7], as has former Clinton Chief of Staff and current president of the Center for American Progress John Podesta.[14] Democratic Presidential nominee Barack Obama has also stated he supports many elements of the plan.[15].

Criticism

The CATO Institute, a libertarian think tank, says that the Pickens Plan amounts to market rigging in favor of his business interests and would raise energy costs for consumers. They think the best energy plan is to remove all energy subsidies and let market forces decide. [16][17] [18]

The Institute for Energy Research (IER, an organization that advocates off-shore drilling[19] and is "funded by the oil industry"[20]) claims that Pickens' plan relies on government subsidies, that producing large amounts of wind power is not a viable option, and that natural gas vehicles are "a niche product." Instead, the IER advocates "less government for more abundant and affordable energy."[21]

The Intelligent Community Website points out several problems with the natural gas portion of Pickens Plan, including the following: 1) Natural gas is not a renewable resource, so substituting one nonrenewable resource for another will ultimately subject the United States to the same issues presented by oil; 2) Natural gas, while cleaner than gasoline, still produces significant greenhouse gases, which will ultimately subject the United States to external costs which need to be paid by taxpayers; 3) A better use for natural gas is to provide a backup to wind power, not to power cars. 4) Natural gas is burned far more efficiently in power plants than in internal combustion engines, and would be better used to power electric cars. [22]

See also


References

  1. ^ Andy Vuong (2008-07-11). Tycoon's plan taps wind ""Tycoon's plan taps wind"". Denver Post. Retrieved 2008-08-08. {{cite news}}: Check |url= value (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  2. ^ Staff (2008-07-13). ""Pickens backs renewable energy plan"". San Antonio Business Journal. Retrieved 2008-07-08. {{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  3. ^ Pickens, Boone (2008). The First Billion is the Hardest. Crown. pp. pp 194-95. ISBN 9780307395771. {{cite book}}: |pages= has extra text (help)
  4. ^ a b "Natural Gas Vehicle Emissions", Alternative Fuels and Alternative Vehicles Center, U.S. Dept. of Energy [1]
  5. ^ a b Michael Milstein (2008-07-25). ""Beyond Wind Plan, Pickens Eyes Pipelines in Drought-Ridden U.S. Popular Mechanics"". Popular Mechanics. Retrieved 2008-08-08. {{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  6. ^ Susan Berfield (2008-06-12). ""There will be water"". Business Week. Retrieved 2008-08-08. {{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  7. ^ a b Dan Reed (2008-07-11). ""Texas oilman T. Boone Pickens wants to supplant oil with wind"". USA Today. Retrieved 2008-08-08. {{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  8. ^ http://www.robertscountyfwsd.com/ Retrieved 2008-09-14.
  9. ^ Adam Schreck (2008-07-08). ""Pickens backs renewable energy plan"". Business Week. {{cite news}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  10. ^ a b Tom Weber (2008-07-08). ""T. Boone Pickens, Facebook Guy? 'Pickens Plan' Taps Social Networking"". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 2008-08-08. {{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  11. ^ a b Allison Fass (2008-07-11). ""Pickens Goes For The Grass Roots"". Forbes. Retrieved 2008-08-08. {{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  12. ^ "Obama discusses energy issues with Pickens". USA Today. 2008-08-17. Retrieved 2008-08-17.
  13. ^ Corsaro, Ryan. "McCain Meets With T. Boone Pickens, Dodges Question About Anti-Obama Book". CBS News. Retrieved 2008-08-15.
  14. ^ T. Boone Pickens Predicts $200 A Barrel Oil CBS News.
  15. ^ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,407221,00.html
  16. ^ http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=9613
  17. ^ http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=9575
  18. ^ Jerry Taylor (2008-07-24). "T. Boone Hard-Wired for Subsidies". Cato Institute. Retrieved 2008-08-08.
  19. ^ [http://www.forbes.com/business/2008/09/10/energy-oil-drilling-biz-beltway-cx_bw_0911gang.html Election-Year Energy ], Forbes
  20. ^ Offshore Drilling Is Coming to a Vote, Washington Post
  21. ^ Rob Bradley (2008-07-10). "Picken's plan leaves U.S. energy security blowing in the wind". Institute for Energy Research. Retrieved 2008-08-08.
  22. ^ http://www.theintelligentcommunity.com/files/TheIntelligentCommunityResponseToThePickensPlan.pdf