Pelosi and the Big Wind Boone-doggle


Automotive8r

Well-known member
Feb 8, 2007
237
Pelosi and the Big Wind Boone-doggle
Michelle Malkin
Wednesday, August 13, 2008


House Speaker Nancy Pelosi recently called congressional Republicans who want up-or-down drilling votes "hand maidens of the oil companies." Let's call Pelosi what she is: House girl of the Big Wind boondogglers.
Though she seemingly backtracked on labeling drilling a "hoax" this week, Pelosi refuses to consider GOP energy proposals that don't include massive government subsidies for so-called eco-alternatives that have never panned out.
Which brings us to Madame Speaker's 2007 financial disclosure form. Schedule III lists "Assets and 'Unearned Income'" of between $100,001-$250,000 from Clean Energy Fuels Corp. -- Public Common Stock. Clean Energy Fuels Corp. (CLNE) is a natural gas provider founded by T. Boone Pickens. Yep, that T. Boone Pickens -- former oilman turned wind-power evangelist whose ads touting a national wind campaign are now as ubiquitous as Viagra promos.
Pickens and Pelosi share the same talking points downplaying the need to drill and open up more access to American oil. Instead, the Pickens pie-in-the-sky plan proposes to replace natural gas with wind power in power generation and theoretically free up natural gas for America's transportation needs.
All well and good in la-la land, but let's be real about the limitations and costs of wind power. Past and ongoing experience demonstrates the unreliability of wind and the miserably low operating capacity of wind power facilities here and around the world. Depending on wind requires supplemental fossil fuel plants as backup to be turned on and off to compensate for wind power supply shortfalls -- nullifying any reductions in carbon dioxide emissions, which are miniscule, according to the National Academy of Sciences.
Not to mention the thousands of sliced-up birds and other wildlife that have become wind power casualties -- a problem scientists say would be solved by "repowering" old turbines at a cost of untold billions.
Fittingly, the environmental mascot of the Democratic National Convention -- the showcase of their alternative energy approach -- is an eastern Colorado wind turbine propped up with Democratic carbon-credit funds that has never produced any substantial energy because of its chronic equipment malfunctions.
But I digress.
Naturally, the Pickens Big Wind plan is proudly endorsed by Do-Nothing Pelosi's friends at the obstructionist Sierra Club. Through another company, Mesa Power, Pickens has committed upward of $12 billion in wind farms on the Texas panhandle. CLNE and Mesa Power are separate entities, but what benefits one piece of the Pickens puzzle benefits them all. The wind venture, as Pickens himself acknowledges, depends on permanent federal subsidies.
Pickens is banking on 'em. And Pelosi is banking on him.
As reported on dontgomovement.com, Speaker Pelosi bought between $50,000 and $100,000 worth of stock in Pickens' CLNE Corp. in May 2007 on the day of the initial public offering:
"She, and other investors, stand to gain a substantial return on their investment if gasoline prices stay high, and municipal, state and even the Federal governments start using natural gas as their primary fuel source. If gasoline prices fall? Alternative fuels and the cost to convert fleets over to them become less and less attractive."
CLNE also happens to be the sponsor of Proposition 10, a ballot initiative in Pelosi's home state of California to dole out a combined $10 billion in state and federal funds for renewable energy incentives -- namely, natural gas and wind.
Follow the money. Or, to put it in economist's terms as energy analyst Kenneth Medlock III did in an interview with The Dallas Morning News about the Pickens multibillion dollar wind farm investment: "A lot of what he's trying to do is add value to a stranded asset he's obviously got millions of dollars on the line." And so, potentially, does the Democratic Speaker of the House -- all the while wagging her finger at the financial motivation of others.

Copyright © 2008 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.
 

S592R

GT Owner
Mark IV Lifetime
Dec 3, 2006
2,800
Typical ....

I have read the Pickens plan and in principle it works. The political issue here is how the elected officials in Washington try to spin their own political cronies into their financial benefit.

We need an energy plan that includes all available sources of USA fuel sources. TAX the CR@P out of foreign energy and give direct subsidies to USA / cont. North America projects (USA owned companies). There is a great supply of wind / natural gas / Oil / hydro in the USA ... we need to use it wisely and widely.

US Congress needs to think beyond themselves and LONG TERM. If they do not we will be a third world country again with in 30 years. Remember USA was a second world country until 1930-1939 when WWII started rolling around and the rest of the world needed OUR RESOURCES. With out USA oil Europe would be speaking German ... and let's not even bring in the concept of the Arsenal of Democracy ...

Maybe we need to send congress to a three week World/American History refresher course to get them back into an intelligent state.

:ack:ack:ack
 

HiloDave

GT Obsessed
Mark II Lifetime
Dec 7, 2005
928
Hilo, Hawaii
You got it right, DPGT.
 

doogie48084

Well-known member
Mar 21, 2007
218
Taylor Michigan
Greed

Greed runs the world behind closed doors. Those in control of the big corporations will continue to get what they want as long as policians can continue being bought!

Democrats or Republicans, it doesn't matter anymore. They all have grubby little hands in the cookie jars!

I just love it when they get caught.

I figured T boone was into Natural gas big time when I first heard his plan....!:frown
 

Spirit

Heritage GT Owner
Mark IV Lifetime
Le Mans 2010 Supporter
The old T-Boone is in it for the money AND himself; bet your bottom dollar on it.

As P. T. Barnum said, "There's a sucker born every minute".
 

Empty Pockets

ex-GT Owner
Mark IV Lifetime
Le Mans 2010 Supporter
Oct 18, 2006
1,362
Washington State
I still say "electric" cars for commuting purposes in the immediate future and hydrogen in the long. (I kinda like the idea of just puking WATER out th' tailpipe! :biggrin)

It's too bad the "Volt" will sticker at around $45K. That's gunna put it out of range of the very people who NEED that alternative the most. :frown



"US Congress needs to think beyond themselves..." - DP

Well then, we're screwed before we start. :mad
 
Last edited:

BlackICE

GT Owner
Nov 2, 2005
1,416
SF Bay Area in California
I still say "electric" cars for commuting purposes in the immediate future and hydrogen in the long. (I kinda like the idea of just puking WATER out th' tailpipe! :biggrin)

It's too bad the "Volt" will sticker at around $45K. That's gunna put it out of range of the very people who NEED that alternative the most. :frown



"US Congress needs to think beyond themselves..." - DP

Well then, we're screwed before we start. :mad

Where are we going to get the cheap electricity to run these cars. I am paying $0.34 per KWH! It will only get worse if everyone uses electric cars. As you probably know electricity is needed to produce hydrogen, and don't sing the song about a time of use meter, I looked into it and then my rate jumps to $0.56 per KWH during the day when my pool pumps and A/C is running! Now if you were pro-Nu-Clear, then it may be a viable solution. However H is difficult to transport and store compared to gasoline.
 

S592R

GT Owner
Mark IV Lifetime
Dec 3, 2006
2,800
currently most hydrogen comes from either natural gas or propane. :ack I hate to sound like tree hugger Al here but wind power will work. Its just too bad T Boone seems to be the front man for the push.... bad feelings towards him by mucho people due to his past raiding activities.

Nuke power ....... :ack:ack:ack:ack:ack:ack:ack:ack:ack:ack:ack:ack waste .... where you gonna keep it? Solar .... yeah about 3% on a grand scale ... or everyone with a few panels on the roof .. mucho better. :thumbsup

Part of an energy plan needs to start right back at the home. Give BIG tax incentives for solar panels/wind generators for home owners usage. Do you guys know home much ELECTRICAL energy is LOST during transport on the GRID? ITS HUGeLY inefficient. but then again .. it was a government invention (go figure).

if we want to make it more efficient we would perfect transmission of electricity via light wave. Just like we do for data on fibre networks. Yes it is possible, yes it is more efficient and yes the government has been standing on the technology.

:bs
 

Empty Pockets

ex-GT Owner
Mark IV Lifetime
Le Mans 2010 Supporter
Oct 18, 2006
1,362
Washington State
Where are we going to get the cheap electricity to run these cars. I am paying $0.34 per KWH! It will only get worse if everyone uses electric cars. As you probably know electricity is needed to produce hydrogen, and don't sing the song about a time of use meter, I looked into it and then my rate jumps to $0.56 per KWH during the day when my pool pumps and A/C is running! Now if you were pro-Nu-Clear, then it may be a viable solution. However H is difficult to transport and store compared to gasoline.


Admittedly I'm speaking from the standpoint of someone in a state where HYDO POWER is the "juice" source! :lol

As to the hydrogen issues - yup, it takes elect to produce it. LOTS of it. That's where clean burn coal comes in. We have LOTS OF THAT. And I'd rather see THAT used than nuke power!:ack (Like I've said B4 - better to cough a bit than glow in the dark.) Besides, what grand scale damage could terrorists do crashing an explosive laden plane into a COAL POWERED ELECT PLANT????? Meditate on THAT'N a while...

The hydrogen transport issues are NOT insurmountable. Shoot! If we can put a man on the moon and robots on MARS...! ('Course, that said, as yet we STILL haven't been able to make an intercom system for McDonald's that anyone can clearly understand. :frown)
 

BlackICE

GT Owner
Nov 2, 2005
1,416
SF Bay Area in California
Clean coal is a marketing term, if one believes in global warming and worries about CO2; if not then a modern coal is fine except for the other junk it puts into the air. Do you know that coal plants have released much more radioactively than 3 mile inland and Chernobyl combined? Very few if any on this board remember what coal plants were doing to Britain and the big cities on our east coast. But the pollution was very bad, blacken buildings and acid rain! The newer, modern plants are much better though. My 1st choice would be NuClear, but I would support coal to be energy independent.

Modern NuClear plants are safe and strong. The containment building is so strong that a direct hit with a 747 would be needed to assure failure and release of nuke material. That can be solve with few anti-aircraft batteries around each plant. As for the waste if it is recycled, as Japan and France are doing, it is minimal a not a issue. Much less of a waste problem than what remains from burning coal. Yes, the older decommissioned nuke plants were unsafe and I wouldn't want to live next to one. I still wouldn't want them to build a nuke plant next to my home, but not because I fear for my families safety. but because everyone else fears them thus it would lower my property value. I feel much the same about anyone planing on installing high voltage power lines or cell towers near me.

Read this about coal and nukes.

http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html
 
Last edited:

Empty Pockets

ex-GT Owner
Mark IV Lifetime
Le Mans 2010 Supporter
Oct 18, 2006
1,362
Washington State
"The containment building is so strong that a direct hit with a 747 would be needed to assure failure and release of nuke material."


And that could be arranged...as 9/11 proved. Now, picture that 747 (or even something a lot smaller) loaded with C4.

I duth rest-eth my case-eth.

'Sides, Three Mile Island proved a simple malfunction or two - to say nothing of purposeful sabotage - is all it takes to screw things up from heck to breakfast in a nuke plant...for a l-o-n-g, L-O-O-O-O-N-G time.

Yeller Stripe Pockets
 

BlackICE

GT Owner
Nov 2, 2005
1,416
SF Bay Area in California
That is what the anti-aircraft battery would be for. If one assumes terrorist have access to a C4 loaded 747. They wouldn't waste it on a nuke plant. They know they can kill many more people by crashing it into a large hi-rise or into any major sporting arena during an event like they have already done. I direct hit on a nuke plant would have less deaths than what happened during 911. I won't elaborate, but they are many ways to kill Americans that are a lot easier and cheaper than using a 747 against a nuke plant. Do you really think the terrorist are dumb enough to waste their money and efforts on a less rewarding target?

Yes, 3 mile inland was a bad plant ran by some idiots that did the wrong thing. Even it that case no one died and the amount of radiation leak was minimal. In spite of the leak, the people in the surrounding area were exposed to less radiation than the average person living in Denver CO. Newer plants are harder to screw up and to leak radiation, but anything is possible when idiots do the wrong thing. Can you count the number of deaths caused by nuke plants in the US? It is far less than the deaths from coal mining!
 
Last edited:

Empty Pockets

ex-GT Owner
Mark IV Lifetime
Le Mans 2010 Supporter
Oct 18, 2006
1,362
Washington State
Do you really think the terrorist are dumb enough to waste their money and efforts on a less rewarding target?



Nope. But, that wuzzunt my point, now wuzzit! :biggrin

Besides, the "nuke fear factor" generated by pulling a stunt like that would be far more "effective"(?) than, say, blowing up Yankee Stadium on game day for instance.


"... It is far less than the deaths from coal mining!"
Yup. Coal mining oughta be done by robots in this day & age anyway.
 
Last edited:

Jones

GT Owner
Mark II Lifetime
Feb 11, 2007
267
Orange County, CA
Where are we going to get the cheap electricity to run these cars. I am paying $0.34 per KWH! It will only get worse if everyone uses electric cars. As you probably know electricity is needed to produce hydrogen, and don't sing the song about a time of use meter, I looked into it and then my rate jumps to $0.56 per KWH during the day when my pool pumps and A/C is running! Now if you were pro-Nu-Clear, then it may be a viable solution. However H is difficult to transport and store compared to gasoline.


Check this option out. Turn that T-bone steak you just ate into fuel...

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/fuel-district-hydrogen-2122433-sewage-methane?slideshow=1
 

Empty Pockets

ex-GT Owner
Mark IV Lifetime
Le Mans 2010 Supporter
Oct 18, 2006
1,362
Washington State
check This Option Out. Turn That T-bone Steak You Just Ate Into Fuel...

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/fuel-district-hydrogen-2122433-sewage-methane?slideshow=1


Install Wunna Those In Front Of The Capital Bldg And We Could Power The Whole World!!!!!