WE NEED AMERICAN MADE WIND TURBINES

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by speedycat on October 26, 2008 at 6:13pm

We may pay more for US made units but at least we would be getting something for our extra money - US jobs, employees who will pay taxes, buy houses and other items to move the economy etc.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tom Bailey on October 27, 2008 at 8:13am

Hey;
I agree!!!!

Let's try this. I think we can get a big attention boost by logging onto (cafepress.com) and order a Pickens tee or ball cap.
We then should go to our local voting place and approach people on there way out.
People will have voted and for the short term relieved some stress, this would be good time to get them focused with us.
Best to all; Tom

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Raymond Baran on November 4, 2008 at 7:48pm

Hey the chinks reverse engineer the products we invent so why dont we give them a payback? your right how the hell is it cheeper to ---1 give them the crap to melt down 2 manufacture it 3 send it to a ship yard load it 5 ship it 3 or 4 thousand miles by ship 6 unload the crap they send 7 disperse it through all 50 states,also dont forget warrantee issues etc are we suppose to beg the dwarfs with 6 dicks for parts if we have a breakdown or what if they decide they dont like us anymore? I feel we need to keep it american its a NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE as well.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by neil cox on January 7, 2009 at 10:25pm

Hi Raymond: Your lack of good feelings toward our Chinese brothers is suggested by your inflammatory words. Basically, I agree, isolationism should be our next goal after freeing ourselves from Arab oil. A high percentage of what we get from China is fluff we can live better without. The GATT treaties are partly what is keeping the USA from building our own stuff. The ten times difference in expected pay is also a big factor. Are you willing to accept a large pay cut? I hope the UAW are willing to accept a big pay cut. They are at about 20 times typical Chinese wages. I've already made several related posts later in this thread. Neil

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Robert S. Poston on January 7, 2009 at 11:21am

HANS KUGLER doesn't know what he is talking about. You will get 4 to 5 times more plant and tree growth if you increase and maintain CO2 concentrations at 1,200 to 1,500 ppm in a hot house. Water, plant nutrients, pesticides, etc will be reduced. Yields will increase by 4 to 5 times. We can capture CO2 from flue gas and enhance oil and food production without gov't mandates, tax credits, incentives and politics. Dr Robt S Poston, PhD

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by neil cox on January 7, 2009 at 9:27pm

Hi Robert. Why do hot house tomatoes taste so awful? I also like free market, but we don't have a free market, and everyone may soon be back to hunter-gatherers, if that is our goal. We need to seek the help of government to get off foreign oil and dirty coal quickly. Getting off foreign oil is far more important, so let's pretend dirty coal is not a problem near term. The market responds very slowly, and sometimes perversely to the important issues.
We can perhaps send thousand degree c flue gases though meter diameter pipes from existing coal fired plants, for 100 kilometers to our vertical algae green houses. Is the gas cool enough after 100 kilometers to not cook the algae in summer? I think the flue gas is about 10% carbon dioxide, 5% oxygen, 5% water vapor, 78% nitrogen, 2% miscellaneous. Will some of the miscellaneous kill the algae, corrode the pipe and green house and buildup as the algae removes the carbon dioxide? Do we dump part the 1200 parts per million carbon dioxide into the atmosphere daily, so we can bring in a fresh batch of flue gas? I'm not being sarcastic, I just don't know a low cost way to do this. Bubbling the flue gas into open algae ponds is even worse as 90 % of the carbon dioxide and other pollutants enter the atmosphere. we can get much cooler flew gas from the top of the chimney, but is a typical chimney strong enough to support a one meter pipe coming back down the outside of the chimney? Surely we have exhausted the safety factors of the original chimney, if we mount carbon dioxide separation equipment near the top of the chimney. Perhaps it is better to be sick and sweating from the polutants than to bow toward Mecca 5 times per day, such few of us that survive that transition. Neil

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Robert S. Poston on January 7, 2009 at 11:31am

HI ALL, Lets stay focused on the PickensPlan to dramatically reduce or eliminate imports of crude from the middle east and Venezuela. Let's not let ourselves get distracted by all this alternate energy stuff if it requires gov't support. Let the free enterprise, market driven economy decide winners and loosers. Dr Robt S Poston, PhD

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Willmorth on January 7, 2009 at 1:11pm

Dr Poston,

Pickens supports all kinds of alternative energy, but the premise of this thread is the use of american made turbines instead of foreign made. Now, we both know that the reason that the turbines come from overseas is because of the free market system, but is restricted by the patent process.

We are buying foreign because We are the newcomers to the wind energy market, as those furriners have been dabbling in wind power since the early 18th century. And we are pragmatists who think it is actually cheaper to buy the knowledge and product offshore than trying o re-invent the wheel.

Winners and losers are always decided in the market driven economy, unless the government turns the tables. And even then, it cost hem a whole lot to negate the free market.

But, If you think wind power is free of governmeny subsidy, then I have a bridge for sale that you might be interested in.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dale Nelson on January 7, 2009 at 8:40pm

Actually, many of the wind power patents were invented by Americans, back in the 70's. When Reagan 'turned the tables' on alternative energy by taking away the tax setup that had existed for alternative energy since the oil embargo. He totally changed the market contours; enough so that the companies could not compete. To avoid bankruptcy, the companies sold the patents, mainly to Social Democratic Danes. Reagan also threw away the solar panels on the White House. We were pioneers in alternative energy until Reagan tossed the table to oil and coal. Both of which have enormous subsidies.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by neil cox on January 7, 2009 at 9:46pm

I also wish we could do this without government, but we need to hurry, and the market will likely be very slow and perhaps perverse.
The USA may need to threaten withdrawal from GATT, NAFTA, UN, NATO etc to get the big wind turbine manufacturing plants quickly built in the USA. Any actual withdrawal needs to be very gradual as the transition to isolationism will be painful for the USA and much of the World. My guess is avoiding foreign entanglements is good for the USA and most other countries, as I suspect the present arrangement is very unstable, and the crash may be in progress. Neil

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Willmorth on January 9, 2009 at 4:43pm

neill,
what we need to do is order 20 thousand wind turbines and the plants will all be build on shore soon enough without threatening withdrawal from anything.

Look at all the construction going on here to coincide with orders placed in the Northwest to supply the US's largest windfarm at Shepards Flat, OR.

If you want to see what a cogent national energy plan looks like, just surf around at the websites for WA, OR, or 18 other states that have developed plans without waiting for the government to develope an energy policy.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kenneth Ludden on January 26, 2009 at 1:41am

I currently represent a company in the US that is building wind turbines. Reply to learn more info.

Ken

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• Next ›
• Page