I have read quite a bit about both of these plans. I have also never been someone that had good things to say about T. Boone until now.
Given this post on mariaenergia I am reevaluating my assessment. I realize that Pickens is after the buck, but he makes sense and is throwing 10 billion at the idea.
I see a few holes in both plans, but these two men are on the right track.
Join me below for a discussion:
Update: Just thinking if we do not get away from oil we will be in Iraq for 100 years.
Gore Said that he likes the Pickens plan but would rather bypass the natural gas option as a bridge fuel...
In Gore's interview (which I watched on CBSnews.com and was previewed with an ExxonMobil commercial), the Vice President agreed with Pickens that we must end our dependence on oil but also on coal. The biggest issue for Gore is ultimately a global warming one: although clean energy is a health, jobs, economy and national security issue, we need to refocus ourselves on the objective of ending our dependence on carbon-based fuels. Once we pull that thread out and transition to a cleaner energy system, all of the other benefits will follow.
Gore is into security for the planet and Pickens is into US security.
From the same post:
The PickensPlan calls for a massive move to wind power and a shift in fuel dependency from oil to cleaner burning natural gas. Contrary to being concerned with the "greenness" of his message, Boone told Couric that he's most upset with the $700 billion a year flying out of this country to import oil. His plan is about energy independence and self-sufficiency.
I personally think that natural gas is the perfect solution for the more rural areas. I grew up in a rural area and everyone has a propane tank. And I have a soft spot for self sufficiency.
One thing I have not heard from either Pickens or Gore is a reference to Hydrogen. With Wind, Solar and possibly wave power and our plentiful coastlines hydrogen is a no-brainer.
I see no problem with joining these two plans and using natural gas as a bridge source until we can get the hydrogen plants up. We would then have an exportable source of fuel that burns cleaner than natural gas leading to lower maintenance costs and providing much needed relief to the environment.
What are your thoughts? I manage a wireless data crisis center, so please be kind if I am missing something.