T. Boone Pickens continues his bad energy news tour, wants to be a player in the fall election
Andrew Littlefair (left) and T. Boone Pickens in Las Vegas in May
There was a lot of interest in my post about oil (and wind and natural gas) man T. Boone Pickens' presentation at the AFVI Expo last month. So, when I saw a new press release titled, "Boone Pickens: U.S. in Energy Crisis," I figured there was good reason to read it and maybe write about it. Turns out, yeah, there was.
Pickens wasn't exactly upbeat about the U.S. energy situation last month, and when he gave a speech to the Oil and Gas Investor's Energy Capital Forum in Houston earlier this week, he said the situation was at crisis level. It's so bad that it should be the most important issue of this fall's (and summer's) presidential campaign, he said. Pickens, who supports Republican candidate John McCain over Barack Obama (but acknowledged that McCain's whole summer gas tax holiday idea was wrong), said he's going to use his clout to "force this [a discussion on energy] into this campaign. We'll see if I have the credibility to force it into the debate." One way is by spending some of his billions on running energy issues ads on TV in the coming months.
There are some choice Pickens quotes in the release pasted after the break. Basically, Pickens believes, high gas prices are a good thing, as they're finally forcing people to change their mindset. Click through for more.
Press Release:
Boone Pickens: U.S. in Energy Crisis
HOUSTON, June 12 /PRNewswire/ -- Billionaire oilman T. Boone Pickens says energy is in a crisis in the U.S. and should be the No. 1 campaign issue for the presidential candidates. Pickens spoke at Oil and Gas Investor's Energy Capital Forum in Houston Tuesday.
"Energy is not a debate; it's a crisis for this country," Pickens said. "We cannot continue down the path were on. It's that desperate."
The 80-year-old former owner of Mesa Petroleum, which he sold in the mid-1990s, said the U.S. currently pays out $700 billion per year on oil imports and will increase to $10 trillion annually within 10 years if the pattern continues.
The energy crisis is a result of decades of lack of leadership that has led to a breakdown. Now, "somebody has to show up to fix it." He doubts the candidates understand the urgency of the circumstances.
Pickens chided Democratic candidate Sen. Barack Obama for "throwing around the windfall profits tax like a piece of balsa wood.
"I don't think the senator knows anything about energy. He sounds good for about two minutes."
Republican candidate Sen. John McCain received little more support. "I don't know how much he knows either. He wants to lower the gas tax during the summer. What the hell is he talking about? Will that fix anything?"
Pickens said he is not impressed by either candidate on energy issues and plans to elevate the issue into this year's presidential election campaign through a series of television ads talking about energy.
"I'm going to force this into this campaign. We'll see if I have the credibility to force it into the debate."
The price of oil is more likely to reach $150 per barrel before it reaches $120, he said, and believes that is a necessary event to force a change in thinking in the American mindset. "The more gas goes down the more you send a signal that there's enough and to buy more. It would be better for the country if the price goes up."
Americans must experience an attitude change to give everything a chance. He said there is "no question" that America must embrace alternate energy sources to alleviate the $700-billion transfer of wealth out of the country to oil imports.
"People are going to start to come to grips with change. This country is not going to go to its knees and get screwed in a bad deal," referring to oil imports.
Ethanol is "an ugly baby but it's ours and it will move cars," he said, emphasizing that he prefers the less-than-perfect fuel over imported oil. Biofuels, however, will never account for more than 10% of the U.S.' energy needs, he predicts.
For expanded coverage of T. Boone Pickens at Oil and Gas Investor's Energy Capital Forum, visit http://www.oilandgasinvestor.com/.
Headquartered in Houston, Hart Energy Publishing's market-leading publications include Oil and Gas Investor, E&P, PipeLine and Gas Technology and FUEL. Hart also produces newsletters, conferences, electronic media, and consulting services.
[Source: Hart Energy Publishing]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
meme 12:36PM (6/13/2008)
Pickens was one of the guys behind the Swift Boat ads.
Reply
BlackbirdHighway 12:29PM (6/13/2008)
I didn't see any mention of swiftboating.
The name T. Boone Pickens is synonymous with swiftboating.
Reply
Paul 12:43PM (6/13/2008)
Good. The Swiftboat guys were absolutely right on about Kerry. He got less than he deserved.
Reply
terrence_bethea 12:54PM (6/13/2008)
I hope Pickens has enough sense to realize the candidate he supported in 00 and 04 facilitated our current state. If Gore or Kerry were unfit to be President, Bush was unfit to think of being President.
Reply
tinman 1:13PM (6/13/2008)
A great American Patriot who is leading.
Reply
Neil 9:10AM (6/14/2008)
My reading of McCain's site came up with very little of any substance with regards to energy other than "keep the troops in Iraq" and "more of what Bush was doing". While Obama's policies are not perfect, he has at least shown some understanding of the situation. I would agree that Obama may not be fully aware of the urgency of the situation or he would be hammering McCain into the ground on this issue. If Pickens isn't happy with todays energy policies he has only himself to blame given his support of Bush and co.
Reply
Bob L. 2:47PM (6/13/2008)
I am interested in the truth about our economy and nation. Keep politics out of it. Both sides in Washington have no clue about economics and are beholden to special interests. They fiddle while Rome burns. Just wait we ain't seen nothing yet.
Reply
Bob L. 2:53PM (6/13/2008)
By the time we auction the drilling leases for our coasts, we will owe so much to China and others. They will be the ones to successfully bid on and drill for our oil.
Reply
Sasparilla 4:24PM (6/13/2008)
I trust Pickens knows what he's talking about with regards to Oil production future etc., since he made his money in the oil markets and I hope he gets some commercials out that elevates this issue so our candidates (both) have to make some commitments to policies that might actually be good for our mid-long term future. BTW, to lend more credence to what Mr. Pickens is saying here, the head of Toyota said he expected world Oil production to peak in the "very near future". That was in this article on Wired (http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/06/plug-in-hybrid.html)
Reply
Paul 4:42PM (6/13/2008)
Some good facts to remember why we're in such dire trouble. Congressman Roy Blunt assembled the voting records below. Commentary is from Powerline.
--------------
For several decades, the Democratic Party has pursued policies designed to drive up the cost of petroleum, and therefore gas at the pump. Remarkably, the Democrats don't seem to have taken much of a political hit from the current spike in gas prices. Probably that's because most people don't realize how different the two parties' energy policies have been.
Congressman Roy Blunt put together these data to highlight the differences between House Republicans and House Democrats on energy policy:
ANWR Exploration House Republicans: 91% Supported House Democrats: 86% Opposed
Coal-to-Liquid
House Republicans: 97% Supported
House Democrats: 78% Opposed
Oil Shale Exploration
House Republicans: 90% Supported
House Democrats: 86% Opposed
Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Exploration
House Republicans: 81% Supported
House Democrats: 83% Opposed
Refinery Increased Capacity
House Republicans: 97% Supported
House Democrats: 96% Opposed
SUMMARY
91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of American-made oil and gas.
86% of House Democrats have historically voted against increasing the production of American-made oil and gas.
Reply
Snowdog 5:29PM (6/13/2008)
Any links to back those up, or was this just made up statistics?
Reply
vfx 5:31PM (6/13/2008)
Paul,
That’s because oil is the crack that the US is addicted to. The republicans have killed hundreds of Bills that would have lessened our dependence on oil. Bills like CAFÉ standards, tax credits for building and buying efficient homes and cars, renewable energy, and removing the tax credits from the oil industry that has had record net profits. Republicans have blocked, stalled, fillibustered and Vetoed a dizzying amount of forward thinking ideas that would have by now at least partially released us from the drug that Bush (an oilman), Cheney (oilman) and Rice (a supertanker) want us to keep injecting into our culture.
Reply
Snowdog 5:34PM (6/13/2008)
The next question is, are any of these actual solutions or just political grandstanding.
Think of it another way. If the world starts to seriously run low on oil someday, they USA will still have these reserves to tap.
Reply
Paul 5:48PM (6/13/2008)
Snowdog,
Do you actually dispute Democrats are blocking drilling? Where have you been the past 10 years at least? The GOP passed a bill to drill in ANWR in the mid-90's and Clinton vetoed it. Every time it has come up since, the Democrats find a way to kill it. Besides, most Democrats are on record opposing drilling of the continental shelf, ANWR and pretty much anywhere else.
And you're talking about 100 billion barrels, not counting the Green River shale, we could be tapping. It would make a huge dent in the global supply and our own balance of payments. Tyrants across the globe would be receiving billions less in petrodollars. This would have sustained us until PHEV's and electrics are ready and penetrating the market. Make no mistake, it doesn't take $135 oil for those technologies to be viable. Oil could be at $60 a barrel and battery tech would still be in play.
But the Democrats decided to screw America instead.
Reply
GoodCheer 5:56PM (6/13/2008)
I was at a conference in DC on plug-in vehicles this week. One of the speakers talked about salt.
100 years ago the only way to preserve food was salt. Countries with salt had power and had money. Wars were fought over salt mines. There was no alternative. Now there is, and nobody thinks about where they get their salt.
Why rely on only one commodity for all transportation? If we could plug in, we would instantly start to rely on nuclear, wind, coal, solar, hydro etc. etc. etc. (including natural gas and yes, diesel electric generation).
Is the answer really building more salt mines, or is it time to invent the refrigerator again?
Reply
Mik_Cal 1:57AM (6/14/2008)
Pickens is now talking a lot of sense but as a model of a human being is not so admirable. He has helped elect and been involved in supporting the politics of the Party that has driven us most completely towards a dependence on oil. It helped him make billions. Now he sees opportunity on the other side of the energy equation and is talking similarly. I hope he does good though I hope people like him are not in control of the energy future.
Reply
Peekoyle 9:25PM (6/14/2008)
Honestly is it just me or does the idea that : drilling and ripping up every last drop of oil to buy a few yrs of cheap/er gas. Is simpley rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic?
Reply
Phil Baze 6:36PM (5/09/2009)
Hello: I'm looking into modifying a tesla that won't need to plug into anything except for the energy that is already available through harnessing the wind at say 70mph through wind cowls via wind generators (3 cowls, 3 generators) 4 tires 4 generators in all. Given the output of 7 generators, why would a battery panel have to be charged at all. It would run an air-condioner, and anything else you would want to run. I'm also looking into magnetically charged plasma, excited into a huge electrical output. Please call me at (423) 939-0098 ask for Phil Baze. Maybe we could put our knowledge together and come up with more solutions to this problem. The answers are out there, but the oil controled media does'nt make it available. Niether does oil controled (MIT), who gets most of their funding from oil companies!!
Reply