William Ellard

Implementing Pickens' Plan for Public Energy Policy

Brahm;
"T. Boone has been pushing is diesel derived from NG" I don't think this is the case - and again I do not wish to pick the winner - let the market work.

Some in the US are paying less than $1 a gallon for NG, not diesel from NG......

Implementing Pickens' Plan for Public Energy Policy

Hick;
20 years ago I spent a month in the flattop mtn - great trout fishin. I am sorry about the range issue - I did not understand the query.

Go to the Tesla web site - I think the range is over 250-300 per charge, and that is for a high performance rig.

You could have an truck and bring with you a thin film solar system and charge up in the backcountry!


Also we could have bio-diesel - I use bio-diesel right now in my Golf tdi and get 50 mpg.
Any diesel vehicle could run bio-diesel, but if these vehicles were designed and manufactures for bio-diesel - they would work even better.

Implementing Pickens' Plan for Public Energy Policy

"use of natural gas for diesel and transportation as proposed by T. Boone. The efficiency of conversion of natural gas to diesel is only about 50%"

Brahm;
I do not understand what you are talking about - no one is talking about NG to diesel conversion? Also if you read the article, I am not proposing the NEW alternative to oil based engines - my view is let energy efficiencies and real free markets(include all cost - pollution) decide the winners.....

Implementing Pickens' Plan for Public Energy Policy

Allen;
Thanks for you thoughts. The move from income taxation to consumption taxation will increase productivity and the economy. Income taxes are a disincentive to create wealth, and an incentive to cheat......

Also these energy taxes will create a huge amount of high paying jobs. Venture capital firms have the money - but will not fund alternatives yet. - This money - 100's of billions is waiting for a comprehensive plan that will allow renewables to compete on a level playing field.

Just changing out the service station to have NG, and fast charge electric would be a huge boost to the economy.

Implementing Pickens' Plan for Public Energy Policy

"They will not voluntarily support higher gas prices. "

They will support paying $200 bucks more in gas a month, if they get 300 bucks more a month in take home pay. That is what my tax plan is all about.

You are correct - the fear mongers will just scream about the high gas prices.....we need to combat this.

Implementing Pickens' Plan for Public Energy Policy

"one concern I have about electric engines is range"

Hick;
Fast charge electric devices have been around for years. Service stations could be fitted with such devices. How long will you have to wait for a complete charge? I do not know 10 minutes? - but I know how greed works in our economy - this would be a huge infrastructure change with 50-100 billion dollars at stake - it will get done!

And remember, we currently spend 700 billion buying oil from other countries!

Implementing Pickens' Plan for Public Energy Policy

"I say Drill,Drill Drill. Build Nuke power plants. natural gas cars, solar power, Coal. Lets do them all and may the winner stand up!!"

Hi Riley;
I fully agree. Let economics pick the winners. But you need to add back in the cost of pollution to those energy sources that pollute - well to wheel.

If you don't add in the pollution costs, then the markets are not fair or free markets. Wind, solar, geothermal, CTL, bio fuels, natural gas, electric engines - are all economically disadvantaged because the polluting sources - Oil, coal - are basically subsidized since they don't pay for the pollution they produce......

Implementing Pickens' Plan for Public Energy Policy

Hi Max;
Thanks for your comments. Please read my article again - I am proposing at tax decrease for workers. Increase in pollution/gas taxes, with an even bigger increase in take home w-2 pay with the change to the SS tax, and all income taxes lower.

This shift from income taxes to consumption taxes has about a 20% gain since we will be taxing the underground economy, and not honest taxpayers.....

Currently the use of gasoline creates an enormous amount of pollution in the US - and many health problems for individuals, and our water and air. Check out the US health care cost just associated with air pollution. Then you will see these REAL costs have never been incorporated into the price of the polluting products.

This is the concept of negative externalities:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Implementing Pickens' Plan for Public Energy Policy

Hi Bill;
Check out tesla motors:
www.teslamotors.com/

0-60mph in 3.9 seconds. The torque from the electric engine is much higher. Trucks can run on an electric engine imho, if not then lets us biodiesel or synthetic bio from CTL, etc...

If anyone can show us why non-oil based engines can't work for big rigs - please post some info or links....I know diesel fuel can come from non-oil feed stocks....

Peak Oil Stocks for the Future

Hi surgcare;
I guess you did not read my article. And take your personel attacks elsewhere. A move to non-oil powered vehicles like electric, is important since we would be using our own energy, NG, coal, solar, etc...vs sending 600B of US $$ overseas. So you like sending all this money and GDP outside the US?

Also the economic and security issues are very important. With our current addiction to oil, If Iran, or a large middle eastern war, could shut down Suadi oil, what do you think would happen to Oil price and more impotantly - supply. How would you like rationing?

Lets us the electric grid. Coal and NG powered cars would also be much cheaper, and create US jobs...Electric engines are not free energy - it would come from US coal and Natural gas and cost consumers less than current gasoline...

Peak Oil Stocks for the Future

Monk;
If we move vehicles off of oil, we will no longer need middle eastern oil. For me this is oil independence. We will still get oil from Canada, and Mexico(#1, and #3 importers). We will still need oil and NG, and we should continue to explore and dig.

Peak Oil Stocks for the Future

Global Warming;
My article does not suggest at all that we should not drill in ANWR for environmental reasons. My reasons are purely economics - it does not make sense IMHO. We should drill in the lower 48, and coast as we have all the infrastructure already.

If the US does not get a comprehensive energy policy - economics will do the job - but in a more painful way. We need to raise the price of energy from oil, to the point were the US demands 20-30% less of it.

Since the demand curve is very inelastic - the price at the pump may need to go up much more than 30%. This will not take decades - one way or another, the US can not economically use this much oil. We can not drill our way out of this problem....

Peak Oil Stocks for the Future

Oilsupply and Shag;
I was hoping for responses, maybe not barf-age! Thanks for your opinion, and I do agree with continuing to drill. Yes I am an environmentalist, but also a capitalist pig. I own CHK, and many oil firms, drillers, refiners, etc....Greed and drilling is good, and can be done in an environmental safe way.

My personal view as stated in the article about ANWR, is that it just does not make economic sense. Lets drill our coastal waters were the infrastructure already exist.

I would have to respectfully disagree on how long it will take for the US to move away from oil based combustion engines as the main source of automotive power. If we just shift the income tax to gas taxes(net would be less total taxes), and create the proper economic incentives for new technology - The US will respond with greed, and US economic activity would thrive IMHO. If the US auto fleet just moved to clean diesel technology, we would not need middle eastern oil.

Peak Oil Stocks for the Future

Hi Brahm;
Thanks for your input. My article is based on the science of economics. My original degree was in marine biology(unfinished), and my overall background in the sciences are sound, but not up to your level.

I have researched technologies heavily over the past 5 years including CTL and the FT processes. My current view is that we need pollution taxes on NOx, SOx, and mercury. I am not so sure on CO2. So unless CTL can be done without a pollution reduction, then it will not work for me. Can CTL be done without increased pollution? You would know better than I, but I think at the right price it could be. The efficiency issues are important, but the US needs a viable alternative away from oil based vehicle transport. What power source do you think is best for out auto, and truck fleet.

I think developing plug in, and fast charge electric vehicles would be the best solution, Since we could manage energy, and pollution from much fewer power points - the grid, now we have millions of little inefficient power plants driving all over the place!.Then we could just tax pollution and let economics decide which is the correct energy for the future. When the government picks the winners(Ethanol) with subsidies, everyone losses IMHO.

I am getting ready to start a web site on energy economics, and future policy decision needed to move the US into the future. Your input would great to have. e-mail me if you the time at [e-mail].

regards;

William Ellard

Peak Oil Stocks for the Future

"economic destruction, job losses"

Actually you are incorrect. High oil prices increase US GDP and economic activity.
This is the chart of crude oil prices and real GDP for the past 10 years:

============== oil===================...
Year==oil ====Price inc.===real GDP growth
----------------------...
1998== $11.91
1999== $16.56===+39%===== 4.5%
2000== $27.39===+65%===== 3.7%
2001== $23.00=== -17%==== 1%
2002== $22.81===-1%===== 1.6%
2003== $27.69===21%===== 2.5%
2004== $37.66===36%===== 3.6%
2005== $50.04===32%===== 3.1%
2006== $58.30===17%===== 2.9%
2007== $64.20===10%===== 2.2%

As one can see, there is no negative correlation between oil price increases and real GDP changes. If fact the data shows a positive correlation. The years with highest oil price increase - 1999, 2000,2004,2005 had the highest real GDP growth - well above normal.

Conversly the years with negative oil price changes 2001, 2002 - had the weakest growth.

The reasons are simple - with increases in prices, drilling and exploring activity increases big time - creating jobs and higher GDP. Also alternatives start to get funded, creating more jobs.

If you think oil independence is important for national and economic security as I do - the only fix is higher, higher prices for all oil related products - the main one being gas at the pump.