Join T. Boone Pickens for an "online rally" over the energy plan tonight
The second U.S. presidential candidate debate is tonight, and it's likely that energy policy will come up in some fashion. Central casting's best-named oil man, T. Boone Pickens, wants to make sure the debate starts a bigger discussion on energy use in America and so he is hosting an "online rally" tonight during and following the debate. Barack Obama and John McCain are scheduled to being a 9 p.m. EST, and that's when the rally starts as well. Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope will join Pickens for a rally that "will feature live video from Pickens Plan HQ in Dallas and you will have an opportunity to submit questions and comments about America's energy future." Pickens unveiled his self-titled Pickens Plan - big on wind energy and natural gas - in July and he laid out his political attitude for 2008 when we heard him speak back in May. Let's just say that Mr. Swift Boat wants John McCain to win, but is much less partisan this time around than he was in 2004. Since both McCain and Obama have met privately with Pickens this year, we can take serious his group's statement that, "We will be delivering a copy of your questions and comments to both Presidential candidates, so don't miss this opportunity to lend your voice to the call for American energy independence!" I'll take a pass on the "rally" tonight, but if you join up, I'd like to hear your report in the comments section.
[Source: Pickens Plan]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Arno 7:47PM (10/07/2008)
I really don't think it's appropriate you guys give this guy any free exposure.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70HFEHB6dag
Really, please remove this post.
Reply
Richard J 7:09PM (12/09/2008)
The following is a series of emmails on the topic of oil protection tax. If you are going to fund any alternate you have to keep them price competitive. Start at the bottom - its email.
somehow I knew you would have ideas on this and direct contact. The point from the left is as you mentioned oil shale is to not take the wind out of T boones sails or is it windmills. With cheap oil Gore will never get his global cooling done.
Hello,
When I rafted the Grand Canyon in 2000, one of the people along on the trip was James Speth, a Dean of Yale University, and the former Chairman of Environmental Quality in the executive office of President Carter. We had the opportunity to talk at length during the nine day raft trip. He was an avid proponent of an oil tax implemented as a ‘carbon tax’. My position was that such a tax would introduce another vastly complicated taxation system and I used my then-recent experience with RECLAIM as an e xample of how, when a system is complicated, it creates many loopholes and costs far more then it should, to everyone, while delivering minimal real results.
By the end of the trip, I think I had made some impact with him on simplifying a ‘carbon tax’ and he had shifted my perspective to the need to have some form of energy tax to create better oilfield policy and environmental impact over the long run. Given his credentials, I would not be surprised to see him involved with Obama’s administration.
He pointed out how it is now obvious that in Europe, the higher price for oil has reduced demand there dramatically (as a function of population and industry results) while supporting the European oil industry to do huge projects that would be considered ‘too risky’ in North America, due to the price fluctuations we see here. Case in point - the recent roll-back of unconventional resource investment in Canada (oil shale, oil sand s) due to recent price fluctuations.
To get the desired result (long term investment to create energy independence in North America and stable E&P industries here) potential oil tax money needs to be either returned to oil companies for investment by the gov’t. ( a very bad idea to have govt say how we should spend our money) or that the minimum $/Bbl received by an oil producer is maintained – something that is potentially more manageable, politically hot (what! Protect Big Oil from Price Fluctuations! ) and yet more intrinsically valuable to solid oil investment strategies and alternative/conservation investment strategies.
There is a book out by Speth, which I have not yet read, but which is probably pretty interesting “The Bridge at the Edge of the World’, subtitle “Capitalism, the Environment and Crossing from Crisis to Sustainability”. Probably a good read although I doubt we are likely to agree with a lot of it.
Cheers,
- Ian
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: cavemn2000
Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2008 7:40 PM
Subject: who's idea
I thought I had an original idea but Tee came up with this article:
Changes of oil price only in one direction allowed
As an addition to the Kyoto protocol reform, a back stop for the oil price should be implemented. This could steer a tax redistribution.
Back stop for the oil price
To escape the dependencde from crude oil and to stabilize the world climate, every lowering of the oild price should be compensated by a higher tax on oil. This could be implemented in an atomatic protocol. For exampel when the average barrel price decreases in a quarter, the oil tax is automatic increased by $20 per barrel. At daily 2,7 million barrel consume in Germany, this would be a tax re distribution ov 15 billion a year.
Sent: Sun, 7 Dec 2008 2:04 pm
Subject: RE:
Who's thinking is this?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not much of a protectionist but I think this is different than items like clothing where cheap labor gives the 3rd world advantage. This market swings both ways at the whim of go vts, some hostile. Lets heat any others - massive layoffs and equipment being id led right now in the oil patch. We will lose again the little expertist we have and the equipment will go to rust again with the current $50 barrel, sure to be followed with a cut from OPEC. I think the USA can do a lot to stabilize this market. At least until the new administration makes us green and independent of oil. LOL
Let me first say that if the credit issue was the bomb, the energy policy was the fuse and OPEC lit it!
Sad thing is that we are making the same mistake yet again with the current cheap oil price.
Here is a solution that has worked with other industries when faced with cheap foreign products:
Treat oil as any comodity and step in to stabilize the price domestically. Impose a duty for any barrel that comes in the USA at less than the "posted price". This duty could be used to supplement the price when it is over the "posted".
I have written literally thousands of energy related programs and economic forecasts. The problem is always the same - the oil price is not predictable for domestic producers. If economics are based on one price and it drops the project is cancelled or tabeled. Since it takes years to get oil to the consumer, projects that could bail us out have been scraped due to some whim of OPEC or others.
The idea is simple and I have not heard any discussion (Right or Left) of such imp osition as has been done in other areas where we are less than competitive.
This supported price (up or down) would also spur and stabilize other energy ventures such as solar, wind etc. and even domestic natural gas, as the price of competition from oil would be stabilized. Also domestic transportation prices would stabilize as would the "price at the pump". The jump in the price to consumers was what triggered the default of so many of the loans. With additional dollars going into the tank, it was no longer available to keep the credit payments going.
Excess funds in the program could fill the petroleum reserves also.
I am available at your convenience if your staff would like to discuss. I will continue to try to get the concept in the public spot light.
Thanks for your time. Please lets not make the same mistake again.
Biodiesel Information 9:23PM (10/07/2008)
Hope we hear something new tonight.I build biodiesel processors which turn waste vegetable oil into biodiesel.We need someone to help implement change. As the other poster said, we just need to keep moving in the right direction.
Reply
John T 10:24PM (10/07/2008)
I must agree with Arno.
Please remove this post and any support for T. Boone Pickens unless he is willing to separate his Wind farm initiatives from any other deals. He is using this as a way to add pork barrel, personal gain, water rights just like congress at its worst.
This is even worse though because he is hiding behind the green movement and it's all about personal gain! If he is serious about his green intentions then he will have no problem COMPLETELY eliminating his water ambitions from the equation.
Make him step up and show his true colors.
Reply
Dave 7:00AM (10/08/2008)
Arno and John T, prove it. He lost 10% of his net worth from his hedge fund in the market just like the rest of us poor schmucks trying to save. Now, as for his quest for weening us off oil, I support him 100% even if it makes him richer than Bill Gates. Why don't you two get off your humps and do something.
Reply
Herm Perez 7:54AM (10/08/2008)
what is it with self-hating commies, that video linked by Arno is a piece of c##p, here is what it says condensed:
1. Boone is rich, thus he is evil
2. He has supported Bush, thus double evil
3. an oilman, triple evil
4. he is using a water pipeline to create a corridor for the power lines, the water pipeline stops legal and environmental roadblocks to the power lines.. because they are desperate for water down in Texas.. The corridors will serve double duty, carrying power and water down to Houston.
Flashy graphics, old cartoons, music and a cute chic cant hide the complete lack of logic in these arguments.. it is 98% emotion based.. very gay and not manly at all.
Reply
Arno 8:07AM (10/08/2008)
You can not like the video all you want but the facts remain the same and can be acquired through many non-video sources as well. There's a lot of people pissed off at this guy and for good reason. He hides behind the green movement to try and get his agenda through and his investments into fruition. That's isn't something we need because at the end of the day it won't actually help the green movement or anybody else for that matter, except him, of course.
Reply
Arno 8:12AM (10/08/2008)
Everybody should search the internet for a few articles about this, including these:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/151727
http://earthfirst.com/“blue-gold”-t-boone-pickens-and-the-privatization-of-water/
Reply
Woodenbee 9:53AM (10/08/2008)
It would be great if he attacked owners of pick ups and suv's, nothing seems to be getting through to these people? I'm so tired of all these runty losers and their gas guzzling me mobiles, who wet themselves at the thought of riding a bike or taking the bus, or giving to a charity. I cant wait for Obama to take power and watch their racist, selfish little world view crumble.
Reply
Rob 11:03AM (10/08/2008)
8
"who wet themselves at the thought of riding a bike or taking the bus, or giving to a charity. I cant wait for Obama to take power and watch their racist, selfish little world view crumble."
What the hell are you talking about? Racist? Selfish? Huh????
You are an idiot.
Reply
John T 11:04AM (10/08/2008)
Ranting at people and calling them gay has nothing to do with this. Someone can disagree with you without being a "self hating commie".
There are lots of people who are going to get rich off green energy and I hope they get very rich, are very happy and provide lots of alternative energy for all of us. If Boone Pickens gets even richer off wind power then he'll be my hero.
But when he hides other schemes behind the banner of green that is a problem because it makes people not believe all of us when we say things.
If the water is needed in Houston or Dallas then that initiative should stand on it's own. It seems like quite a coincidence that this huge aquifer sits across the heart of the American Breadbasket. How do I know that it won't damage our ability to irrigate crops in the very area where we get most of our food? Why should I care more about people in Dallas getting water than people in Oklahoma City?
I was born in Houston and lived in Austin for a long time so I'm a Texan and do care about what happens there. But that doesn't mean it's necessarily right to support this plan. What else does it affect? Will it hurt midwestern farmers and impact food prices for all of us?
Reply
Jason 12:05PM (10/08/2008)
I will not fool myself into believing that I know everything about Mr. Pickens or what his motives are. My instinct though tells me that he is potentially a dangerous man who people should be careful about, but I also think it is important to not jump to conclusions to quickly. For example I believe that natural gas is a cleaner fuel than crude oil, so if natural gas can help us get off of crude oil than that is a positive. I do not believe that there is a single solution that will solve the energy crisis so as much as I support electrified transportation I also understand that other technology can also move us in the right direction and a combination might be what is needed to complete the clean energy transformation.
On that subject I have created a social networking site for Zap's 3-wheel EV called Xebra: http://xebraplanet.ning.com/
Reply
1985 Gripen 12:56PM (10/08/2008)
This man just seems fishy to me. To think that an oil man at age 80 just wants to turn into a philanthropist would be a stretch. There's extremes to everything, but I think he's trying to help others while also lining his own pockets. It's a win-win right?
I suggest you all watch that YouTube video the first commenter here posted above.
As a Californian I'm very suspicious of Pickins's ballot initiative 10 on next month's ballot. According to wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T._Boone_Pickins#Attempt_to_sell_natural_gas_with_a_California_Ballot_Initiative) if it passes Pickins' own natural gas company will be the sole beneficiary. Know where natural gas often comes from? It's a by-product of drilling for oil and is a non-renewable fossil fuel. I just wonder how he got The Sierra Club to sign-on to his "Pickins Plan".
The official position of the California Green, Libertarian, and Republican parties is to vote NO on Prop 10, whereas the California Democrat party declares they're "neutral" on it.
Reply
Chris M 4:00AM (10/09/2008)
California Prop. 10 is seductive but badly flawed, as it favors CNG vehicles over other alternative fuels, and as a bond measure, it adds substantial debt, both the principal and interest have to be paid back by tax revenues - and California already has severe budget problems and a deteriorating bond rating threatening to raise interest rates.
Another bad proposition is Prop. 7, which is supposed to require more renewable energy use by utilities - but it only counts very large "megawatt" sun/wind/geothermal projects, not the small homestead solar and wind power projects. The result would actually force the utilities to discourage small "grid tie" solar and wind projects and small hydropower projects, too! Of course, it would also dramatically increase electricity rates.
If you live in California, vote NO on 7 and 10.
Heck, just vote no on all the propositions, they are all bad!
Herm 2:29PM (10/08/2008)
His motive is profit, best thing that could happen to the greens.
Domestic natural gas for cars instead of power generation is also a good thing... dont forget, NG spills will not kill marine life.. windmills are also a good thing..but useless without transmission lines.
The best good thing here is if he proves that windmills can be profitable then there will be a stampede to install more of them.
Reply
Jack H 2:51PM (10/08/2008)
Herm, what the hell are you talking about? So we should chose our strategy by the guy who acts the "manliest" and "least gay" and wears a red, white and blue lapel pin?
Why don't we get Chuck Lidell to do our strategy for us. He won some mixed martial arts championships and he's a real patriotic guy. Hell, let's vote for him for President! That will solve all our energy and economic problems.
You're an idiot.
Reply
Ra Conteur 6:20PM (10/08/2008)
"wet themselves at the thought of riding a bike or taking the bus, or giving to a charity. I cant wait for Obama to take power"
Umm, check Obama's charitable giving record. He made $4 million last year and donated under $1k to charity. Twice what he reports giving in previous years. Pathetic.
As for T Boone - he's after gas sales. The wind portion of his plan is fine. But he wants car makers to build ICEs running on CNG. CNG is a fossil non-sustainable fuel that is produced exclusively by the petroleum industry. What is a REAL laugh is to see Sierra Club Pope get in bed with big oil like this. Hilarious!
Reply
zeitgeist 9:45PM (10/09/2008)
www.zeitgeist.com
Reply
zeitgeist 9:51PM (10/09/2008)
i have a car that runs on water. useing browns gas. nothing more. the us does not need oil at all. nobody cares. it is all a scam. take a look at a water torch. h2 is the answer to our future. it can easily be separated from 0. through electrolysis. a square d pulse modified wave. an internal combustion engine runs better on hydrogen than propane, and its free. + the by product is carbon dioxide. how clean is that? yes I have replicated stanley meyers work. herman anderson did this for nasa. usa has this technology. we just don,t use it. its all greed.
Reply
Chris M 2:04AM (10/10/2008)
Talking of scams, did you know that Stanley Meyers was arrested, tried and convicted of fraud? Seems he took money from dealers and customers but refused to deliver the goods! The fact that his "water car" didn't work for the court investigator didn't help his case any.
Of course, Meyers didn't deliver, as his device couldn't do what he claimed it would do. His "water car" ran on a hidden fuel tank, the bubbling electrolysis cell was just for show.
An electrolysis cell big enough to fuel an internal combustion engine would require more than 14 times the TOTAL power output of that engine! It couldn't power a car, it can't even power itself!