I would almost guarantee that he stands to make a great deal of money. He is a billionaire for a reason.

 

I have no problem with him making money if his plan is legit. In fact, I stand to make money on his plan myself, but that does not excuse his plan nor his motives from close scrutiny. We can't afford neither the investment nor the lost time if it's not a workable solution.

Pickens calls off massive wind farm in Texas

 

Trying to sell some of the $2 billion worth of wind turbines that he ordered a few years ago, still plans on trying with smaller wind farms in the Midwest or Canada, perhaps.

 

"It doesn't mean that wind is dead," said Pickens..... "It just means we got a little bit too quick off the blocks."

Having been to Germany, the #1 Nation in regards to wind power, and seen first hand the large wind turbines all over the country side, I say we go nuclear.

Having been to Germany, the #1 Nation in regards to wind power, and seen first hand the large wind turbines all over the country side, I say we go nuclear.

 

 

In today's world a smoke stack is seen as an ugly blemish on the landscape and a symbol of man's exploitation of the environment. A few generations ago a smoke stack was seen as a positive symbol of economic strength. Also in today's world, I often see photos of wind turbines proudly displayed as a symbol of sound economic and environmental policy. When I think about a photo of a smoke stack and a photo of a wind turbine, it's amazing how similar the photo's can be. I can't help but wonder that if wind turbines become as ubiquitous as smoke stacks were one hundred years ago, that they will come to be viewed with the same disdain.

In today's world a smoke stack is seen as an ugly blemish on the landscape and a symbol of man's exploitation of the environment. A few generations ago a smoke stack was seen as a positive symbol of economic strength. Also in today's world, I often see photos of wind turbines proudly displayed as a symbol of sound economic and environmental policy. When I think about a photo of a smoke stack and a photo of a wind turbine, it's amazing how similar the photo's can be. I can't help but wonder that if wind turbines become as ubiquitous as smoke stacks were one hundred years ago, that they will come to be viewed with the same disdain.

 

True. You can drive by a smoke stack or nuclear power plant and not see another one for 500 miles. You see wind turbines on every hilltop for 500 miles.

^ I'm with you. I've never considered myself so much an environmentalist as a conservationist. These turbines might spare the ozone layer, but at the expense of our beautiful American landscape. There is another answer out there somewhere. Nuclear might be it.

^ I'm with you. I've never considered myself so much an environmentalist as a conservationist. These turbines might spare the ozone layer, but at the expense of our beautiful American landscape. There is another answer out there somewhere. Nuclear might be it.

:thumb: :thumb:

Good to see people are finally agreeing with me about nuclear. :dancingpa

Good to see people are finally agreeing with me about nuclear. :dancingpa

 

Son, while you were still trying to learn how to load a 1911, some of us old fogeys were preaching the need for nuclear. :laugh:

Son, while you were still trying to learn how to load a 1911, some of us old fogeys were preaching the need for nuclear. :laugh:

 

Yeah, but you all needed someone like me to get them to listen. :banana:

Yeah, but you all needed someone like me to get them to listen. :banana:

 

You don’t have to convince me, it’s all of those tree lovers who want wind, solar, and corn power that sounds great on paper, but are lacking in execution.

I'll be the first in line with you guys on the nuclear issue. It's probably the best way to power large parts of our countries electricity needs. However, I just drove through Kansas and saw a large wind farm (100+ turbines) and I actually thought that they were beautiful and interesting.

I'm going to scale back what I said about T. Boone earlier.

 

What I THOUGHT he was doing was providing economic measures to make land rights available to provide utility lines in wind turbine areas.

 

Now I know that is not what he is doing.

 

I represent the electric utilities. Here is the problem:

 

THERE ARE NO MAJOR POPULATION CENTERS WHERE THE WIND IS, AND THERE IS VERY LITTLE WIND WHERE THERE ARE PEOPLE.

 

To get the turbine-generated electricity from where the wind is to where the people are, you MUST have distribution power lines on the grid holding at LEAST 270 kV in order to transfer electricity over distance. Recall from your college class that the ampage of electricity loses boost over distance.

 

If you lay a map of the electrical grid over the map of the United States, you will see that THERE VERY, VERY FEW POWER LINES OF AT LEAST 270 kV ANYWHERE WHERE THERE IS WIND SUFFICIENT TO JUSTIFY A COLLECTION TURBINE.

 

I have seen private, conservative estimates at the cost of acquisition and construction put at in excess of $3T. The "T" stands for "trillion."

 

What I thought the T.Boone was doing was mobilizing resources for acquisition and construction, but apparently he is just talking turbines.

 

He also has his hands in a lot of riparian/water issues and I think he's going to have to pick his poison pretty soon.