Alternative energy proponent, chairman of BP Capital, T. Boone Pickens, is pushing a plan to "turn the US into the Saudi Arabia of wind power."
He believes that by using the potential of wind power, the US can abolish its dependency on foreign oil, and help revive its economy with money going to rural areas with great wind energy potential like the Dakotas.
The plan, dubbed "The Pickens Plan", was introduced today to the media. Mr. Pickens, a billionaire, will now launch a national ad campaign trying to convince any future administration to follow his plan. His people promise Mr. Pickens face will be as recognizable as the faces of the two US election candidates come November. Could he be interested in running as an independent?
Here's the reasoning of the Pickens Plan, from Pickensplan.com:
"The Department of Energy reports that 20% of America's electricity can come from wind. North Dakota alone has the potential to provide power for more than a quarter of the country... In one year, a 3-megawatt wind turbine produces as much energy as 12,000 barrels of imported oil."
...
"Building wind facilities in the corridor that stretches from the Texas panhandle to North Dakota could produce 20% of the electricity for the United States at a cost of $1 trillion. It would take another $200 billion to build the capacity to transmit that energy to cities and towns."
T. Boone Pickens, an investor and business man ranked in Forbes as one of the richest people in the US, is the founder and chairman of BP Capital Management, an energy investment firm.
A quick look at his biography paints a picture of an 1980s agressive, ruthless oil man who seemed to have changed, and now supports environmental causes like alternative energy and a ban on the slaughter of horses. In 2007, he publically declared he supports Rudy Guiliani for presidency.
Here's the USA Today story.
Here's a video of T. Boone Pickens explaining his plan.
It is important to use every means of reducing our dependance on foreign oil. Wind is only one of many. It would be nice if the government were giving funds to alternative sources of fuel in the amounts that it sends aid to other nations. It is time to limit our sending money to other nations until we improve our own nations needs.
In Denmark 20% of the electricity we use, comes from wind.. We have about 5.000 windmills, and if we had 25.000 it could cover all the electricity we use... I know Denmark is a lot smaller than USA, but it's not impossible to get a huge amount of electricity from wind ... btw, if USA showed the world that wind was the way to go, more contries would probably follow ....
Picken's plan has some issues. Wind is nice, but in many places the wind blows mostly at night, when electricity demand is lowest. To make up for peak demand during the day you still need coal, gas or best nuclear. LNG is a decent fuel...but it has the minor problem of being much more explosive than gasoline.
tboone pickens another another peewee from texas toast.why sure put one in my back yard heck my back yard is two hundred miles down there! i'll never see the dam thing anyway. two reasons: you can tax both wind and cng.solar what a nasty word how do we tax the sun.maybe ol,t boom is eating those [ralph] nader-nuts??
wind power is not really an option here where i live....not enough wind....also i would like to add that our dependence on oil is not going to disappear...not with all of the products we use that need petroleum to be manufactured....plates, cups, containers the list really does go on and on...
Wind power will not solve any problems. However, it will be a part of an overall solution which includes solar and geothermal and tidal and "cleaned" coal and hydro and possibly even nuclear. But the MOST important thing is USING LESS ENERGY. The problem with wind power is it is often not steady. However, depending on the area, it could provide power surges exactly when they are needed, because high wind usually happens when it is unusually hot or unusually cold, and that is EXACTLY when people use more electricity.We need to end our dependence on oil for energy, there is no doubt. The Saudi Oil Minister puts it this way: The stone age did not end because we ran out of stones.
It's a start, but we need more nuclear power plants and the ability to drill for the 20 BILLION barrels of oil in ANWR. By the way, don't plan on putting any of those wind power things off the coast in San Francisco, Nancy Pelosi won't allow it. One more thing, this Mr. Pickens looks like he doesn't have to worry about the price of gasoline.
Without big plans like this, energy will always be a problem. If I recall correctly, the hoover dam was much like this. Prohibitively expensive (around $625 million), but has generated about $85 billion in power over 60 years. For a trillion dollars and 20% of our country's current energy needs, this wind farm should pay for itself in just 2155 years. Hmm... :-/ Now that I've crunched the numbers, I think I'll change my vote.
sorry, typo: should read 20 billion in ANWR
As Mscrowe states, it is a start. However, anyone who thinks wind will ever replace what oil does for us is sadly mistaken. The US burns 22 million barrels of oil a day. So we'd need .. oh, roughly a 700,000 of those 12,000 barrel a year wind turbines to replace it.And as for ANWR ... you do realize that those 200 billion barrels are less than 6 months supply. Personally I don't think delaying our inevitable oil crunch for6 months is worth destroying that wilderness forever ... but I'm sure we will end up drilling there eventually. But that has more to do with $ then sound energy policy.