metspitzer wrote:
He has been telling us for quite a few weeks that he has a plan.

Why waste money on commercials saying you will be telling us something
in the future?

I have something to say......I will be saying it in the next few
weeks.


He's now saying it and he makes sense. The Harry Reeds in DC would
prefer we sit around with our thumbs up our ass blaming oil company profits.

On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 18:10:42 -0500, metspitzer
wrote:

He has been telling us for quite a few weeks that he has a plan.

Why waste money on commercials saying you will be telling us something
in the future?

I have something to say......I will be saying it in the next few
weeks.


BTW it will be.............I want you tax payers to pay for the grid I
need so I can start selling you wind power instead of oil.

I suspected the ad, "next few weeks", would imply his web site as a
start. Not been there yet.

He called history the largest transfer of wealth to foreigners...

On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 18:25:03 -0400, Frank
frankdotlogullo@comcastperiodnet wrote:

The Harry Reeds in DC would
prefer we sit around with our thumbs up our ass blaming oil company profits.

Did you know Harry is AKA "Pinky", by his constituents?

Described as Pelosi in a dress (non-constituents), but his nic is
really Pinky.

He has been telling us for quite a few weeks that he has a plan.

Why waste money on commercials saying you will be telling us something
in the future?

I have something to say......I will be saying it in the next few
weeks.


BTW it will be.............I want you tax payers to pay for the grid I
need so I can start selling you wind power instead of oil.

metspitzer wrote:
He has been telling us for quite a few weeks that he has a plan.

Why waste money on commercials saying you will be telling us something
in the future?

I have something to say......I will be saying it in the next few
weeks.


BTW it will be.............I want you tax payers to pay for the grid I
need so I can start selling you wind power instead of oil.

He wants to build wind farms. Using his own, and investor, money. It won't
cost the taxpayer anything - it will cost the consumer something like
$3.00/month to pay for the transmission lines.

Not in Texas, though. Texas has its own electrical grid. It's not connected
to the national grid. This means that one or two levels of regulatory
approval are not necessary to build transmission towers.

Still, to build transmission lines from the wind farms to where the power
will be needed will require rights-of-way. Because of fuddy-duddies, this
will probably require imminent domain, court cases, new state laws,
pay-offs, and mostly, time.

On Jul 22, 6:10*pm, metspitzer wrote:
He has been telling us for quite a few weeks that he has a plan.

Why waste money on commercials saying you will be telling us something
in the future?

I have something to say......I will be saying it in the next few
weeks.

BTW it will be.............I want you tax payers to pay for the grid I
need so I can start selling you wind power instead of oil.

He not only has a plan, but is one hundred billion times richer,
and smarter than you, and your idiotic post, and measly bank account.

He is worth Billions and is putting 10 Billion into Wind of his
own.

What the **** has Buch done, answer nothing. This issue has been a
key to our demise for 50 years and no ****in government of mine has
done **** to not keep us from being held hostage to imported energy
from enemys. Gee we dont even have a upgraded insulation policy for
homes... Gee we still allow 82% non condensing boilers and furnaces to
be sold. In a country as we IMPORT 80% of our oil.

Did you know England many many years ago banned non condensing
heating units, and England Exports oil, that move in itself saves a
minimum of 11 % in winter Ng consumption!!!. Its the stupid **** like
this that has gotten us broke, its the stupid **** like this that
leaves us with no plan. No wonder we consume 25% of the Worlds
resources of energy and have 5% of the population. **** Butch and the
4x4 Hummer GM burn it like we can attitude, and the old guard thats
brought this crap on to us. But only so far T Boone Pickens, has any
plan,

I say you listen to new air, and stop breathin the Old ****...

"metspitzer" wrote in message
...
He has been telling us for quite a few weeks that he has a plan.

Why waste money on commercials saying you will be telling us something
in the future?

I have something to say......I will be saying it in the next few
weeks.


BTW it will be.............I want you tax payers to pay for the grid I
need so I can start selling you wind power instead of oil.


He has a website:

http://hboonepickens.com

"freckles" wrote in message
...

"metspitzer" wrote in message
...
He has been telling us for quite a few weeks that he has a plan.

Why waste money on commercials saying you will be telling us something
in the future?

I have something to say......I will be saying it in the next few
weeks.


BTW it will be.............I want you tax payers to pay for the grid I
need so I can start selling you wind power instead of oil.


He has a website:

http://hboonepickens.com (wrong)

http://tboonepickens.com (corrected)

On Jul 22, 8:37*pm, metspitzer wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:31:21 -0700 (PDT), ransley





wrote:
On Jul 22, 6:10*pm, metspitzer wrote:
He has been telling us for quite a few weeks that he has a plan.

Why waste money on commercials saying you will be telling us something
in the future?

I have something to say......I will be saying it in the next few
weeks.

BTW it will be.............I want you tax payers to pay for the grid I
need so I can start selling you wind power instead of oil.

* He not only has a plan, but is one hundred billion times richer,
and smarter than you, and your idiotic post, and measly bank account.

* He is worth Billions and is putting 10 Billion into Wind of his
own.

* What the **** has Buch done, answer nothing. This issue has been a
key to our demise for 50 years and no ****in government of mine has
done **** to not keep us from being held hostage to imported energy
from enemys. Gee we dont even have a upgraded insulation policy for
homes... Gee we still allow 82% non condensing boilers and furnaces to
be sold. In a country as we IMPORT 80% of our oil.

* Did you know England many many years ago banned non condensing
heating units, and England Exports oil, that move in itself saves a
minimum of *11 % in winter Ng consumption!!!. Its the stupid **** like
this that has gotten us broke, its the stupid **** like this that
leaves us with no plan. No wonder we consume 25% of the Worlds
resources of energy and have 5% of the population. ***** Butch and the
4x4 Hummer GM burn it like we can attitude, and the old guard thats
brought this crap on to us. *But only *so far T Boone Pickens, has any
plan,

* * I say you listen to new air, *and stop breathin the Old ****....

Bush has managed to protect the oil flow for his oil family, and T
Boone's so far.

Without US drilling, when the global oil runs out, guess who will be
sitting on the last of it?

Tell us how you made your billions?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You like all the rest, miss the point, totaly.. Its about not buying
energy , its not buying energy from enemies, its about self
sufficency- national security- nondependance on 3rd world Crooks. If
we were smart enough we would not be spending hundreds of billions and
thousands of lifes a year in areas that really dont matter. WHO
actualy gives a **** if Muslems overtake the world in religon , I
dont. I care about USA, and our independance to the world like it was
until the 1950s.

Did you know Germany has a plan to be 30% solar by 2030 and will
beat that time frame, its plan IS working. We have NO PLAN.

And here we still allow to be sold the 8mpg city Hummer and
Incandesant electric bulb, an electric heater by definition. A
lighting apliance that puts out no more than 3-7 watts of light for
every 100 watts it consumes, its all quite dumb if you think about it,
as is the US consuming 25% of the worlds energy.

Wake up, the US has had and has NO ENERGY CONSERVATION SELF
SUFFUCENCY PLAN, or ENERGY CONCERN, and you sucker, are the looser,
YOU wake up. OUR " PLAN " IS military , which is BS, and it
includes nuclear !!!

ransley wrote:

He not only has a plan, but is one hundred billion times richer,
and smarter than you, and your idiotic post, and measly bank account.

He is worth Billions and is putting 10 Billion into Wind of his
own.

What the **** has Buch done, answer nothing. This issue has been a
key to our demise for 50 years and no ****in government of mine has
done **** to not keep us from being held hostage to imported energy
from enemys. Gee we dont even have a upgraded insulation policy for
homes... Gee we still allow 82% non condensing boilers and furnaces to
be sold. In a country as we IMPORT 80% of our oil.

Did you know England many many years ago banned non condensing
heating units, and England Exports oil, that move in itself saves a
minimum of 11 % in winter Ng consumption!!!. Its the stupid **** like
this that has gotten us broke, its the stupid **** like this that
leaves us with no plan.

We're not broke. The increase in the U.S. economy for the past two years,
just the INCREASE, is greater than the entire gross domestic product of
China.


Besides, if I WANT a non-condensing boiler and am willing to pay for it,
what the **** business is it of the government? What's a non-condensing
boiler anyway?


No wonder we consume 25% of the Worlds
resources of energy and have 5% of the population.

I agree that's a problem. If it were up to me, we'd be using 50% of the
world's energy. Not take it away from the rest of the world, mind you, just
use more.

**** Butch and the
4x4 Hummer GM burn it like we can attitude, and the old guard thats
brought this crap on to us. But only so far T Boone Pickens, has any
plan,

Pickens is not the only thinker on the planet. For example, invading Saudi
Arabia and administering their oil as a "World Resource" is a plan than some
are working on.

On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:31:21 -0700 (PDT), ransley
wrote:

On Jul 22, 6:10*pm, metspitzer wrote:
He has been telling us for quite a few weeks that he has a plan.

Why waste money on commercials saying you will be telling us something
in the future?

I have something to say......I will be saying it in the next few
weeks.

BTW it will be.............I want you tax payers to pay for the grid I
need so I can start selling you wind power instead of oil.

He not only has a plan, but is one hundred billion times richer,
and smarter than you, and your idiotic post, and measly bank account.

He is worth Billions and is putting 10 Billion into Wind of his
own.

What the **** has Buch done, answer nothing. This issue has been a
key to our demise for 50 years and no ****in government of mine has
done **** to not keep us from being held hostage to imported energy
from enemys. Gee we dont even have a upgraded insulation policy for
homes... Gee we still allow 82% non condensing boilers and furnaces to
be sold. In a country as we IMPORT 80% of our oil.

Did you know England many many years ago banned non condensing
heating units, and England Exports oil, that move in itself saves a
minimum of 11 % in winter Ng consumption!!!. Its the stupid **** like
this that has gotten us broke, its the stupid **** like this that
leaves us with no plan. No wonder we consume 25% of the Worlds
resources of energy and have 5% of the population. **** Butch and the
4x4 Hummer GM burn it like we can attitude, and the old guard thats
brought this crap on to us. But only so far T Boone Pickens, has any
plan,

I say you listen to new air, and stop breathin the Old ****...

Bush has managed to protect the oil flow for his oil family, and T
Boone's so far.

Without US drilling, when the global oil runs out, guess who will be
sitting on the last of it?

Tell us how you made your billions?

"metspitzer" wrote in message
...
He has been telling us for quite a few weeks that he has a plan.

Why waste money on commercials saying you will be telling us something
in the future?

I have something to say......I will be saying it in the next few
weeks.


BTW it will be.............I want you tax payers to pay for the grid I
need so I can start selling you wind power instead of oil.

Oooooooooooooo, metspitzer. I shall anxiously await your prophesy/spew.

Hand me a cold one.

Steve

On Jul 22, 9:43�pm, G. Morgan wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
Not in Texas, though. Texas has its own electrical grid. It's not connected
to the national grid.

It is physically connected.

Did you mean not connected in a regulatory sense?

--

Cool:http://users.skynet.be/J.Beever/pave.htm

the state of texas has its own seperate power grid not normally
powering others or getting power from out of state.

since the first oil crisis of 1972 our country has ignored the problem
almost entirely.

too much big business making money off the status quo..........

in 1972 a buddy of mine converted his vehicles to dual fuel and has
run both primarily on compressed natural gas ever since.

works fine pollutes little, costs less to operate

part of pickens plan is converting to natural gas to power vehicles.

doing nothing is no longer a viable option, the high cost of energy is
crippling our economy

On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 18:11:20 -0700 (PDT), ransley
wrote:



You like all the rest, miss the point, totaly.. Its about not buying
energy , its not buying energy from enemies, its about self
sufficency- national security- nondependance on 3rd world Crooks. If
we were smart enough we would not be spending hundreds of billions and
thousands of lifes a year in areas that really dont matter. WHO
actualy gives a **** if Muslems overtake the world in religon , I
dont. I care about USA, and our independance to the world like it was
until the 1950s.

I guess you haven't noticed that for the last 20 years or so both
political parties have been steering us into a global market.
(actually big business and the banks)

You want energy independence for the US? You want national security?
Tell us how you plan to getting that, when open borders is clearly
next on the agenda?

I missed the part about how you made your billions.

wrote:
....
the state of texas has its own seperate power grid not normally
powering others or getting power from out of state.
....

The operative word there is "normally" -- there are tieins of the ERCOT
grid to the rest of the country, just not as extensive. There have been
studies in the relatively recent past on increasing those ties but I
haven't paid attention since I retired on what the status is.

--

ransley wrote:
....
Did you know Germany has a plan to be 30% solar by 2030 and will
beat that time frame, its plan IS working. We have NO PLAN.

I've seen nothing on anything other than installed capacity, nothing
about what actual consumption percentages are. Assuming a summer day of
(say) 15 daylight hours, 30% capacity if all online would translate to
20% maximum on average and, of course, essentially 0% for the other
9hrs. This only gets worse in winter. Meanwhile, standby generation of
some other form has to be there for the load.

And, while making some pacification of the Greens, the installation of
the solar they have is made possible only by very heavily subsidizing same.

--

"metspitzer" wrote in message
...
He has been telling us for quite a few weeks that he has a plan.

Why waste money on commercials saying you will be telling us something
in the future?

I have something to say......I will be saying it in the next few
weeks.


BTW it will be.............I want you tax payers to pay for the grid I
need so I can start selling you wind power instead of oil.


So far, he seems to have a good idea. Is your plan better?

"ransley" wrote in message
...
On Jul 22, 6:10 pm, metspitzer wrote:
He has been telling us for quite a few weeks that he has a plan.

Why waste money on commercials saying you will be telling us something
in the future?

I have something to say......I will be saying it in the next few
weeks.

BTW it will be.............I want you tax payers to pay for the grid I
need so I can start selling you wind power instead of oil.

He not only has a plan, but is one hundred billion times richer,
and smarter than you, and your idiotic post, and measly bank account.

He is worth Billions and is putting 10 Billion into Wind of his
own.

What the **** has Buch done, answer nothing. This issue has been a
key to our demise for 50 years and no ****in government of mine has
done **** to not keep us from being held hostage to imported energy
from enemys. Gee we dont even have a upgraded insulation policy for
homes... Gee we still allow 82% non condensing boilers and furnaces to
be sold. In a country as we IMPORT 80% of our oil.

Did you know England many many years ago banned non condensing
heating units, and England Exports oil, that move in itself saves a
minimum of 11 % in winter Ng consumption!!!. Its the stupid **** like
this that has gotten us broke, its the stupid **** like this that
leaves us with no plan. No wonder we consume 25% of the Worlds
resources of energy and have 5% of the population. **** Butch and the
4x4 Hummer GM burn it like we can attitude, and the old guard thats
brought this crap on to us. But only so far T Boone Pickens, has any
plan,

I say you listen to new air, and stop breathin the Old ****...

------------------

Oh get off your soapbox! Haven't you noticed the price of oil has
plummeted?! We can now go back to doing whatever we want.

In article ,
wrote:


Solar power does not have to be a total solution to the entire problem in
order
to be a huge help. We don't need one grand sweeping solution. We need many
solutions that cumulatively put us on a better track.


Of course the same is being said for off-shore drilling.
Interestingly, though, is that solar and wind power doesn't seem to
haave gotten that much more traction than the drilling in real life.
We are a nation of Scarlet O'Haras " I can't think about that right now.
If I do, I'll go crazy. I'll think about that tomorrow."

wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 21:51:06 -0500, dpb wrote:

ransley wrote:
...
Did you know Germany has a plan to be 30% solar by 2030 and will
beat that time frame, its plan IS working. We have NO PLAN.
I've seen nothing on anything other than installed capacity, nothing
about what actual consumption percentages are. Assuming a summer day of
(say) 15 daylight hours, 30% capacity if all online would translate to
20% maximum on average and, of course, essentially 0% for the other
9hrs. This only gets worse in winter. Meanwhile, standby generation of
some other form has to be there for the load.

And, while making some pacification of the Greens, the installation of
the solar they have is made possible only by very heavily subsidizing same.

Solar power does not have to be a total solution to the entire problem in order
to be a huge help. ...

The point was that it isn't as much a major solution as the other poster
seems to think...and the need for maintaining alternate generation
capacity when either solar or wind _aren't_ available as they simply are
not reliable sources makes them expensive. They're a piece, yes, but
not nearly the panacea many wish them to be.

BTW - I'm currently looking into coverting my home heating to Geo-Thermal.
....
Did that almost 15 years ago. As compared to solar/wind, it's a very
effective solution as it doesn't suffer the vagaries of wind nor does it
go away at night when the sun goes down.

--

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
....
So far, he seems to have a good idea. Is your plan better?

For central electricity generation, yes, I think my plan _is_ better.

--

On Jul 23, 8:19*am, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
wrote:



Solar power does not have to be a total solution to the entire problem in
order
to be a huge help. We don't need one grand sweeping solution. We need many
solutions that cumulatively put us on a better track.

* Of course the same is being said for off-shore drilling.
Interestingly, though, is that solar and wind power doesn't seem to
haave gotten that much more traction than the drilling in real life.
We are a nation of Scarlet O'Haras " I can't think about that right now.
If I do, I'll go crazy. I'll think about that tomorrow."

Solar for electricity isn't being deployed to any significant extent
because it's economically unviable. It is being deployed in small
amounts by govt heavily subsidizing it. Here in NJ, they levied a
tax on all electric bills to generate a fund. Part of that is being
used so that people can buy a $50K, 5KW home system for $15K, which
then makes it viable.

Oil drilling in new areas with high potential, ie ANWR and offshore,
is blocked by the environmental extremists.

Wind is the more interesting. That one is always put forward by the
environmentalists as a great solution. Yet, when it comes down to
actually building them, the usual environmental extremists shoot many
of them down.

G. Morgan wrote:
HeyBub wrote:

Not in Texas, though. Texas has its own electrical grid. It's not
connected to the national grid.

It is physically connected.

Did you mean not connected in a regulatory sense?

Um, you're right. There are a few physical connections. Still, Texas, which
uses 40% more electricity than California (peak demand in excess of 75GW),
is not really a player in the national grid. 85% of the power generation
companies in Texas have agreed to neither buy nor sell their power outside
the state. The state, therefore, is largely exempt from federal regulatory
oversight.

There are four interconnections to points outside the state (including
Mexico).* Together they have a capacity of about 500 megawatts. There is one
600 megawatt line that connects the Texas grid to points in east Texas that
are part of the "Eastern" U.S. grid, but the service is still designed for
Texans.

---------
* A 220 MW line to Oklahoma, A 36 MW line to Mexico in El Paso, Two lines,
totaling 250 MW, also to Mexico, near McAllen.

On Jul 22, 7:31*pm, ransley wrote:
On Jul 22, 6:10*pm, metspitzer wrote:

He has been telling us for quite a few weeks that he has a plan.

Why waste money on commercials saying you will be telling us something
in the future?

I have something to say......I will be saying it in the next few
weeks.

BTW it will be.............I want you tax payers to pay for the grid I
need so I can start selling you wind power instead of oil.

* *He not only has a plan, but is one hundred billion times richer,
and smarter than you, and your idiotic post, and measly bank account.

* *He is worth Billions and is putting 10 Billion into Wind of his
own.

* *What the **** has Buch done, answer nothing. This issue has been a
key to our demise for 50 years and no ****in government of mine has
done **** to not keep us from being held hostage to imported energy
from enemys. Gee we dont even have a upgraded insulation policy for
homes... Gee we still allow 82% non condensing boilers and furnaces to
be sold. In a country as we IMPORT 80% of our oil.

* *Did you know England many many years ago banned non condensing
heating units, and England Exports oil, that move in itself saves a
minimum of *11 % in winter Ng consumption!!!. Its the stupid **** like
this that has gotten us broke, its the stupid **** like this that
leaves us with no plan. No wonder we consume 25% of the Worlds
resources of energy and have 5% of the population. ***** Butch and the
4x4 Hummer GM burn it like we can attitude, and the old guard thats
brought this crap on to us. *But only *so far T Boone Pickens, has any
plan,

* * *I say you listen to new air, *and stop breathin the Old ****....

Gas is $9 a gallon in England.

wrote:
....
Wind is the more interesting. That one is always put forward by the
environmentalists as a great solution. Yet, when it comes down to
actually building them, the usual environmental extremists shoot many
of them down.

The problem w/ wind is still one of inconsistency. I've posted before
results of a sizable wind farm in W KS (Gray County) which in seven
years operation has overall average of 50% installed capacity w/ months
(mid-summer and -winter) where monthly average is only 20%. Thus would
take as much as 5X installed capacity to have a chance of producing the
required power as installed on that long an averaging scale. It's worse
as the time scale is shortened, of course, including the problem that
the wind typically also goes down at night after losing solar heating.
These data are available from EIA site for a farm in the prime area for
wind generation in the US. Again, it's a piece but it's no panacea as
many proponents who don't worry about the realities of making their
wishes true would like to think (or probably more correctly, make others
think).

--

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
....
So far, he seems to have a good idea. ...

Actually, I really don't see anything new or novel or different other
than he has enough money to get media attention. They've been building
wind generation here on the High Plains (which includes TX, particularly
the panhandle) in large numbers for 10 years or so. I see on average
probably 20/week semi's w/ new towers/rotor blades going through town on
way to various erection sites in the area.

KS, for example, passed legislation to aid in the construction of new
transmission lines a year ago; that has had the effect of beginning
construction probably within the year on new lines to aid in the
distribution. Any other state can do the same; all it takes is getting
off their duff and doing it.

--

on 7/23/2008 1:31 AM said the following:
On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 00:39:15 -0400, "jack" wrote:


He is worth Billions and is putting 10 Billion into Wind of his
own.


It is interesting that when they asked him if he had a wind generator
on his ranch he said no, they are butt ugly.

As are oil wells, cell phone towers, telephone microwave relay towers,
and those giant high voltage electric towers crisscrossing the nation.
He probably doesn't have any of those on his ranch either, but they are
essential to our needs.
I must have missed that quote attributed to him, though.

--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
in the original Orange County
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

On Jul 22, 7:10*pm, metspitzer wrote:
He has been telling us for quite a few weeks that he has a plan.

Why waste money on commercials saying you will be telling us something
in the future?

I have something to say......I will be saying it in the next few
weeks.

BTW it will be.............I want you tax payers to pay for the grid I
need so I can start selling you wind power instead of oil.

For now I only have one question:

Why is he spending all this money on commercials rather than just
going ahead and, as he has indicated, spend his own money and just do
it.

So far it is all talk and no action. Sounds like Congress or he is
up to something. Let's wait until the other shoe drops

On Jul 23, 9:21*am, dpb wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 21:51:06 -0500, dpb wrote:

ransley wrote:
...
* *Did you know Germany has a *plan to be 30% solar by 2030 and will
beat that time frame, its plan IS working. We have NO PLAN.
I've seen nothing on anything other than installed capacity, nothing
about what actual consumption percentages are. *Assuming a summer day of
(say) 15 daylight hours, 30% capacity if all online would translate to
20% maximum on average and, of course, essentially 0% for the other
9hrs. *This only gets worse in winter. *Meanwhile, standby generation of
some other form has to be there for the load.

And, while making some pacification of the Greens, the installation of
the solar they have is made possible only by very heavily subsidizing same.

Solar power does not have to be a total solution to the entire problem in order
to be a huge help. ...

The point was that it isn't as much a major solution as the other poster
seems to think...and the need for maintaining alternate generation
capacity when either solar or wind _aren't_ available as they simply are
not reliable sources makes them expensive. *They're a piece, yes, but
not nearly the panacea many wish them to be.


It seems it's T Boone Pickens major solution. He wants to install
what he estimates to cost $1 trillion in wind power, plus billions
more in distribution infrastructure to replace natural gas used for
electricity production. That would then allow the natural gas to be
used to power cars. And after all that, if you read far enough, it
eliminates 1/3 of our oil imports?

IMO, it's a pretty hair brained scheme, even assuming the facts and
costs as Pickens states them.







BTW - I'm currently looking into coverting my home heating to Geo-Thermal.

...
Did that almost 15 years ago. *As compared to solar/wind, it's a very
effective solution as it doesn't suffer the vagaries of wind nor does it
go away at night when the sun goes down.

--- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

wrote:
....
It seems it's T Boone Pickens major solution. He wants to install
what he estimates to cost $1 trillion in wind power, plus billions
more in distribution infrastructure to replace natural gas used for
electricity production. That would then allow the natural gas to be
used to power cars. And after all that, if you read far enough, it
eliminates 1/3 of our oil imports?

IMO, it's a pretty hair brained scheme, even assuming the facts and
costs as Pickens states them.
....

The use of natural gas for automobile propulsion is as short-sighted as
was the Clinton/Gore push against coal/nuclear which caused the
profligate rise in gas-fired electricity production. It's too valuable
as a chemical feedstock and other uses to waste on automobiles.

Wind can never be more than roughly 20-30% of a grid as beyond that
point voltage regulation owing to the variability becomes a real issue.
We're already seeing that here w/ smaller grids; it will gradually
become an issue for more and more grids as the supply grows.

--

wrote in message
...
On Jul 22, 7:10 pm, metspitzer wrote:
He has been telling us for quite a few weeks that he has a plan.

Why waste money on commercials saying you will be telling us something
in the future?

I have something to say......I will be saying it in the next few
weeks.

BTW it will be.............I want you tax payers to pay for the grid I
need so I can start selling you wind power instead of oil.

For now I only have one question:

Why is he spending all this money on commercials rather than just
going ahead and, as he has indicated, spend his own money and just do
it.

So far it is all talk and no action. Sounds like Congress or he is
up to something. Let's wait until the other shoe drops

It's a conspiracy, I tell you. A God damned conspiracy. Why, there's a
fellow in Missouri that can get 425 mpg in an 11 mph wind, using no fossil
fuel, but the government won't give him a patent. And then, there's the
fellow ..................

What?

Wait, the nurse is here.

Time for meds? Time for painting class?

Woohoo!

I'll see ya later ....................

Is Rita giving massages tonight behind the water heater in the utility room?
Put me down for twenty bucks.

Steve

"dpb" wrote in message
They've been building wind generation here on the High Plains (which
includes TX, particularly the panhandle) in large numbers for 10 years or
so.


KS, for example, passed legislation to aid in the construction of new
transmission lines a year ago; that has had the effect of beginning
construction probably within the year on new lines to aid in the
distribution. Any other state can do the same; all it takes is getting
off their duff and doing it.

--

Not every state can do it. In MA they want to put them out in the water
around Cape Cod. It may spoil Teddy Kennedy's view so it is not allowed.
Complaints in the Litchfield Hills of CT too, that the view won't be as
pretty.

Wind just makes a lot of sense. I'd consider one too, but it is too high of
a structure in my town so again, not allowed.

There must be a practical way to harness the tides too. More research
should be done on using the oceans to provide power. With global warming,
there will even be ocean in KS soon.

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
....
Not every state can do it. ...

They _can_, they simply don't have the will...

--

"dpb" wrote in message ...
Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
...
Not every state can do it. ...

They _can_, they simply don't have the will...

Some people have the will, but we have idiots for politicians

In article ,
"Edwin Pawlowski" wrote:


There must be a practical way to harness the tides too. More research
should be done on using the oceans to provide power. With global warming,
there will even be ocean in KS soon.

The trouble with that is it seems to filet a fairly large number of
fish when the schools wander into the generator area. At least that was
the argument I saw against it last year.
If global warming doesn't do it, maybe KS can use tidal
forces after the West Coast falls off the continent following The Big
One.

Kurt (Better get ready to tie-up de boat in Idaho) Ullman

On Jul 23, 11:00*pm, "Edwin Pawlowski" wrote:
"dpb" wrote in ...
Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
...
Not every state can do it. *...

They _can_, they simply don't have the will...

Some people have the will, but we have idiots for politicians


There are legitimate concerns with putting up windmills just
anywhere. While I'm no fan of the Kennedys and you certainly can
call them hypocrits because they run around advocating green
solutions, I agree that they have a legitimate concern about putting
up offshore windmills that destroy a pristine view. Here in NJ
there was a plan to put 350ft high windmills offshore within sight of
land. To me, that is unacceptable. The last thing we need to do is
turn a beautiful ocean view into an industrial one. We spend a huge
amount of money here buying up open land and forest to keep it natural
and from being developed. To then turn around and destroy one of the
most priceless views makes no sense.

If they can be located beyond sight, then I have no problem with
that. But even that gets blocked by environmentalists, who then moan
about bird strikes, harm to fish, etc. I'd also seriously question
the economics of offshore windmills as compared to other
alternatives.

wrote:
.....
There are legitimate concerns with putting up windmills just
anywhere. While I'm no fan of the Kennedys and you certainly can
call them hypocrits because they run around advocating green
solutions, I agree that they have a legitimate concern about putting
up offshore windmills that destroy a pristine view. Here in NJ
there was a plan to put 350ft high windmills offshore within sight of
land. To me, that is unacceptable. The last thing we need to do is
turn a beautiful ocean view into an industrial one. We spend a huge
amount of money here buying up open land and forest to keep it natural
and from being developed. To then turn around and destroy one of the
most priceless views makes no sense.

If they can be located beyond sight, then I have no problem with
that. But even that gets blocked by environmentalists, who then moan
about bird strikes, harm to fish, etc. I'd also seriously question
the economics of offshore windmills as compared to other
alternatives.

But, of course, it's just fine to put them in KS...


--

On Jul 24, 7:26*am, wrote:
On Jul 23, 11:00*pm, "Edwin Pawlowski" wrote:

"dpb" wrote in ...
Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
...
Not every state can do it. *...

They _can_, they simply don't have the will...

Some people have the will, but we have idiots for politicians

There are legitimate concerns with putting up windmills just
anywhere. * While I'm no fan of the Kennedys and you certainly can
call them hypocrits because they run around advocating green
solutions, *I agree that they have a legitimate concern about putting
up offshore windmills that destroy a pristine view. * *Here in NJ
there was a plan to put 350ft high windmills offshore within sight of
land. * To me, that is unacceptable. * The last thing we need to do is
turn a beautiful ocean view into an industrial one. * We spend a huge
amount of money here buying up open land and forest to keep it natural
and from being developed. * To then turn around and destroy one of the
most priceless views makes no sense.

If they can be located beyond sight, then I have no problem with
that. * But even that gets blocked by environmentalists, who then moan
about bird strikes, harm to fish, etc. *I'd also seriously question
the economics of offshore windmills as compared to other
alternatives.

I hope those damn things are never near me either in the midwest,
farmland views are beautiful too.

I say go nuclear, then develop battery plug in cars with a STANDARD
BATTERY FORMAT so gas stations can keep a stock of fully charged
battery packs that can be slid in and out of the vehicles in seconds.
By backing up to a puller winch than slides out the old battery and
slides in a new one. the battery pack can be long and tubular and run
the length of the car and slides in/out a hatch in the back under the
license plate. Then gas stations just recharge batteries all day with
nuclear generated power. Having automotive transport on nuclear (via
batteries), now frees up all the natural gas needed for power
generation and frees up all the crude needed for automotive gasoline.
Electric vehicles can develop more than enough torque to still make
driving fun. Windmills are not the future, I hope. Trucking and
medium/sever service vehicles will still need to be diesel but moving
a family of 4 around really does not need a 3 or 4 ton car. Full
containment nuclear plants with built-in 200 years of spent-fuel
storage space are not dangerous.

wrote:


There are legitimate concerns with putting up windmills just
anywhere. While I'm no fan of the Kennedys and you certainly can
call them hypocrits because they run around advocating green
solutions, I agree that they have a legitimate concern about putting
up offshore windmills that destroy a pristine view.

Bull****. There are plenty of printine views, but few places windmills are
practical.

Here in NJ
there was a plan to put 350ft high windmills offshore within sight of
land.

Trust me. There are NO pristine views in New Jersey.

To me, that is unacceptable. The last thing we need to do is
turn a beautiful ocean view into an industrial one. We spend a huge
amount of money here buying up open land and forest to keep it natural
and from being developed. To then turn around and destroy one of the
most priceless views makes no sense.

Without the energy-producing apparatus, for twelve hours a day you won't be
able to see ANYTHING.


If they can be located beyond sight, then I have no problem with
that.

You may be sensible. Others will be upset. Just knowing they are out there
(somewhere) gets some folks all exercised.

But even that gets blocked by environmentalists, who then moan
about bird strikes, harm to fish, etc. I'd also seriously question
the economics of offshore windmills as compared to other
alternatives.

That's a good point. Windmills are horribly expensive when compared to
hydrocarbon-based energy.

HeyBub wrote:
....
... Windmills are horribly expensive when compared to
hydrocarbon-based energy.

Not so much, really. The initial cost is somewhat higher per MW
generated, true (but far less a penalty than solar), but it does get
amortized out by the lack of continuing fuel cost w/ time. And, costs
are coming down as the volume of installed units continues to rise.

The problem w/ the cost isn't the cost of the wind generation itself
some much , it's (as previously noted) the need to have the reserve for
when the wind isn't that is a sunk cost that much of the wind can't
overcome. If it's that secondary cost you're complaining of, then I'm
in full agreement.

--