I think we all knew this was coming but last year it was one of the rallying cries on how we were going to get off oil. Once the smoke cleared and the election was over the cold hard truth set in. You just can't stick some windmills up and start getting power without a lot of overhead and work to get it going before you even see any savings. This reminds me of what happened here in NY when the town I live in made the code so that if you put one up it wouldn't be nearly high enough to benefit from the wind to save you anything. Words are great but you better be ready to back them up. I think I remember Hillary saying something like that in the Primary.
Pellegrine From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1845 posts, RR: 8 Reply 1, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 1259 times:
Pickens did everything one man could. His plan is a victim of regulation and poor infrastructure. Of course if you build 1-4 nuclear reactors worth of wind turbines in a remote area you need huge transmission capacity.
L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29350 posts, RR: 62 Reply 2, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1241 times:
It was a poor buisness plan to start with.
The answer my friends isn't blowing in the wing, the answer isn't blowing in the wind.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
Mt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6354 posts, RR: 7 Reply 3, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1226 times:
Quoting L-188 (Reply 2): It was a poor buisness plan to start with.
I think thats more like it. Definitely poor business plan.
Quoting L-188 (Reply 2):
The answer my friends isn't blowing in the wing, the answer isn't blowing in the wind.
Not completely. But a good 20% of the answer is indeed Wind
Klaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 20853 posts, RR: 55 Reply 4, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1199 times:
The business plan depended largely on rising energy costs. The financial crisis has provided a temporary respite for consumers in that regard, but that will pass again, sooner or later.
Pickens probably was a bit too ambitious too early in the ongoing development in view of the financial crisis, but the concept had merit.
Michlis From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 737 posts, RR: 2 Reply 5, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1185 times:
Quoting L-188 (Reply 2): It was a poor buisness plan to start with.
But at least he had a plan and he tried. You don't make it to his level of wealth without taking risks and yes even falling flat on your face a few times.
If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the outcome of a hundred battles.
RFields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 6150 posts, RR: 25 Reply 6, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1174 times:
This is just another salvo in Pickens plan for building a privately held electrical transmission network across north Texas financed by taxpayers and eminent domain takeovers of private land for the transmission lines.
Quote: He'd hoped to build his own transmission lines but he said there were technical problems.
It is aimed at the Texas Legislature which needs to authorize him that ability. He was turned down by the legislature recently, but they have now started the normal special session every sixty days.
Pickens is not willing to use the existing power grid infrastructure to distribute his power like other wind producers are using. Yes, there would have to be some upgrades to handle large amounts of new generated power, but not a wholesale replacement.
Pickens will accept nothing less than new transmission lines from the panhandle down along the Red River to the north Texas area near Fort Worth. Pickens insists that his company own the lines, and unlike many high voltage transmission lines, his privately held company must own the land over which the lines travel. He says he must have eminent domain authority to take over land at 'reasonable values'.
He also want ERCOT, the Texas statewide power management system, to provide funding to build the transmission lines via taxpayer supported bonds. But his company will own the transmission network. Not ERCOT or the taxpayers.
Quoting L-188 (Reply 2): It was a poor buisness plan to start with.
Quoting Klaus (Reply 4): The business plan depended largely on rising energy costs.
Pickens said early on that for this plan to be economically viable, the price of oil has to be above $80 per barrel.
Quoting Michlis (Reply 5): But at least he had a plan and he tried.
He has a plan, and he has not given up. This story is about political pressure, not a change in location, strategy or direction of his plan.
Though he will certainly be willing to move the site if another state or government entity is willing to give him the money and ownership he wants.
Mt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6354 posts, RR: 7 Reply 7, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1160 times:
Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 6): Quote:
He'd hoped to build his own transmission lines but he said there were technical problems.
Yea i also picked up on the "technical problems" part. There a LOT more to that story.
I certainly do not blame him for wanting his own power lines. However, the methods he seems to be using are sketchy at best though.
So - back to the original point.. its a matter of politics vs viability of Wind Energy.
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 20853 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
