Comments on: Winds shifting for Pickens' wind farm plan

A lack of transmission lines means that a massive wind farm Pickens had hoped to build in Texas will need to find new locations.

[bwrobertson2]

Nobel laureate: Wind is not the future
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-10254009-54.html

[cary1]

That's because he wants funding for his solar power project. Just like Thomas Edison discredited alternating current and look what we all use today.

Countries like Denmark and Spain are already using it to provide 19% and 11% of their electricity needs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power) As they get more efficient or as more wind turbines are installed, this number will increase.

I am not saying just wind power will meet all our needs, but it can partially fulfill our energy requirements.

[Seaspray0]

I partly agree with cary1. It is part of our future, but not the entire solution. Only one source of power available today can provide the quantity of energy needed without the use of hydrocarbons... nuclear energy. I know alot of people will say solar and wind can do it, but both the output of both of those can't be guaranteed. The wind may not blow and the sun doesn't shine at night. Both wind and solar combined provide a much more reliable stable output, but you still can't guarantee it. They will do well to suppliment existing power sources but we still need something reliable. A combination of wind, solar, and nuclear energy can provide all our power needs without relying on any hydrocarbon resources. I would suggest we throw our eggs into all 3 baskets.

[hfarooq]

we r using compressed natural gas here in pakistan for quite a while now.its great as far as performance goes.and u have a somewhat clearer conscience using it.

[techie2479]

I'm a quasi-supporter of the Pickens Plan - good in pitch and theory, but when I started researching Pickens and the plan, I came across some not so flattering info about his ventures (past and present).

[JohnQueuePublic]

How do you know when an oil man (past or present) is lying? When his mouth is moving.

Mr. Pickens is looking out for Mr. Pickens.

[gjohnson]

From what I've heard lately, there is a HUGE problem with the electricity backbone anyway. It is very antiquated and needs a major overhaul as demand is likely to continue increasing.
I'm no expert, but would it not make more sense to dot wind turbines around so that there is less burden on the transmission system rather than clumping them all in one place and having to transmit the power shorter distances. Wouldn't that even out the loads on the transmission system??

[mike_ekim]

Yes, distributing power production will ease the burdon on the grid. For example, if everyone placed enough wind or solar at their homes to generate 10% of their power, we wouold ease the burdon on the grid by 10% (that much is obvious, right?). That means less chances of brownouts, and as populations grow we can wait longer before beeefing up the grid.

The problems are:
1) these windmills are huge and not easy to locate
2) they should optimally be place where they recieve the most wind possible, and that's not where people usually live
3) economies of scale - 100 different small sites cost more to hook up to the grid than a couple of larger sites

[martin_c_e]

Modern windmills require a 16 mph wind to be constant. The great plains is one of the best places in the world for windmills. Unfortunately, most of the cities are hundreds of miles from the plains. Ergo, grid improvements must be made. Texas is spending $4.9B to extend its grid.

[jemiller0]

Remember back in the early Bush years all the rolling blackouts? What has been done since then to correct the problem? Instead Bush mired us in two unnecessary wars and put us into massive debt. Thanks for screwing our country Bush.

[ballmerisanape]

Didn't Obama increase the overall number of troops deployed.. Hasn't he spent almost as much as Bush.. and it hasn't even been a year?

I'm not bashing Obama.. but you are blaming Bush.. a single person.. for the bad things that have happened over the last few years. I'm pretty sure we would have at least gone to Afghanistan regardless of who was president.

And lets not talk about how Congress has mucked things up Royally...

The problem with clean energy is that people are willing to dive right into poorly planned solutions just because it's the right thing to do. It's nice that our auto industry is getting a taste of reality.. but that would have happened without the government getting it's hands dirty.

[jonathan0766]

When did we become a fascist dictatorship such that a single person, the president, is responsible for transmission lines? It's almost comical, the lack of knowledge and understanding of what the constitution and rule of law stipulate the president's responsibilities are. People think he's a dictator that is supposed to run the economy by command & control like Soviet Russia. Raw ignorance.

Also, we didn't have rolling blackouts at all under Bush, at any point, period. Los Angeles / California had a few during peak Summer periods, and there was one major crash from a power surge back into the grid up north near Canada / Michigan that spiraled down through the grid. Neither of which had anything to do with the president.

[martin_c_e]

The rolling blackouts were only in California. The whole problem was the PUC-C policy and not knowing how to regulate the system they created. Bush had nothing to do with it...keep on topic please.

[jemiller0]

Bush was in power for YEARS, and what did he do on energy policy? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. The guy truly is a clueless idiot. His version of energy policy is lets run around the planet invading and taking over countries that have oil. Then, once we do that, let's sell oversize pieces of crap that burn it all and as fast as possible. This moron really should be tried for war crimes. Regarding the blackouts, I don't remember the specifics, but, I do remember something happening in the midwest or east coast also. From what I remember it was one of the first issues that he faced and in the end he did absolutely nothing about it. At least Obama is trying to do something. All Bush did was stonewall the whole time he was in office, impede progress, and hand out no bid contracts to his buddies at corporations like Halliburton.

[ballmerisanape]

Wind power is noisy and can have a pretty large impact on bird migration...

There is a funny story regarding the noise.. apparently wind turbines are loud enough to sleep deprive animals to the point of death ;)

http://blogs.howstuffworks.com/2009/05/21/wind-farm-kills-goats/

[dwimmer38]

My conscience is completely clear. The whole CO2 thing is nothing but a scam. Wind farms are expensive and unreliable at best. Same thing with solar. We have plenty of coal and can build enough nuclear plants if needed. Obama's a moron.

[disco-legend-zeke]

Electricity can be stored as hydrogen (by hydrolysis) and the hydrogen shipped.

Obama wants to build more grid anyhow.

Sequester carbon: put plastic bags in landfill.

Don't burn coal... What would santa give to bad little boys?

Seriously, locating the generation closer to the consumption makes the most sense, if T. Boon can find enough wind.

[cyberspittle]

Salinas, CA would be a great location. Farm area is windy as heck and with Silicon Valley a readily accesible market. Famers would benefit from not only growing and selling produce, but leasing the land for wind generated energy. The governator would appreciate any investment in this downed economy state.

:)

[78tiger]

The transmission lines are a problem. Yesterday I counted 135 wind turbines from my front yard in west Texas, where few people live. I think that the highest users of electricity and population are along the coast where the wind blows almost continuously and the transmission distances are not great. But I understand trhat some people in Martha's Vineyard think that a wind mill 20 miles from shore would disrupt their scenery.

I heard T Boone on TV tonight claiming he believed in free enterprise and cap and trade. How can you believe in the free market and government interference in the markets at the same time? His wind power can't compete without taxpayer subsidies. Also, now it is coming out that the whole global warming issue is overblown.
From Senator Inhofe:
Jackson Confirms EPA Chart Showing No Effect on Climate Without China, India
Energy Secretary Chu disagrees with EPA Analysis

Washington, D.C.-During a hearing today in the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, EPA Administrator Jackson confirmed an EPA analysis showing that unilateral U.S. action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would have no effect on climate. Moreover, when presented with an EPA chart depicting that outcome, Energy Secretary Steven Chu said he disagreed with EPA's analysis.
"I believe the central parts of the [EPA] chart are that U.S. action alone will not impact world CO2 levels," Administrator Jackson said.
Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) presented the chart to both Jackson and Secretary Chu, which shows that meaningful emissions reductions cannot occur without aggressive action by China, India, and other developing countries. "I am encouraged that Administrator Jackson agrees that unilateral action by the U.S. will be all cost for no climate gain," Sen. Inhofe said. "With China and India recently issuing statements of defiant opposition to mandatory emissions controls, acting alone through the job-killing Waxman-Markey bill would impose severe economic burdens on American consumers, businesses, and families, all without any impact on the climate."

Along with Administrator Jackson's statement, Energy Secretary Chu responded with an unequivocal "no" when asked whether he agrees with the analysis depicted in the EPA chart. "No, I don't' agree with that [EPA] chart," Chu asserted.
"I was somewhat surprised that Secretary Chu disagreed with EPA's analysis of what would happen if the U.S. acts alone to address climate change, which cap-and-trade supporters claim is a global problem," Sen. Inhofe said. "EPA's analysis that global greenhouse gas emission levels can only be stabilized with meaningful, mandatory action by China and India is widely accepted. I extend an invitation to the Secretary to see whether he wants to clarify his remarks."
###
I do think we should use all of our local power options if they make fiscal sense.

[Joe Real]

The wind farm proposed by Pickens is really just a facade to sell his natural gas. His electricity generation from the wind is stabilized by natural gas but we suspect that it will be predominantly electricity from the gas rather than the wind that will supply the power. The wind turbine will just be there for the Green effect to mask the true Greed behind it all. He has supported many bills in California to fool the public into converting his fleet of cargo trucks to use natural gas, paid for by the California taxpayers and those trucks won't even be used in California.

He has been hoping that with the increased demand for natural gas via the facade of wind farms and "alternative" fuel initiatives, he would strike it rich to be the richest natural gas tycoon ever. He owns vast tracks of natural gas mining rights all over the US.

Well, we just want the wind farms without the natural gas. After all natural gas is still fossil fuel. But between oil from the mideast and the natural gas in the US, it is a non-decision issue. But Mr. Pickens, don't you try to fool us.

[gggg sssss]

what a stupid waste of taxpayer money - no wait - GM was a stupid waste of tax payer money. Pickens plan is just plain stupid that will only work with massive subsidies.

[martin_c_e]

AT&T likes points of Picken's Plan. It is converting 600 E-series vans to cng by the end of this year. It also plans to buy up to 6000 cng vehicles over the next 10 years. Also 7200 automobiles will be purchased over the next 10 years with a range of fuel sources, cng, hybrid, electric, plug-in hybrid, etc.

I think Picken's plan is great and if he can make money out it, more power to him. This is what a free market is all about.

[corcan]

Free markets are the reason wind & solar struggled during the Bush years. Obama has to give 100 billion of our tax dollars to wind and solar companies because they are too expensive/inefficient to survive on their own. And of course he's repaying the special interest groups that helped get him into office in the first place.

It says a lot about how useless wind-energy technology must be when a man like Pickens, who has tons of money to throw away, doesn't want to invest in it.

I'm glad I live in a free market economy.

[openskye]

Let's get past the politics and open up a national discussion on this. If we can throw money at old economy industries like automotive, why can't we figure out a way to get new industries going. Future jobs depend on it, as well as the obvious benefits to the planet. blog.openskye.com

[JungleStruggle]

Wind power is not a solution. The whole truth about wind turbines is never told by lobbyists and governments.
How could the very weak and extremely unreliable initial energy source of a wind turbine ever produce a steady power of any significance?
<b>Please think!<br />
And read: ?Wind energy- the whole truth? at: <a href="http://www.windenergy-the-truth.com">Wind energy- the whole truth</a></b>.
<br />
And for <b>green jobs</b> creation in relation to renewable energy read:
<br />
<a href="http://www.juandemariana.org/pdf/090327-employment-public-aid-renewable.pdf">Study of the effects on employment of public aid to renewable energy sources.</a>