A Service of Energy CentralEnergyBlogs.com Logo

Good old T. Boone.

Cannot help but love an oilman turned wind wizzard with a name like that.

You know his announcement earlier this week, chronicled in a WSJ op-ed "My Plan to Escape the Grip of Foreign Oil." Get wind to generate one-fifth of our electricity - which the feds say is doable.

I subscribe to the view that we need as much of everything as possible in our energy kitchen. More nuclear - next generation stuff. Better coal-fired plants. Wind, Solar and energy efficiency.

The problem with Pickens' plan is he appears to be engaging in some hand trick. Take wind and get it to replace the natural gas used to generate electricity, he says. Then use the natural gas to move our nations' vehicles. That begs some important questions. There is an emerging consensus that we need to move to plug-in vehicles. That will maximize grid efficiency, particularly with a smart grid that can orchestrate powering up the vehicles in overnight low-peak-demand hours.

The question we need to ask is how to we get the most wind. The most natural gas - from US and abroad. The most coal and nuclear and hydro.

Push it all to the limit - and limit as much as possible market distortions. We need incentives to build the next round of nuclear - and Congress has so provided. And wind and solar need subsidies to ramp up technology and achieve scalability. And Congress turns those subsidies on and off way too frequently. They should be put in place for a decade and left alone.

What we should not do is become preocupied with which fuel goes where. We should be focused on creating a national energy policy that maximizes all our resources.

Unsaid by Boone is that energy demand is ever growing in our society and around the world. So wind is more likely to help us deal with growing demand - alongside natural gas powered generation, coal, nuclear and energy efficiency  - for a long time to come.  Which fuel goes where is of secondary importance to maximizing the total portfolio.

Boone does get credit for focusing attention on the need for a national energy policy. In that regard, he quickly proved he is more the showman than either Obama or McCain.

 

 

849 Views Comments 9 Comments Comments Add Comment Author BioAuthor Bio
ReportReport This Post as Foul/Inappropriate
member photo The talk Boone gave in Houston last month was substantially more complete than the few words the WSJ gave him. What WSJ didn't mention is that Boone owns a string of natural gas stations, especially around airports and ports. You are completely right that it isn't an either-or proposition, but a both-and. We need it ALL and we need it soonest. The good news is that T. Boone is putting his money where his mouth is, including buying ads and forcing energy to the forefront of the election campaign. The bad news is, politicians being politicians won't "kick a sleeping dog", and are loath to bring up the subject first. This country has NEVER had a coherent energy policy, so it is long past time that one is considered. As long as the fringe elements can be constrained from their all or nothing thinking and accept compromise, it might just stand a chance... might. Letting it be hijacked by special interests would of course be the death knell, for it and our national standard of living, already on life support.
# Posted By Jeff Presley | 7/11/08 3:44 PM | Report This Comment as Foul/Inappropriate
member photo Mr. Pickens dropped the T from his name; quite a while ago actually.
# Posted By jim coleman | 7/13/08 7:14 AM | Report This Comment as Foul/Inappropriate
member photo Maximizing and improving ALL resources... you said it.
# Posted By Alex Rodriguez | 7/14/08 11:22 PM | Report This Comment as Foul/Inappropriate
member photo I tend to agree with you that consistent subsidy is important in encouraging the proper mix of generation sources over a longer time frame. However, I am a firm believer that the renewables PTC is ill conceived and badly constructed. That wind power, for instance, produces to weather, not to demand signals, and varies in output hour by hour between 8 and 100% or rated capacity in all of Germany (EON Netz, 2006 annual report, page 6) is not exactly a scenario that a.) promotes efficient use of grid resources, b.) comes without an obvious need for companion generation to maintain the margin between demand and supply (since wind is oblivious to and generally counter correlated to peaks) and c.) offsets thermal generation and its environmental consequences to an impressive ratio. If you agree this is true, then why is the wind industry lavished with subsidy levels per unit 25 times those given to coal or nuclear? (EIA 2007) The on again - off again nature of the renewable PTC is poetic quid pro quo for the on again - off again nature of wind turbine production even on a scale as impressive as Germany has purchased. Why not level the subsidy playing field first, rewarding reliability and efficiency instead of raw energy output - and then talk about longer term tax credit renewal?
# Posted By Thomas Stacy | 7/15/08 8:10 AM | Report This Comment as Foul/Inappropriate
member photo The apparent missing element to Mr. Picken's plan is storage capacity. While Wind is capable of possibly meeting the target, because it is not a demand based production, it needs a capacitance or storage mechanism to level out the ramp-up/ramp-down of the albeit capable but slow changing fossil fuel generation methods.

Has anyone seen a study or projection of the effect on weather caused by removing all the energy out of the wind? I would anticipate that solar similarly will gradually tend to cool the atmosphere (less light absorbed and reflected back to the atmosphere)
# Posted By Timothy Dibble | 7/15/08 9:54 AM | Report This Comment as Foul/Inappropriate
member photo Their contribution to electricity generation cannot justify the public money being given away to wind farm developers: turbine manufacturer GE Energy reported recently to the NYS energy research agency (NYSERDA) that (at least in NY) because most of its electricity is provided at night and in the winter, when it's needed the least, industrial wind generates only one-third of its 30% rated capacity, making it the least efficient renewable energy source. Moreover, siting large arrays within one mile of populated rural communities is generating noise complaints, as has happened in Europe. Thomas Stacy's comment should be developed further: the wind developers are involved in an Enron-type scam on the public and its elected representatives looking for a feel-good solution to the energy problem.
# Posted By Gary Abraham | 7/15/08 10:20 AM | Report This Comment as Foul/Inappropriate
member photo I like the idea of "rewarding reliability and efficiency" as stated by Thomas... the on and off factor also impacts volatility for the entire market, thus leaving consumers paying the price, thus instigating politicians to take sometimes short term/sighted action.
# Posted By Alex Rodriguez | 7/16/08 11:13 AM | Report This Comment as Foul/Inappropriate
member photo All who have interest in our planet's enverioment and our need for a good on demand power source is going in the right direction, But many don't have a clue of how this can be done. I agree with Mr T-bone Pickens and Al Gore and challenge them to be informed about the facts that a renewable can be a on demand power source,(Renewable thermal wind the energy power source is the answer and should get the facts. In early January energy central news artical by Harry Valinetne says many points that are included in the new way to think outside of the box that most are in.
I have the complete story of this plan that can change the world, when innovative thinkers get it.
Innovation is the key to a better way that is outside the box and combines 8 known technoloigies that are known to be very good sources of power for the need of the world. Don't get stuck with the words WIND think total combinations. I take what the experts say about the need and have the answer to many problems and it's simple and many look to hard and can't see the tree infront of the forest. Get the facts.
# Posted By KENNY MAGERS | 7/28/08 10:36 AM | Report This Comment as Foul/Inappropriate
member photo If you really want to get into the negatives of wind power, check out these sites:

http://www.windaction.org/opinions/
http://www.stopillwind.org/lowerlevel.php?content=...
http://www.nortexwind.org/The%20Ghost%20of%20Enron.pdf
# Posted By Scott Brooks | 7/30/08 2:22 AM | Report This Comment as Foul/Inappropriate
 
Toolbox

Blog Editor
Search
Calendar
Recent CommentsRecent Comments
RSS
Energy Central
Power Network


Sponsored Content

Copyright © 1996-2012 by CyberTech, Inc. All rights reserved.
Energy Central ® is a registered trademark of CyberTech, Incorporated.
CyberTech does not warrant that the information or services of Energy Central will meet any specific requirements; nor will it be error free or uninterrupted; nor shall CyberTech be liable for any indirect, incidental or consequential damages (including lost data, information or profits) sustained or incurred in connection with the use of, operation of, or inability to use Energy Central.
2821 S. Parker Rd. Ste 1105 Aurora, CO 80014
Contact: Phone - 303-782-5510 Fax - 303-782-5331 or service@energycentral.com.