Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Mojava on July 25, 2008, 11:09:39 AM
-
T Boone Pickens has put together a good looking plan for energy independence http://www.pickensplan.com/ (http://www.pickensplan.com/). I don't know a whole lot about the guy, other than he funded that swift boat mess. He seems to be genuine in his appeal to both sides of the isle. He's a good example of the American spirit, thinking big and innovation in times of adversity.
-
T Boone Pickens plan is to make himself richer. While this is absolutely commendable, the fact that he's hiding it and trying to make himself seem noble and driven with a High Purpose is not.
"The man who wishes for the government to adopt and enforce HIS ideas, is the kind of man who's ideas are idiotic."
-
So do you agree with the plan?
"The man who wishes for the government to adopt and enforce HIS ideas, is the kind of man who's ideas are idiotic."
Glad you didn't write the constitution, it would have remained blank paper.
-
It would have been.
"Man cannot be governed, and free."
-
His plan is a joke, but it gets good press. It all depends on the ignorance of people as to what is really available to provide power.
I suppose it is something though.
-
How is it a joke?
-
I fail to see how harnessing a natural rescource is a joke.
-
T Boone Pickens has put together a good looking plan for energy independence http://www.pickensplan.com/ (http://www.pickensplan.com/). I don't know a whole lot about the guy, other than he funded that swift boat mess. He seems to be genuine in his appeal to both sides of the isle. He's a good example of the American spirit, thinking big and innovation in times of adversity.
I put this in another thread, but Pickens leaves out all the problems with wind produced electricity. What, there's no drawbacks?
Surely you don't believe that? Wind doesn't blow all the time. You can't store the electricity the windmills produce. They need to be backed up by conventional electricity plants, and those plants must be always running. There's a lot of farmers in Texas raising windmills now instead of cattle, mostly because of subsidies. Wind power costs about 3 times what conventional power costs. Imagine a 300% increase in your light bill.
Here - read another point of view that differs from Pickens. You can always buy a windmill from him.
oops forgot the link..
http://www.reason.com/news/show/34839.html
-
windmills kill condors, so you can't put them in Cal. they will have to put them in your back yard.
-
That's from 2002, how does it apply to the increased cost of fuel today? Also I'm pretty sure we know how to store energy from turbines.
"North and South Dakota by Global Winds Harvest. Schleede points out that electricity produced by the project likely will cost at least 2 cents more per kilowatt-hour than conventionally produced power"
That doesn't look like 300%. Also isn't the point to ween the US off foreign energy?
-
Let's put some additional reasoning to this. If wind was such a great resource then why isn't being used predominantly now?! Or why isn't solar power being used more often. The answer is because it is not economical. Every one is for reusable power that doesn't pollute. No one is for paying higher utilities. Well except T. Boone Pickens and it seems the Democrats are. These are not brand new ideas folks. I've read and heard about wind and solar power for almost my whole life. Nothing new is being invented or just now coming to the front. Don't you think that if some one could make millions off of these technologies they would have already. Currently the only way that can be done is to force you to buy the technology through government mandate. That will be expensive!
When the technology is there and when the market is ready we will use Wind and Solar energy.
What Pickens is trying to do is stall any oil development and that is what the democrats are trying to do as well. Pickens wants to make more money and the Democrats want power over every aspect of your life.
-
Nothing new is being invented
look up thin film photovoltaics.
-
The reason is because gas was $9.00 a barrel in 1999, we didn't feel a need to invest in other resources. The brand new thing is gas at $140.00 a barrel.
-
How is it a joke?
I fail to see how harnessing a natural resource is a joke.
Cost per watt is far too high using the methods he is purporting to use. It may never pay for itself due to long term maintenance costs as well. This is not free electricity.
All I am saying is there are better, more efficient ways to harness wind, and Sun. There are also other methods to generate power that are viable which he is not even talking about.
There is a lot involved in doing something like this right. His is more of a lip service approach, but I guess it is something. I just do not see it working for the long term.
As a matter of fact, he is probably going to do more harm than good for the long term if he stays the course he is laying out.
-
T Boone Pickens plan is to make himself richer. While this is absolutely commendable, the fact that he's hiding it and trying to make himself seem noble and driven with a High Purpose is not.
"The man who wishes for the government to adopt and enforce HIS ideas, is the kind of man who's ideas are idiotic."
Hmmm... sounds more like you are referring to Al Gore and his carbon credit offsets.
T Boone Pickens is not trying to make himself richer. He has already said he has more money than he can use. He could loose money on this deal, and he is more genuine about his convictions than you can hope to get from anyone else. I will consider his recommendations and solutions much better than any politicians solutions.
-
the rich never have enough money, the more they have the more they want, it becomes a game to them.
-
I put this in another thread, but Pickens leaves out all the problems with wind produced electricity. What, there's no drawbacks?
Surely you don't believe that? Wind doesn't blow all the time. You can't store the electricity the windmills produce. They need to be backed up by conventional electricity plants, and those plants must be always running. There's a lot of farmers in Texas raising windmills now instead of cattle, mostly because of subsidies. Wind power costs about 3 times what conventional power costs. Imagine a 300% increase in your light bill.
Here - read another point of view that differs from Pickens. You can always buy a windmill from him.
oops forgot the link..
http://www.reason.com/news/show/34839.html
Ok someone is going to have to teach me why you can't store electricity from windmills? That just doesn't even see to come close to making sense.
-
the rich never have enough money, the more they have the more they want, it becomes a game to them.
That is a clumsy poor mans argument. The most cheritable and caring people I know are rich. There are stingy rich people who care for only themselves, but to paint them all the same is ignorant. It is like calling all poor people lazy and stupid. You can't say such things. You are not contributing to this argument by making such careless comparisons.
-
Amazing... what a buncha freakin whiners..... I guess y'all figure that we should wait for Exxon or the Dept Of Energy to solve the energy crisis? Who the hell was it in the McCain campaign that said the american public was a buncha puzzies waiting on a free lunch? The guy was right.... look at you guys!
Yup; the guy is an old 'Big Oil' hound... and better yet, he made his bones by devouring larger oil companies... the guy is a regular wall-street raider. His political tricks are also well known. Since when did it become dis-reputable to eat a poorly managed company or make a damn profit? So he kicked Kerry in the balls... I don't consider that dirty pool... the lyin' salamander tossed his medals over the freakin white house fence... bastard deserved a kick in the balls.
Pickens has also recognized the handwriting on the wall... and sees an opportunity to make some more bucks, this time by creating a new type of energy company business model that can provide a not insignificant bump to power on the grid.
As for the technology... sure; storing electricity from turbines and solar fields is problematic, but there is absolutely no denying that it generates power... a hell of a lot of it, and that none of it will be 'wasted'... and yes, it will not; by itself, replace oil or LNG.... but it WILL make a big assed dent in the use of oil and LNG for power on the grids this system will supply. Add in re-deployment of nuclear, plus conversion of oil to LNG and hybrids for transportation and we'll be heading off down the road towards energy independence.... and we can get started NOW... he's already got proven systems up and running... on his dime. (not yours or mine)
So, aside from the fact that he's making a buck, and the libs hate his politics, anybody got any valid reasons why he should be dismissed as 'irrelevant'?
.... or shall we all just sit here and whine while we wait for the government to solve ourenergy problems?
Hang
-
.... or shall we all just sit here and whine while we wait for the government to solve ourenergy problems?
It's much easier to sit behind my computer and whine on the BBS...
:)
-
look up thin film photovoltaics.
I was referring to the concepts.
-
Personally, I am all for a properly implemented solution to get us off our dependency on resources which may or may not be around much longer.
There are better solutions than what he is proposing.
Thankfully, my home will be off the grid soon and it is only going to cost me about 10 square feet of backyard space. A much larger version of what I have designed could power a city or two, but that is not going to happen, because I am not rich.
I look at it like this. I thought of how to do it. Someone else will too, eventually, and maybe that someone will have the money to actually get it implemented on a large scale.
I am sure the brightest minds of our time have all come together and designed this implementation for him. It must be bulletproof. He has the money to say so. It must be brilliant! He has the money to say it is. It must be the answer to our prayers. He has the money to promise it.
Afterall, only people of the highest standards could get rich and only those rich people would want to do something good for mankind.
I am bitter. I am frustrated. I am cynical. I am not a whiner.
-
Ok someone is going to have to teach me why you can't store electricity from windmills? That just doesn't even see to come close to making sense.
You can store electricity. It just costs a lot of money.
The downsides with wind power are:
It costs more than conventional power generation sources
It's intermittent. You can't order a wind farm to produce more electricity to meet demand, it produces power according to the strength of the wind. That means you need backup generation ready to come on line immediately in case the wind drops.
That pushes the price up further, because you not only have to pay to build the wind farm, you have to pay for another power station to back up the wind farm as well.
As for the technology... sure; storing electricity from turbines and solar fields is problematic, but there is absolutely no denying that it generates power... a hell of a lot of it, and that none of it will be 'wasted'
Unless you pay a fortune for storage, much of it will be wasted. You have to have enough other generation capacity to cover 100% of demand for when the wind isn't blowing strongly enough to generate electricity. On the other hand, at times the wind will be just right and you will be generating as much electricity as you have installed capacity.
Wind farms typically average about 25% of their installed capacity. So a 1 megawatt turbine will generate an average of 250 kw/h an hour over a year. Obviously, some of the time it will be generating 1 mw, other times it will be generating 0 mw, and some times it will be generating something in between.
That means if you have wind power making up 25% of your power generation, the wind will contribute between 0 and 100% of electrical demand, on average. Because power stations take time to bring on line, and can't be shut down quickly, there are times when you will be generating far too much power. If you don't have any way of storing it, that excess power will be wasted.
and yes, it will not; by itself, replace oil or LNG.... but it WILL make a big assed dent in the use of oil and LNG for power on the grids this system will supply.
It would make a difference in natural gas consumption, at the cost of higher electricity bills. But useful oil isn't used for power generation in the US. The little oil that is used is residual oil and petroleum coke, two waste products from the refining process that aren't much use for anything other than power generation.
The only exception are generators, typically running on diesel. But they are used for backup and off grid, so increasing the electrical supply won't make any difference to them. In fact, increasing the price of electricity by using more expensive forms of power generation may result in increased use of generators, because it will narrow the cost gap between generators and mains electricity.
So, aside from the fact that he's making a buck, and the libs hate his politics, anybody got any valid reasons why he should be dismissed as 'irrelevant'?
Look at the experience of other countries that have spent fortunes subsidising "alternative" power generation. Germany, for example, where the government pays massive subsidies for solar power, but industry is warning unless there is an urgent expansion of coal power stations the country will start suffering blackouts, because solar might appear green but it doesn't generate enough electricity.
Same in Britain, where the government has spent a decade subsidising wind farms, which still make up less than 1% of our power generation. The government is now doing a U turn and promising a massive expansion of nuclear power, and new coal power stations, despite writing both off 10 years ago as "not green enough". Even then, there's a big doubt whether the new conventional power stations will be built in time to avert blackouts in the middle of the next decade.
The solution to expensive oil isn't to increase the cost of generating electricity.
-
Heheheh Hang -
Ya beat me to it. Does his plan have problems? Yep, absolutely. Is it perfect? Is it going to be implemented over night? Heck no. But we have to start somewhere. It took Brazil 30 years to put their ethanol infrastructure in place. We gotta start somewhere.
The wife and I are very close to pulling the trigger on one of these http://www.skystreamenergy.com/skystream/ (http://www.skystreamenergy.com/skystream/) in conjuction with PV, which will generate about 50% of our power. The plan is to make the system scaleable and when we are ready, add on a 2nd skystream and additional PV. Unfortuantely, systems big enough to generate 100% of what we use start at about 60K and go up from there, which i would imagine is going to be a pretty tough pill to swallow for most average people.
Currently, to collect on any rebates/programs offered by state (typically 25% of system cost up to 35K) & federal goverment (usually about 2k) your site has to be evaluated by a qualified assessor. While the rebates offered now are a start, they are a drop in the bucket compared to the capitol outlay a person has to commit to get a system big enough to run a house
If the government was really serious about alternative energy, they would create a program to make this stuff affordable for anyone who's site qualifies. An example program (in my happy little world)
1. the system would have to be a grid-tied system.
2. the system would be no smaller than 20Kw, which is big enough to power 3 average homes
3. normally, any extra power generated by a grid-tied system is either credited or paid to the owner of the system by the utility company, however, due to the large subsidy (part paid by government and part by local utility) (75-80%), this extra power goes into the grid free for X number of years. Its kind of like an intrest free loan that is paid back with electricity
4. The home owner now has free electricity for life and the system is providing power for 2 other homes.
Course this is in my happy little world. Is it a perfect plan? Nope. We gotta start somewhere.
-
Ok someone is going to have to teach me why you can't store electricity from windmills? That just doesn't even see to come close to making sense.
The amount of power your house uses can't easily be stored in economical sized batteries.
I've built a house with Solar Panels, battery reserves and a propane back up. The batteries could only power the house during normal peak daytime use for about an 1.5 hours to 2.0 hours, assuming the solar panels weren't powering up, and the generator wasn't on.
This small amount of power is stored in a bank of batteries some 20 feet long, 3 feet deep, and 4 feet high. Each battery is filled to the brim with ACID. An extremely strong acid. So strong that most of the workers found themselves "Busy" when we were installing the batteries by lowering them into the storm exit of the basement. Not to mention the maintenance needed for it. All of the batteries needed distilled water placed in them to a certain level, at a certain charge.
And the man installing it warned not to touch the positive - negative connections. I would have "Melted."
And then you take a look at some data centers where constant power is necessary to maintain data integrity. They have rooms upon rooms of these batteries in levels upon levels of basements. The duty of these batteries is to power up the building in the chance of a power brownout between main power out, and generator kicking on. They probably couldn't last more than 30 seconds solo.
Basically, batteries aren't feasible size wise. Then if you consider that all energy transfers, like from windmill to battery, and from battery to grid lose energy, you try to find some other way to store energy. It just ain't there.
-
A different type of battery.
http://www.consumersenergy.com/welcome.htm?/content/hiermenugrid.aspx?id=31
shamus
-
The amount of power your house uses can't easily be stored in economical sized batteries.
I've built a house with Solar Panels, battery reserves and a propane back up. The batteries could only power the house during normal peak daytime use for about an 1.5 hours to 2.0 hours, assuming the solar panels weren't powering up, and the generator wasn't on.
This small amount of power is stored in a bank of batteries some 20 feet long, 3 feet deep, and 4 feet high. Each battery is filled to the brim with ACID. An extremely strong acid. So strong that most of the workers found themselves "Busy" when we were installing the batteries by lowering them into the storm exit of the basement. Not to mention the maintenance needed for it. All of the batteries needed distilled water placed in them to a certain level, at a certain charge.
And the man installing it warned not to touch the positive - negative connections. I would have "Melted."
And then you take a look at some data centers where constant power is necessary to maintain data integrity. They have rooms upon rooms of these batteries in levels upon levels of basements. The duty of these batteries is to power up the building in the chance of a power brownout between main power out, and generator kicking on. They probably couldn't last more than 30 seconds solo.
Basically, batteries aren't feasible size wise. Then if you consider that all energy transfers, like from windmill to battery, and from battery to grid lose energy, you try to find some other way to store energy. It just ain't there.
And please people, just use a little common sense to decide if you are being sold a bill of goods. All these things that people are bringing up are never even mentioned when Dimocrats want to stall oil production. Alternative energy sources are presented as completely clean with no drawbacks and are being obstructed by big oil. They're pie in the sky. If they were immediately feasible, big oil with all its money and technology would hold the patents for its practical application. The fact is, the time frame in which these source will become feasible is nothing like the Dimocrats paint. And I guarantee, when practical use is developed it will be by an evil oil company and not Al Gore. But if you think its closer to 5 years away than 50 years away, you are just wrong and need to investigate alternative energy from unbiased sources.
I'm not including nuclear in the "alternative" energy group. Obviously that technology exists now.
-
A different type of battery.
http://www.consumersenergy.com/welcome.htm?/content/hiermenugrid.aspx?id=31
shamus
Yeah, it's a decent battery. Until you remember that you waste 60-70% of the energy generated to get the water up there. Then you waste ANOTHER 60-70% to convert the potential energy to electricity.
So out of all the energy you make with a windmill and convert to this hydroelectric source, you'll get roughly 15-16% back.
-
If the government was really serious about alternative energy, they would create a program to make this stuff affordable for anyone who's site qualifies.
Now you & Boone can use your own money for whatever you want. Nothing personal but if it's too expensive for you to invest your own money, it's just too expensive. End of story. Taking MY money and giving it to YOU for your private little project doesn't make the project economically justified. There are already too many government subsidies given to private/special interest groups. Now if the government wants my money to build nukes or a new electric grid or to develop solar technology or drill ANWR or similar for the good of the entire nation, I'm fine with that. :salute
-
Yeah, it's a decent battery. Until you remember that you waste 60-70% of the energy generated to get the water up there. Then you waste ANOTHER 60-70% to convert the potential energy to electricity.
So out of all the energy you make with a windmill and convert to this hydroelectric source, you'll get roughly 15-16% back.
When you don't use electricity that is being generated you waste 100% of it no matter what the source. We are talking about how to store excess baseline capacity, this seems to work quite well.
shamus
-
Let's put some additional reasoning to this. If wind was such a great resource then why isn't being used predominantly now?! Or why isn't solar power being used more often. The answer is because it is not economical. Every one is for reusable power that doesn't pollute. No one is for paying higher utilities. Well except T. Boone Pickens and it seems the Democrats are. These are not brand new ideas folks. I've read and heard about wind and solar power for almost my whole life. Nothing new is being invented or just now coming to the front. Don't you think that if some one could make millions off of these technologies they would have already. Currently the only way that can be done is to force you to buy the technology through government mandate. That will be expensive!
When the technology is there and when the market is ready we will use Wind and Solar energy.
What Pickens is trying to do is stall any oil development and that is what the democrats are trying to do as well. Pickens wants to make more money and the Democrats want power over every aspect of your life.
As answered earlier.....This hasn't been done because with low cost oil it wasn't economic to do so. Now with high cost oil it makes more sense.
-
wait wait wait
WhyTF would you have to store wind power??????
It's a grid that is all connected and dependent on the load placed on it. for the most part it will allways be "on" even if the output varies.
There's no reason to store the electricity created by wind power as it is a SUPPLIMENT to our energy grid. There's no reason to store it at all. IT IS the back up. During peak times coal and other plants can run at one capacity and during lower peak times they can scale back.
Either way you are still ADDING a much needed source of CLEAN energy to the grid.
Back that up with a couple of solar farms like they are building in austrailia while you add a couple of nuke plants in the long term and viola. Problem not solved but at least much better.
-
Something else to be considered is that the power grid is not capable of distributing the total power produced. Every power transmission method uses some power for ever inch of distance the power travels.
I run a 4 megawatt back up facility that has the sole purpose of providing power to a 40 acre compound. I have significant losses getting the power across a street, let alone distributing it nationally. Not to mention that my main battery bank is a thousand batteries that cost three thousand each, that three million dollars for a bank that can produce 2.5 million Watts for "8 Minutes".
Futher power isn't like water, you cant just dump it on the grid, if the source is out of phase, under or over voltage, or insufficiently coupled (badly connected) your power source can dump the grid, and cause the safety trips to open blacking out all your users. In Texas the grid has been dumped at least once because a wind farm "ran a way" and dumped an enormous surge to the grid, all of Europe was blacked out at least once for the same reason.
So the question is where does the money come from to rebuild our grid? And who is going to force the thousands of individual owners to do it?
Regards,
Kevin
-
Ok someone is going to have to teach me why you can't store electricity from windmills? That just doesn't even see to come close to making sense.
Just to beat this dead horse I thought over time you'd be smarter than making a flippant comment like this. you've been around a while and still make these types of comments... I guess it is just your way of trolling through here.
-
yes there's gonna be loss through transmission but again there's loss through ALL power transmission.
Again if this is a SUPPLIMENT to our current system it could work.
-
Yup, Guns... mention solar and wind on the grid and folks jump up and down and holler about how it can't work....
... meanwhile; it is working.
Is it expected to supply ALL the energy on the grid? Nope. Is it expected to replace outright or in the immediate future the need for the LNG/Oil/Coal plants we currently have? Nope. Will it reduce the amount of LNG/Oil/Coal used? Nope... BUT WITH SOLAR AND WIND ON THE GRID the amount of LNG/OIL/Coal needed in the future (for the grid) will likely rise at a lower rate than the rise in demand for power.
Just a sure as there's christmas, we're gonna need more power tomorrow for the grid than we needed yesterday. Instead of building more coal/LNG/Oil plants to meet the increasing demands, add solar and wind and Nuclear.
"FU@&^%ing NOW, gentlemen!"
Hang
-
windmills kill condors, so you can't put them in Cal. they will have to put them in your back yard.
Lol John, that WAS a problem at first, so they made ALL the windmills in CA (there are a LOT of them, esp in the Mojave>>Bakersfield corridor) have transmissions, which make the blades spin painfully slow, making them less efficient, and greatly increasing the 1 million dollar cost of EACH windmill
-
Lol John, that WAS a problem at first, so they made ALL the windmills in CA (there are a LOT of them, esp in the Mojave>>Bakersfield corridor) have transmissions, which make the blades spin painfully slow, making them less efficient, and greatly increasing the 1 million dollar cost of EACH windmill
I don't know why they don't look into that helix spiral thing that one guy invented....let me find the link.
-
wait wait wait
WhyTF would you have to store wind power??????
It's a grid that is all connected and dependent on the load placed on it. for the most part it will allways be "on" even if the output varies.
There's no reason to store the electricity created by wind power as it is a SUPPLIMENT to our energy grid. There's no reason to store it at all. IT IS the back up. During peak times coal and other plants can run at one capacity and during lower peak times they can scale back.
Either way you are still ADDING a much needed source of CLEAN energy to the grid.
Back that up with a couple of solar farms like they are building in austrailia while you add a couple of nuke plants in the long term and viola. Problem not solved but at least much better.
Now theres the answer I have been searching for while reading this thread.
Also, the argument made by someone that you would need to build a new plant to serve as the back up to the windmills.......umm, dont we already have plants?
anyway, interesting thread :salute
-
Do you get Pickens is farming subsidies and not wind power? Does he tell you the carbon footprint of manufacturing and maintaining these colossals? What powers the plants that creates these windmills? Do you have any idea of how many will have to be built and maintained to produce only 20% of the United States electrical needs? Where the hell is that in Picken's "plan."
There is a reason the world depends on diesel powered watercraft and not sail boats. Just think, we've been perfecting wind powered boats for thousands of years and diesel still beats it. You seriously believe we're on the cusp of some wind breakthrough?
Only in America could they market the wind.
-
Do you get Pickens is farming subsidies and not wind power? Does he tell you the carbon footprint of manufacturing and maintaining these colossals? What powers the plants that creates these windmills? Do you have any idea of how many will have to be built and maintained to produce only 20% of the United States electrical needs? Where the hell is that in Picken's "plan."
There is a reason the world depends on diesel powered watercraft and not sail boats. Just think, we've been perfecting wind powered boats for thousands of years and diesel still beats it. You seriously believe we're on the cusp of some wind breakthrough?
Ahhh... right. Lets start pulling down the @ 75,000 turbines that are up.. cancel all orders for the ones in production, halt solar development and order a few thousand more tanker loads of light sweet saudi crude.
edit: I wonder what the 'carbon footprint' is for more of these:
(http://quay-capital.com/vlcc.jpg)
You got oil stock?
-
Only in America could they market the wind.
Denmark gets 20% of its electric power from wind. Spain, Portugal, Germany and Ireland are also big players. The US is just starting and has 1% or less. Wind is useful power source as *part* of an overall power system, not as the only power source.
-
Ahhh... right. Lets start pulling down the @ 75,000 turbines that are up.. cancel all orders for the ones in production, halt solar development and order a few thousand more tanker loads of light sweet saudi crude.
You got oil stock?
Let me splain something. You have many people in Texas worried about who is going to remove those eyesores after the subsidies run out and they are no longer federal money siphons. They wont be used for energy, they'll simply rot on the horizon.
We need to develop alternate energy sources, but we need a little more expertise than someone who has ridden on Disney's Carousel of Progress ride. They're reselling the WINDMILL. Does that strike you as odd? We have nuclear technology and they are deferring to centuries old technology - the windmill. Its a ruse of obstructionists, plain and simple.
What in the world is a more efficient use of wind energy than a sail boat? Is there anyway a sail boat could out perform a diesel powered boat? Could a sail boat match the performance of a diesel powered boat? Why do you think a windmill could match the performance of petroleum generated power?
You want something clean? WE HAVE IT! Nuclear. But Dimocrats aren't about solving, they are about obstructing.
-
herzogin cecile
-
edit: I wonder what the 'carbon footprint' is for more of these:
(http://quay-capital.com/vlcc.jpg)
You got oil stock?
Compared to what its traversing, next to nothing.
If you could eliminate the biggest CO2 producer in the world, would you?
The fact that you see the freighter and are oblivious to the ocean shows the power of propaganda.
Here's another point of view...
http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/5656
-
Theres no wind during the summer, only stifling humidity
-
Compared to what its traversing, next to nothing.
If you could eliminate the biggest CO2 producer in the world, would you?
The fact that you see the freighter and are oblivious to the ocean shows the power of propaganda.
---------
Well.. starting with sail vs engines in shipping... ones faster, more reliable, resistant to the vagaries of weather. The other is cheaper. When married up, wind power, supplementing engines, reduces costs. Is it for use 100% of the time? Nope. Does it work? Yup. Lotsa documentation on the web. And, I've sailed most of my life... yer not liable to convince me that wind is a dead end...
Lastly, building and operating ONE VLCC slaps a heluva lot bigger hit on the carbon footprint than an entire freaking forest of 'windmills'. Run one of them VLCC's onto a sandbar, tell me what the 'footprint' looks like then? VLCC's are built in Korea. 'Windmills' are coming outta GE in Wisconsin. The oil she's carrying was already paid for by tax dollars... who the hell guards the Straights of Hormuz? How many billion a year does that cost? The profits, pumped into an Arab Princes pocket, goes to schooling an entire generation of madras-programed jihadists..
... and yer upset about the view? LOL... I imagine the visible proof of America's Pride and Power and proof against all threats is ugly... like a battleship, or aircraft carrier. And, like San Francisoo "Not in My Harbor", enh?
Bullpuckey.
Every time I see a 'windmill' I see evidence of alternative energy being utilized... another barrel of saudi crap not coming ashore here. You may not like the look of a windmill... but I'd rather have 50 of 'em in view off my coast than one stinking drilling platform. You'll get to look at yours in Texas, I'll get to look at mine here off Long Island.
Frankly, given the choice of eyeballing a windmill vs eyeballing a nuke or coal fired plant... I'll take a windmill farm.
As fer propaganda... well, I wonder who's the sucker?
Hang
-
Frankly, given the choice of eyeballing a windmill vs eyeballing a nuke or coal fired plant... I'll take a windmill farm.
I truly dont this answer...Does any 'wind farm; equal a standard coal-fired power plant? And if not, how many windmills WOULD it take?
-
'Windmills' are coming outta GE in Wisconsin.
....
Frankly, given the choice of eyeballing a windmill vs eyeballing a nuke or coal fired plant... I'll take a windmill farm.
As fer propaganda... well, I wonder who's the sucker?
Hang
I sure hope its not General Electric GE, but I don't think they make windmills. What exactly do you find unattractive about a nuclear plant? They are pretty much geometrically benign. Seriously this not an aesthetic choice, but a practical choice.
-
Every time *I* see a windmill, I see a tax subsidy.
-
BJ and BT,
It's not I repeat NOT about replacement. The cost and time to get a nuke plant online is staggering. We havn't built one in decades plus the liberals (most of them) don't want them.
This isn't a fix, it's a suppliment. I don't want tax subsidies but there is ALOT of land out there doing absolutly nothing at all. We can put enough wind and solar farms on them to SUPPLIMENT our energy dependence while we build more nuke plants.....if you get the liberals in on it.
This is the problem there is NO energy plan.
SO what if we pay a farmer a few bucks to use his land. That doesn't mean he's sitting on his bellybutton collecting a check. Dollars to doughnuts he's still farming. We should be investing in these not blowing them off as tried and faild because THEY"VE NEVER BEEN TRIED HERE!
Add this to some tidal current generators and you have a good source of clean energy to SUPPLIMENT the current supply and as hangtime said DEMAND IS GOING TO RISE! do we buy more oil? burn more coal?
-
I sure hope its not General Electric GE, but I don't think they make windmills. What exactly do you find unattractive about a nuclear plant? They are pretty much geometrically benign. Seriously this not an aesthetic choice, but a practical choice.
Obviously... you have not even eyeballed the Pickens operation, or it's plan. Yes, it's General Electric. As for the Nuke... we had one here. They shut it down because there's no feasible evacuation plan to get 3.5 million people off this island over the 5 bridges lat connect it with the resta this insane nation in less than 2 weeks.
Every time *I* see a windmill, I see a tax subsidy.
In the 140 buck a barrel environment, it's profitable without subsidy.. as long as the same protections provided to the oil companies with regards to legal impediments mounted by environmentalists against drilling and nuke operators are applied. The 'yer messing up the view and endangering spotted owls' garbage has to cease.
-
Now you & Boone can use your own money for whatever you want. Nothing personal but if it's too expensive for you to invest your own money, it's just too expensive. End of story. Taking MY money and giving it to YOU for your private little project doesn't make the project economically justified. There are already too many government subsidies given to private/special interest groups. Now if the government wants my money to build nukes or a new electric grid or to develop solar technology or drill ANWR or similar for the good of the entire nation, I'm fine with that. :salute
Did you read my entire post or just immediately assume I was looking for a handout paid for with YOUR money?
Just imagine if 1000 people had 20Kw systems on their property. Again, 20Kw supplies 3 average homes. That means there are 3000 homes that no longer need to rely on energy directly from the power company. Ultimately your energy bill goes down because the power company isn't spending the money supply those 3000 homes. Now imagine this program extended across all the states. This doesn't help you how?
Your tax dollars are already being used to subsidize these programs whether you want them to or not. However, your tax dollars are going into installations that are usually only big enough to run the residence with maybe a little bit extra left over. So guess what? You get NO benefit from that. Wouldn't you rather have your tax dollars being allocated to programs that show you a little payback and help us get off oil dependancy?
Take a look at the economic impact that rising fuel costs has had on this country. Guess what, if you think its bad now, stick around, because its only going to get worse. I don't know what state you are in, but I'll bet when you pay your electric bill there is a little line item on there that says "energy assistance program" You know what that is? Those are YOUR dollars going being paid into a fund that pays for the energy used by people who can't pay for their power. As the cost of energy continues to go up, the amount you are going to pay for this little gem of a program is also going to go up. Do you think that's fair? What's your payback on that?
Is wind/solar going to generate 100% of the US requirement? Not a chance, but, we have to start somewhere.
-
Obviously... you have not even eyeballed the Pickens operation, or it's plan. Yes, it's General Electric. As for the Nuke... we had one here. They shut it down because there's no feasible evacuation plan to get 3.5 million people off this island over the 5 bridges lat connect it with the resta this insane nation in less than 2 weeks.
In the 140 buck a barrel environment, it's profitable without subsidy.. as long as the same protections provided to the oil companies with regards to legal impediments mounted by environmentalists against drilling and nuke operators are applied. The 'yer messing up the view and endangering spotted owls' garbage has to cease.
So General Electric is going to stop doing business in Iran and sell us windmills? I really wish it wasn't General Electric because I can no longer discuss his plan objectively, and it really does fail objectively. But I have no use for GE, so I can't discuss it objectively.
-
So General Electric is going to stop doing business in Iran and sell us windmills?
your statement (without support) makes as much sense as a football bat
-
your statement (without support) makes as much sense as a football bat
While Iranian IED's were killing American soldiers in Iraq, GE was doing business in Iran.
-
While Iranian IED's were killing American soldiers in Iraq, GE was doing business in Iran.
were they building power plants?
-
I'll save you the trouble
"GE did about $270 million in business last year in Iran, representing less than 1% of its revenue, Sheffer said. Through a foreign subsidiary, GE has provided hydroelectric equipment, medical equipment, and oil and gas equipment in Iran."
Is what I could find. This doesn't sound bad to be as usually this kind of stuff is allowed even with sanctions. However, they have stated they have stopped doing business in iran. This was 2005.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/manufacturing/2005-02-02-ge-iran_x.htm
-
were they building power plants?
Parts for them.
-
Is wind/solar going to generate 100% of the US requirement? Not a chance, but, we have to start somewhere.
I agree with this statement. I think we disagree on the potential set of solutions which are capable of making a real difference. Putting solar on one's roof, or similar, should be encouraged but not subsidized. It's a feel good project but has too many moving parts if scaled to a size capable of making a real difference in solving the US energy problem. I'm more than willing to subsidize energy projects that are large/massive enough and robust enough to make a difference. For electricity alone, the US needs the equivalent of at least 50 to 100 new nukes over the next 30-50 years to make a significant improvement in both energy and emissions (reduce coal).
-
I'll save you the trouble
"GE did about $270 million in business last year in Iran, representing less than 1% of its revenue, Sheffer said. Through a foreign subsidiary, GE has provided hydroelectric equipment, medical equipment, and oil and gas equipment in Iran."
Is what I could find. This doesn't sound bad to be as usually this kind of stuff is allowed even with sanctions. However, they have stated they have stopped doing business in iran. This was 2005.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/manufacturing/2005-02-02-ge-iran_x.htm
Its USA based company could not under USA laws about USA based companies dealing with countries sponsoring terrorism. However, their foreign subsidiaries can.
-
There have always been skeptics.
- The earth is flat.
- The sun spins around the earth.
- Balloons can't fly.
- Airplanes can't fly.
- Airplanes can't fly without propellers.
- Airplanes can't fly past the speed of sound.
- Man can't live in space.
- Man can't land on the moon.
- Computers can't be smaller than a refridgerator.
Do you see a pattern?
- Windmills can't produce enough energy.
-
So General Electric is going to stop doing business in Iran and sell us windmills? I really wish it wasn't General Electric because I can no longer discuss his plan objectively, and it really does fail objectively. But I have no use for GE, so I can't discuss it objectively.
LOL... 'discuss the plan objectively?" Dude, you've never even read the damn plan.... and yah haven't yet objectively addressed the issues.
"It's GE?" <head twirl and shoulder roll> "..talk to the hand!"
What kinda car yah drive? Ford? Chevy? They do more business in Iran than GE does. Like Coke? Pepsi? They're in Iran. Goodyear; Polaroid, Yup. All these outfits, and more; are doing business in Iran. Who's yer bank? Betcha they're doin business there. Lastly... oh, and this is rich... BUY ANY STINKING FOREIGN OIL LATELY? OR DO YAH RIDE A FREAKIN BICYCLE?
See yah at wallmart, bub. While we're waiting on the checkout line we can discuss what a rotten bucha dicks those outfits are... imagine; doing business with the enemy. Oh, by the way, give my regards to Chairman Mao's ghost and the resta the little crooked commie bastards and murdering fanatics we're doing business with on this planet. Oh, and don't forget to tip the illegal's cutting yer lawn. #wink#wink#
Wake the hell up, america.
-
I could bring up a certain family that did buisness with Nazi Germany during WW2...
-
I guess everyone has become a slave to marketing. If they tell us it is true, then it must be true.
His plan is a pure snowjob. An excellent marketing document. They tried a small wind farm here once. After 5 years it was pulled down. Had it gone on line, it would have cost five times more to run than other alternatives.
The maintenance costs for wind power is as high as a nuclear power plant while generating a micro amount of the power a nuclear plant does,
Sure, if you like short term thinking, then go for it. This is definitely short term thinking at its finest.
The problem here is, there are other alternatives, that actually work. They are not being discussed because no one has bothered to write a marketing paper for them, like this gentleman has. Our country is a country of short term thinking though. Even though it creates more problems than it solves, no one seems to care and we keep doing it over and over again.
I remember when this same argument was about nuclear power plants. Well, long term, those have not held up to what everyone expected and was told. There was another time when coal plants were all the rage as well. We know how that went. I guess, eventually, we will get decent power solutions. We just have to wait until someone with enough money decides for us that it is time for those solutions.
As most have noticed, if you have bothered to read any of my diatribes, I do not delve in specifics. That is because I could care less about mankind anymore. I do not think it is worth salvaging at this point in time. After going through the number of idiotic investors I have gone through, I finally quit beating my head against the wall. I am not nearly as frustrated as I used to be.
Here is a bone to consider. You do not need to store electricity to have a power backup solution to your primary service. The Sun can be used to generate primary power, and that power can continue over night as well, without using batteries or some other electrical storage device. I know, because I am doing it. It will cost me some maintenance. About one to two hundred dollars a year. I'll have more precise numbers in a few years.
In the meantime, go back to your marketing plan and keep telling yourself, and others, how grand it is. At least it has some comic value.
-
I want to add this as a separate post. Here is how I know no one is really serious about this. If you were, your home would be using an air conditioner that consumes 1/2 the power of the current ones available in the market. If you were serious, your heating would use 1/3 the power of the current units. If you were serious, your home would need 1/2 the power it needs now.
All the above is technology available today. Yet, you will never see it in your lifetime. How do I know it is available? I invented it all and eventually it will be in my home. I am not rich, so it will take a long time to get done. You will not find patents on it. It does not exist. No one wants it to exist. I am bitter enough about it, that my home will be destroyed when I die and so will all my creations.
But keep ranting about how we *need* better solutions for power. I am sure there is a marketing plan out there you can sink your teeth into and get behind.
-
You should do the right thing because it's right, not because others approve or disapprove of it.
-
It is not about approval. It is about money. I have spent all my life savings on my ideas. I have no retirement. I will work until the day I die. If I lose my home, I can assure you I will destroy all my work and documentation.
For some reason, I thought investors would jump on the ideas. I was wrong. I made a serious error in judgement. You see, the investors want full disclosure on the idea before they decide to invest. Showing them it works is not enough. Of course, I know what has happened to many inventors in the past when they did that. They lost everything as the investor simply stole the idea, and claimed it for themselves.
It is the nature of our society. It took me a long time to come to grips with the fact that I will never be rich and should simply stop wasting my time trying. My time is better spent figuring out ways to reduce my cost of living so I can hang on to my home when I finally get to the point where they will no longer allow me to work.
You can take all the idealistic crap and shove it. There will always be some rich person who will be happy to provide a marketing plan the masses will drool over.
-
I truly dont this answer...Does any 'wind farm; equal a standard coal-fired power plant? And if not, how many windmills WOULD it take?
A typical 3 mw wind turbine has a rotor diameter of about 300 feet, and is 400+ ft high. Whilst it's rated at 3 mw, it will typically generate about 750 kw/h an hour.
Coal power stations vary in size greatly. The largest in the US that I know of is a 3.4 gigawatt plant. For comparison I'll use a 2 gw plant.
The coal power station has a much higher load factor, which means it produces a much higher percentage of it's theoretical power. A 2 gw plant will typically generate 1.5 gw/h an hour, on average.
That means you need 2,000 3mw wind turbines to equal the power of one large coal plant.
-
Bones I'm not feeding you any crap. If it seems like the right thing that no one deserves to know, then do it. I just thought it was inconsistent to attempt to spread something as needed as that, and be put off by a few bad apples.
-
Just in case you haven't seen these yet:
http://www.energy.ca.gov/research/innovations/index.html - 30 grants/yr at 50 to 90 thousand bucks in this one.. Evaluated by experts... I dunno if this conflicts with your intention to keep the specifics under wraps for now.
http://www.dodsbir.net/solicitation/default.htm
-
That is a clumsy poor mans argument. The most cheritable and caring people I know are rich. There are stingy rich people who care for only themselves, but to paint them all the same is ignorant. It is like calling all poor people lazy and stupid. You can't say such things. You are not contributing to this argument by making such careless comparisons.
Well said.
-
It has always seemed to me that solar and wind power are usually best as point of use energy sources. With a grid backup, generated by nuclear or clean coal technology.
And yes, get a lot smarter about the kinds of appliances we use and the size and quality of our home construction.
Bones,
No offense intended, but when you state your case like that, you sound a little like one of Art Bell's guests. :D
Seriously dude, your work sound interesting. I'd consult a patent attorney. It might cost what, 15k for a patent? You could scrape that together in a year of delivering pizza’s at night and weekends. Or mowing grass. If you had a patent pending and a functioning prototype, I don’t see how you’d have any problem acquiring some venture capital.
Good luck.
Wab
-
It is not about approval. It is about money. I have spent all my life savings on my ideas. I have no retirement. I will work until the day I die. If I lose my home, I can assure you I will destroy all my work and documentation.
For some reason, I thought investors would jump on the ideas. I was wrong. I made a serious error in judgement. You see, the investors want full disclosure on the idea before they decide to invest. Showing them it works is not enough. Of course, I know what has happened to many inventors in the past when they did that. They lost everything as the investor simply stole the idea, and claimed it for themselves.
It is the nature of our society. It took me a long time to come to grips with the fact that I will never be rich and should simply stop wasting my time trying. My time is better spent figuring out ways to reduce my cost of living so I can hang on to my home when I finally get to the point where they will no longer allow me to work.
You can take all the idealistic crap and shove it. There will always be some rich person who will be happy to provide a marketing plan the masses will drool over.
You aren't Joseph Newman are you? If you aren't you should touch base with him - google him
-
LOL... 'discuss the plan objectively?" Dude, you've never even read the damn plan.... and yah haven't yet objectively addressed the issues.
"It's GE?" <head twirl and shoulder roll> "..talk to the hand!"
What kinda car yah drive? Ford? Chevy? They do more business in Iran than GE does. Like Coke? Pepsi? They're in Iran. Goodyear; Polaroid, Yup. All these outfits, and more; are doing business in Iran. Who's yer bank? Betcha they're doin business there. Lastly... oh, and this is rich... BUY ANY STINKING FOREIGN OIL LATELY? OR DO YAH RIDE A FREAKIN BICYCLE?
See yah at wallmart, bub. While we're waiting on the checkout line we can discuss what a rotten bucha dicks those outfits are... imagine; doing business with the enemy. Oh, by the way, give my regards to Chairman Mao's ghost and the resta the little crooked commie bastards "and murdering fanatics we're doing business with on this planet. Oh, and don't forget to tip the illegal's cutting yer lawn. #wink#wink#
Wake the hell up, america.
"Dude" (what are you - 15?) do you think Pickens is the first to milk the windmill subsidies? I've read about whats going on in Texas and the opposition to it. As far as the rest of the stuff, you're off in space. Have a nice trip and let me know when you get back.
-
windmills kill condors, so you can't put them in Cal. they will have to put them in your back yard.
well that puts you as a little beehind! :lol
(http://bp1.blogger.com/_RqUhovIgvaQ/R6fqtkjekgI/AAAAAAAAABY/bys-6grRQJs/s400/2007wind.jpg)
-
BJ and BT,
It's not I repeat NOT about replacement. The cost and time to get a nuke plant online is staggering. We havn't built one in decades plus the liberals (most of them) don't want them.
This isn't a fix, it's a suppliment. I don't want tax subsidies but there is ALOT of land out there doing absolutly nothing at all. We can put enough wind and solar farms on them to SUPPLIMENT our energy dependence while we build more nuke plants.....if you get the liberals in on it.
This is the problem there is NO energy plan.
SO what if we pay a farmer a few bucks to use his land. That doesn't mean he's sitting on his bellybutton collecting a check. Dollars to doughnuts he's still farming. We should be investing in these not blowing them off as tried and faild because THEY"VE NEVER BEEN TRIED HERE!
Add this to some tidal current generators and you have a good source of clean energy to SUPPLIMENT the current supply and as hangtime said DEMAND IS GOING TO RISE! do we buy more oil? burn more coal?
I dont disagree with that at all Gunslinger, but there are a LOT of people (in Congress too, lol) that wind and solar CAN replace fossil fuels in generating electricity. I'm thinking we use more coal than oil in producing power anyway...not sure. (Though obviously, ANYthing helps)All that stopping coal does is make the global warming people happy. Biggest use of oil is vehicles, I'd imagine, wish something would come up there
-
T Boone Pickens plan is to make himself richer. While this is absolutely commendable, the fact that he's hiding it and trying to make himself seem noble and driven with a High Purpose is not.
"The man who wishes for the government to adopt and enforce HIS ideas, is the kind of man who's ideas are idiotic."
ever heard of the quantum group? i bet you will find a whole lot of his money tied up there.
if this thing happens, there stock holdings will go thru the roof!!
i have a few of the same pieces they have, and for money making, pay attention to the big boy's who know how too do it!!
as for the plan we have the wind here so why not, but it would be better located in the north east to provide power to help get off fuel oil, to heat those homes!! that being said am still happy with the plan for another reason, if this thing gets built,
i will get to help build it! guaranteed work for the next year or more, ye ha :rock
-
Amazing... what a buncha freakin whiners..... I guess y'all figure that we should wait for Exxon or the Dept Of Energy to solve the energy crisis? Who the hell was it in the McCain campaign that said the american public was a buncha puzzies waiting on a free lunch? The guy was right.... look at you guys!
Yup; the guy is an old 'Big Oil' hound... and better yet, he made his bones by devouring larger oil companies... the guy is a regular wall-street raider. His political tricks are also well known. Since when did it become dis-reputable to eat a poorly managed company or make a damn profit? So he kicked Kerry in the balls... I don't consider that dirty pool... the lyin' hoot tossed his medals over the freakin white house fence... bastard deserved a kick in the balls.
Pickens has also recognized the handwriting on the wall... and sees an opportunity to make some more bucks, this time by creating a new type of energy company business model that can provide a not insignificant bump to power on the grid.
As for the technology... sure; storing electricity from turbines and solar fields is problematic, but there is absolutely no denying that it generates power... a hell of a lot of it, and that none of it will be 'wasted'... and yes, it will not; by itself, replace oil or LNG.... but it WILL make a big assed dent in the use of oil and LNG for power on the grids this system will supply. Add in re-deployment of nuclear, plus conversion of oil to LNG and hybrids for transportation and we'll be heading off down the road towards energy independence.... and we can get started NOW... he's already got proven systems up and running... on his dime. (not yours or mine)
So, aside from the fact that he's making a buck, and the libs hate his politics, anybody got any valid reasons why he should be dismissed as 'irrelevant'?
.... or shall we all just sit here and whine while we wait for the government to solve ourenergy problems?
Hang
:aok
-
I'm thinking we use more coal than oil in producing power anyway...not sure.
Coal produces 50% of the electricity in the US. Oil produces about 1%, usually used only for backups when primary electric system is down.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epat1p1.html#_ftn2
-
Coal produces 50% of the electricity in the US. Oil produces about 1%, usually used only for backups when primary electric system is down.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epat1p1.html#_ftn2
Well coal and oil are both fossil fuels and come from the same peat. I think oil and petroleum are used interchangeably in discussions like this. I take it to mean oil, coal and natural gas. Its irrelevant to the discussion, since the real point is the advantages of conventional fossil fuels over developing alternate energy sources. If someone is discussing clean coal technology, then I guess its important.
-
In the 140 buck a barrel environment, it's profitable without subsidy..
Trouble is, there's about as many oil-fired power plants near hear as there are coal-powered cars.
-
Bones I'm not feeding you any crap. If it seems like the right thing that no one deserves to know, then do it. I just thought it was inconsistent to attempt to spread something as needed as that, and be put off by a few bad apples.
My apologies if my post came across as personally directed at you. It was not.
It has always seemed to me that solar and wind power are usually best as point of use energy sources. With a grid backup, generated by nuclear or clean coal technology.
And yes, get a lot smarter about the kinds of appliances we use and the size and quality of our home construction.
Bones,
No offense intended, but when you state your case like that, you sound a little like one of Art Bell's guests. :D
Seriously dude, your work sound interesting. I'd consult a patent attorney. It might cost what, 15k for a patent? You could scrape that together in a year of delivering pizza’s at night and weekends. Or mowing grass. If you had a patent pending and a functioning prototype, I don’t see how you’d have any problem acquiring some venture capital.
Good luck.
Wab
I know how much a patent costs. If I spend all my spare time working to get money to pay an attorney, then I would not have time to invest in my projects. As it stands, I will never be able to complete all my projects in my lifetime due to lack of time and money.
I know what the posts sound like. Some nut case waving a banner around saying, "Look at me! Look at me!". Does not hurt my feelings if that is what anyone thinks. Frankly, I would not blame you. A good dose of skepticism is what keeps most ideas grounded in reality.
Mr. Pickens could have and should have used a bit more skepticism before plunging head long into a project that simply cannot work.
You aren't Joseph Newman are you? If you aren't you should touch base with him - google him
Funny. Not unexpected though. You would be surprised how close you are to capturing the attitude of most people when confronted with something they do not understand.
-
Mr. Pickens could have and should have used a bit more skepticism before plunging head long into a project that simply cannot work.
As noted above, the only thing which needs to work about a T. Boone Pickens scheme is that T. Boone Pickens gets paid. That may yet happen.
-
Well coal and oil are both fossil fuels and come from the same peat. I think oil and petroleum are used interchangeably in discussions like this. I take it to mean oil, coal and natural gas. Its irrelevant to the discussion, since the real point is the advantages of conventional fossil fuels over developing alternate energy sources. If someone is discussing clean coal technology, then I guess its important.
I think most of media do that too---the only problem is there is no shortage of coal--we are the Saudi Arabia of coal. A lot of the "we gotta get alternative energy now' crows are really global warming nutbergers,--as that would be the only reason to get away from coal, and to not drill the umteen billions of barrrels of oil we have laying about. . But as most liberals, never have the cajones to come out and announce their end goal (NO creation of 'greenhouse' gas), we are left with the windmill thing....nice idea mind you, nut not the big necessity it's made out to be. Transportation is where the problem lies, and it's not so easy to lessen that consumption without hurting the economy, the prohibitive taxes on which pays for heap many government programs
-
It is not about approval. It is about money. I have spent all my life savings on my ideas. I have no retirement. I will work until the day I die. If I lose my home, I can assure you I will destroy all my work and documentation.
For some reason, I thought investors would jump on the ideas. I was wrong. I made a serious error in judgement. You see, the investors want full disclosure on the idea before they decide to invest. Showing them it works is not enough. Of course, I know what has happened to many inventors in the past when they did that. They lost everything as the investor simply stole the idea, and claimed it for themselves.
It is the nature of our society. It took me a long time to come to grips with the fact that I will never be rich and should simply stop wasting my time trying. My time is better spent figuring out ways to reduce my cost of living so I can hang on to my home when I finally get to the point where they will no longer allow me to work.
You can take all the idealistic crap and shove it. There will always be some rich person who will be happy to provide a marketing plan the masses will drool over.
Whine, whine, whine. squeak, squeak, squeak. Blame your apparent failures on someone else. When everything falls apart, it's not your problem, but theirs.
You are a failure because you have accepted it. Hell, you probably accepted it way before you started. Getting something done requires tenacity, and drive.
But then again, had everyone quit when things became remotely difficult, we'd probably still be swinging copper swords at each other.
-
Pouring in money, despite not having much of it, till the end of his life, whether he'll manage to finish the project or die trying, that's not drive and tenacity?
-
Pouring in money, despite not having much of it, till the end of his life, whether he'll manage to finish the project or die trying, that's not drive and tenacity?
He's already quit. It's apparent.
-
The only thing I have quit on is people. I will complete as many of my ideas I can before I die. I am not a failure. Society is a failure. If you think I am feeling sorry for myself, then you have completely misinterpreted my postings.
There comes a point when you realize that beating your head against a wall only hurts your head. It does not take a rocket scientist to know when to quit wasting time and money on people who have no need for cheaper/cleaner power.
Tell me laser, how many ideas have you gotten funded in your lifetime? Just curious.
-
Actually, I'm in the process of doing it now. Successfully.
It's always society's failure. Never yours.
-
Then, of course, there is the 2.6 TRILLION Cubic feet of natural gas in the Destin Dome, already tapped just waiting for approval to start bringing it in... We have coal reserves out the wazoo, We ARE the Saudi Arabia of coal.... We should be making as much use of coal as possible to relieve pressure on petroleum supplies. If we increased oil production or replace usage of oil by a mere 2 to 3 million barrels/day (ANWR ALONE is capable of supplying 1M/barrels/day for approximately 35 years) We could actually see Pre-Y2K gas prices.
We DO need alternatives but we have an energy crisis NOW, right now and we should be attacking the problem from every damn angle possible, not just hoping for one or 2 "maybes" that are as yet unproven. Coal, nuclear power, oil and natural gas should be on an immediate short list, corn ethanol needs to be scrapped because it is a net energy loser.
I might also add that 30 Million illegal aliens consume a lot of energy every day... It's time to get that burden off of our economy altogether. I know I personally drive far less now than ever, every trip to any store is well planned, sometimes days in advance and I only shop at certain stores (like best buy) when the routing is convenient according to my schedule.
T Boone Pickens should be calling for more use of consistent naturally generated power such as hydro-electric dams. We have several in my state and not only do they provide clean, safe energy but also provide some mighty fine fishing holes! ;-)
If they made me dictator for a day, i'd cut alllllll of the red tape and BS expense energy companies have to contend with in order to produce energy. That alone would sink the speculation in the marketplace now.
My 2 cents worth...
-
Actually, I'm in the process of doing it now. Successfully.
It's always society's failure. Never yours.
Congratulations and good luck to you.
You do not know me, nor my history, and it serves no purpose to explain all that mess. If I have a failure it is that I made the mistake of trusting people would honor their word and/or contracts.