Piedmont Platoon

Add a Comment

Comment by Mike Anthony Fernald Sr. on February 5, 2009 at 1:51am

Comment by Ed Matricardi on December 5, 2008 at 2:05pm

As we approach the new year (and get ready for the new WH Administration & Congress), we are shifting gears to begin recruiting Pickens Plan District Leaders in every congressional district to help with activities in the coming months.

Please let me know if you are interested in serving as a District Leader in your area and I will get you additional information.

Thanks.

Comment by Ed Matricardi on November 22, 2008 at 8:39am

5 NC Mayors Sign Pickens Pledge for Energy Independence

To date, 168 Mayors across the nation have signed the Pickens Pledge, joining T. Boone Pickens’ national campaign to reduce foreign oil imports by utilizing abundant domestic resources including wind power and natural gas.

In NC, the following Mayors have signed the pledge:

William Bell, Mayor, Durham
John Grogan, Mayor, Eden
Alfonzo King, Mayor, Goldsboro
Yvonne Johnson, Mayor, Greensboro
Raymond Pennington, Mayor, Lumberton

If your Mayor is not on the list, contact their office today and urge them to sign the pledge for energy independence!

For a complete list of Mayors who have signed the pledge, please visit:
http://www.pickensplan.com/news/2008/11/21/mayors/

Thanks.

Comment by Kim on November 21, 2008 at 7:29pm

Hello. I am curious what people around Charlotte are doing who are passionate about energy-independence for America? I see the you have created the "Piedmont Platoon". Obviously it is impt. to write letters to all of our elected officials and spread the word. But what are the next steps?

Here is letter I posted to the President-Elect:
Dear President-Elect Obama,
Please implement “The Pickens Plan”.
I know you know how important energy-independence is to the future of America. You and I both know that it benefits OPEC in the long run to keep the prices down now, so that we Americans will forget and take our eye off of the goal. You also know that you have a very, very short window to make this happen for us and our children. Keep in mind that we will have less money next year than this year and the money that will have may be a bit less valuable due to the economy. Please, PLEASE make this your #1 priority immediately. Future generations will thank you. And of course if you need help from us, ask and we will answer.
God Bless America and best of luck to you!
Sincerely,
Kim
p.s. The financial markets will right themselves. They always have.

Comment by Michael, Houston on November 1, 2008 at 7:18am

Thousands of new GREEN JOBS are now posted on GREEN JOBS NOW! group page. Join the group today and we will keep you informed. http://push.pickensplan.com/group/greenjobsnowcom
Tell your friends looking for a job to sign up on the PickensPlan and upload their resume FREE at: www.green-jobs-now.com
Melissa
coordinator@green-jobs-now.com/b>

Comment by Cathy Hill-Cook on October 24, 2008 at 4:18pm

What lays to the left, what lays to the right, what lays above, what lays below, what lays infront of us, and behind us... as to within us like breath?
What are these 7 winds?

THE GREAT I AM!
With all of the I AM'S
we make a difference.

Brightlightspathfinders

Comment by Mike Anthony Fernald Sr. on October 23, 2008 at 11:32am

Comment by Mike Anthony Fernald Sr. on October 23, 2008 at 9:43am

An Open Letter to the President, the Congress, and the American people
Concerning Reform of the Federal Tax Code
Dear Mr. President, Members of Congress, and Fellow Americans,
We, the undersigned business and university economists, welcome and applaud the ongoing
initiative to reform the federal tax code. We urge the President and the Congress to work
together in good faith to pass and sign into federal law H.R. 25 and S. 25, which together call
for:
• Eliminating all federal income taxes for individuals and corporations,
• Eliminating all federal payroll withholding taxes,
• Abolishing estate and capital gains taxes, and
• Repealing the 16th Amendment
We are not calling for elimination of federal taxation, which would be irresponsible and
undesirable. Nor does our endorsement call for reduced federal spending. The tax reform plan
we endorse is revenue neutral, collecting as much federal tax revenue as the current income tax
code, including payroll withholding taxes.
We are calling for elimination of federal income taxes and federal payroll withholding taxes.
We endorse replacing these costly, oppressively complex, and economically inefficient taxes
with a progressive national retail sales tax, such as the tax plan offered by H.R. 25 and S. 25 –
which is also known as the FairTax Plan. The FairTax Plan has been introduced in the 109th
Congress and had 54 co-sponsors in the 108th Congress.
If passed and signed into law, the FairTax Plan would:
• Enable workers and retirees to receive 100% of their paychecks and pension benefits,
• Replace all federal income and payroll taxes with a simple, progressive, visible,
efficiently collected national retail sales tax, which would be levied on the final sale of
newly produced goods and services,
• Rebate to all households each month the federal sales tax they pay on basic necessities,
up to an independently determined level of spending (a.k.a., the poverty level, as
determined by the Department of Health and Human Services), which removes the
burden of federal taxation on the poor and makes the FairTax Plan as progressive as the
current tax code,
• Collect the national sales tax at the retail cash register, just as 45 states already do,
• Set a federal sales tax rate that is revenue neutral, thereby raising the same amount of tax
revenue as now raised by federal income taxes plus payroll withholding taxes,
• Continue Social Security and Medicare benefits as provided by law; only the means of
tax collection changes,
• Eliminate all filing of individual federal tax returns,
• Eliminate the IRS and all audits of individual taxpayers; only audits of retailers would be
needed, greatly reducing the cost of enforcing the federal tax code,
An Open Letter to the President, the Congress, and the American people
-2-
• Allow states the option of collecting the national retail sales tax, in return for a fee, along
with their state and local sales taxes,
• Collect federal sales tax from every retail consumer in the country, whether citizen or
undocumented alien, which will enlarge the federal tax base,
• Collect federal sales tax on all consumption spending on new final goods and services,
whether the dollars used to finance the spending are generated legally, illegally, or in the
huge “underground economy,”
• Dramatically reduce federal tax compliance costs paid by businesses, which are now
embedded and hidden in retail prices, placing U.S. businesses at a disadvantage in world
markets,
• Bring greater accountability and visibility to federal tax collection,
• Attract foreign equity investment to the United States, as well as encourage U.S. firms to
locate new capital projects in the United States that might otherwise go abroad, and
• Not tax spending for education, since H.R. 25 and S. 25 define expenditure on education
to be investment, not consumption, which will make education about half as expensive
for American families as it is now.
The current U.S. income tax code is widely regarded by just about everyone as unfair,
complex, wasteful, confusing, and costly. Businesses and other organizations spend more than
six billion hours each year complying with the federal tax code. Estimated compliance costs
conservatively top $225 billion annually – costs that are ultimately embedded in retail prices paid
by consumers.
The Internal Revenue Code cannot simply be “fixed,” which is amply demonstrated by more
than 35 years of attempted tax code reform, each round resulting in yet more complexity and
unrelenting, page-after-page, mind-numbing verbiage (now exceeding 54,000 pages containing
more than 2.8 million words).
Our nation’s current income tax alters business decisions in ways that limit growth in
productivity. The federal income tax also alters saving and investment decisions of households,
which dramatically reduces the economy’s potential for growth and job creation.
Payroll withholding taxes are regressive, hitting hardest those least able to pay. Simply
stated, the complexity and frequently changing rules of the federal income tax code make our
country less competitive in the global economy and rob the nation of its full potential for growth
and job creation.
In summary, the economic benefits of the FairTax Plan are compelling. The FairTax Plan
eliminates the tax bias against work, saving, and investment, which would lead to higher rates of
economic growth, faster growth in productivity, more jobs, lower interest rates, and a higher
standard of living for the American people.
An Open Letter to the President, the Congress, and the American people
-3-
The America proposed by the FairTax Plan would feature:
• no federal income taxes,
• no payroll taxes,
• no self-employment taxes,
• no capital gains taxes,
• no gift or estate taxes,
• no alternative minimum taxes,
• no corporate taxes,
• no payroll withholding,
• no taxes on Social Security benefits or pension benefits,
• no personal tax forms,
• no personal or business income tax record keeping, and
• no personal income tax filing whatsoever.
No Internal Revenue Service; no April 15th; all gone, forever.
We believe that many Americans will favor the FairTax Plan proposed by H.R. 25 and S. 25,
although some may say, “it simply can’t be done.” Many said the same thing to the grassroots
progressives who won women the right to vote, to those who made collective bargaining a reality
for union members, and to the Freedom Riders who made civil rights a reality in America.
We urge Congress not to abandon the FairTax Plan simply because it will be difficult to face
the objections of entrenched special interest groups – groups who now benefit from the
complexity and tax preferences of the status quo. The comparative advantage and benefits
offered by the FairTax Plan to the vast majority of Americans is simply too high a cost to pay.
Therefore, we the undersigned professional and university economists, endorse a progressive
national retail sales tax plan, as provided by the FairTax Plan. We urge Congress to make H.R.
25 and S. 25 federal law, and then to work swiftly to repeal the 16th Amendment.
Respectfully,
Donald L. Alexander
Professor of Economics
Western Michigan University
Wayne Angell
Angell Economics
Jim Araji
Professor of Agricultural
Economics
University of Idaho
Ray Ball
Graduate School of Business
University of Chicago
Roger J. Beck
Professor Emeritus
Southern Illinois University,
Carbondale
John J. Bethune
Kennedy Chair of Free
Enterprise
Barton College
David M. Brasington
Louisiana State University
Jack A. Chambless
Professor of Economics
Valencia College
Christopher K. Coombs
Louisiana State University
William J. Corcoran, Ph.D.
University of Nebraska at
Omaha
Eleanor D. Craig
Economics Department
University of Delaware
An Open Letter to the President, the Congress, and the American people
-4-
Susan Dadres, Ph.D.
Department of Economics
Southern Methodist University
Henry Demmert
Santa Clara University
Arthur De Vany
Professor Emeritus
Economics and Mathematical
Behavioral Sciences
University of California, Irvine
Pradeep Dubey
Leading Professor
Center for Game Theory
Dept. of Economics
SUNY at Stony Brook
Demissew Diro Ejara
William Paterson University of
New Jersey
Patricia J. Euzent
Department of Economics
University of Central Florida
John A. Flanders
Professor of Business and
Economics
Central Methodist University
Richard H. Fosberg, Ph.D.
William Paterson University
Gary L. French, Ph.D.
Senior Vice President
Nathan Associates Inc.
Professor James Frew
Economics Department
Willamette University
K. K. Fung
University of Memphis
Satya J. Gabriel, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics and
Finance
Mount Holyoke College
Dave Garthoff
Summit College
The University of Akron
Ronald D. Gilbert
Associate Professor of
Economics
Texas Tech University
Philip E. Graves
Department of Economics
University of Colorado
Bettina Bien Greaves, Retired
Foundation for Economic
Education
John Greenhut, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Finance & Business Economics
School of Global Management
and Leadership
Arizona State University
Darrin V. Gulla
Dept. of Economics
University of Georgia
Jon Halvorson
Assistant Professor of
Economics
Indiana University of
Pennsylvania
Reza G. Hamzaee, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics &
Applied Decision Sciences
Department of Economics
Missouri Western State College
James M. Hvidding
Professor of Economics
Kutztown University
F. Jerry Ingram, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics and
Finance
The University of Louisiana-
Monroe
Drew Johnson
Fellow
Davenport Institute for Public
Policy
Pepperdine University
Steven J. Jordan
Visiting Assistant Professor
Virginia Tech
Department of Economics
Richard E. Just
University of Maryland
Dr. Michael S. Kaylen
Associate Professor
University of Missouri
David L. Kendall
Professor of Economics and
Finance
University of Virginia's College
at Wise
Peter M. Kerr
Professor of Economics
Southeast Missouri State
University
Miles Spencer Kimball
Professor of Economics
University of Michigan
James V. Koch
Department of Economics
Old Dominion University
Laurence J. Kotlikoff
Professor of Economics
Boston University
Edward J. López
Assistant Professor
University of North Texas
Franklin Lopez
Tulane University
Salvador Lopez
University of West Georgia
Yuri N. Maltsev, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
Carthage College
Glenn MacDonald
John M. Olin Distinguished
Professor of Economics and
Strategy
Washington University in St.
Louis
Dr. John Merrifield,
Professor of Economics
University of Texas-San
Antonio
An Open Letter to the President, the Congress, and the American people
-5-
Dr. Matt Metzgar
Mount Union College
Carlisle Moody
Department of Economics
College of William and Mary
Andrew P. Morriss
Galen J. Roush Professor of
Business Law & Regulation
Case Western Reserve
University School of Law
Timothy Perri
Department of Economics
Appalachian State University
Mark J. Perry
School of Management and
Department of Economics
University of Michigan-Flint
Timothy Peterson
Assistant Professor
Economics and Management
Department
Gustavus Adolphus College
Ben Pierce
Central Missouri State
University
Michael K. Pippenger, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of
Economics
University of Alaska
Robert Piron
Professor of Economics
Oberlin College
Mattias Polborn
Department of Economics
University of Illinois
Joseph S. Pomykala, Ph.D.
Department of Economics
Towson University
Barry Popkin
University of North Carolina-
Chapel Hill
Steven W. Rick
Lecturer, University of
Wisconsin
Senior Economist, Credit Union
National Association
Paul H. Rubin
Samuel Candler Dobbs
Professor of Economics & Law
Department of Economics
Emory Univeristy
John Ruggiero
University of Dayton
Michael K. Salemi
Bowman and Gordon Gray
Professor of Economics
University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill
Dr. Carole E. Scott
Richards College of Business
State University of West
Georgia
Carlos Seiglie
Dept. of Economics
Rutgers University
John Semmens
Economist
Phoenix College
Arizona
Alan C. Shapiro
Ivadelle and Theodore Johnson
Professor of Banking and
Finance
Marshall School of Business
University of Southern
California
Dr. Stephen Shmanske
Professor of Economics
California State University,
Hayward
James F. Smith
University of North Carolina-
Chapel Hill
Vernon L. Smith
Economist
W. James Smith
Dean of Liberal Arts and
Sciences and Professor of
Economics
University of Colorado at
Denver
John C. Soper
Boler School of Business
John Carroll University
Roger Spencer
Professor of Economics
Trinity University
Daniel A. Sumner, Director,
University of California
Agricultural Issues Center
and the Frank H. Buck, Jr.,
Chair Professor,
Department of Agricultural and
Resource Economics,
University of California, Davis
Curtis R. Taylor
Professor of Economics and
Business
Duke University
Robert Vigil
Analysis Group, Inc.
John H. Wicks, Ph.D.
Professor Emeritus
Department of Economics
University of Montana
F. Scott Wilson, Ph.D.
Canisius College
Mokhlis Y. Zaki
Professor of Economics
Emeritus
Northern Michigan Universit

Comment by Ed Matricardi on October 16, 2008 at 10:47am

Region ripe for energy jobs?
Forum speakers cite demand, incentives as a nuclear renaissance takes root in the area.

By Bruce Henderson
bhenderson@charlotteobserver.com
Posted: Thursday, Oct. 16, 2008
Growing energy demand and government incentives for renewable fuels make the Charlotte region ripe for a surge of new energy-related jobs, speakers said at an economic forum Wednesday.

Global investments in energy from the sun, wind and other renewable sources are soaring as a predicted renaissance in nuclear power takes root in Charlotte's backyard, industry experts told an audience hosted by the Charlotte Regional Partnership.

The nonprofit agency encourages economic development in a 16-county region of both Carolinas.

What's unknown: whether the global financial crisis will scare off lenders and investors, especially in renewable energy. And whether schools and universities can turn out enough grads to staff high-tech energy firms.

“This is the challenge – matching graduates with the needs of industry,” said Steve Patterson, whose job is to help make that happen.

He's the first director of UNC Charlotte's Energy Production and Infrastructure Center, or EPIC, which intends to produce both a technical work force and technological advances.

Access to capital in a financially dry marketplace will also pose a major challenge, added Mike Horkey, who finances energy efficiency and “green” energy projects for Banc of America Leasing. Many projects involving renewables need longer than average financing, he said, compounding the problem.

“A lot of people have mistakenly thought that the sun is free, the wind and wave action is free,” Horkey said. “It's the conversion of the resources to energy that's not cheap.”

Other speakers included John Sisson, whose InSite Consulting helps companies find new locations worldwide; Duke Energy Carolinas president Ellen Ruff; and Randall Taylor, an executive with the engineering giant URS Corp.

The Charlotte region has shared in the growth that is watching global investment in renewables grow between 20 percent and 60 percent a year.

Duke Energy, meanwhile, is adding to its conventional power fleet for the first time in decades. Duke is building a new coal-fired unit at its Cliffside coal-fired power plant 50 miles west of Charlotte and plans a new nuclear plant just south of Cliffside near Gaffney, S.C.

In the past year, Sencera International Group announced it will invest $36.8 million to build a solar-module factory in Mecklenburg County. Finland-based Metso Power is building a $13.2 million boiler manufacturing plant in Lancaster County, S.C., where the engineering firm URS/ Washington Group brought 400 jobs for a nuclear-design facility. Shaw Power Group added 500 design and engineering jobs in its Charlotte location.

A study last month for the American Council on Global Nuclear Competitiveness, a pro-nuclear group, estimated that South Carolina could generate more than 50,800 new jobs, tops in the nation, if a new wave of nuclear power plants are built. North Carolina could see 20,700 new jobs, the report said.

Subscribe to The Charlotte Observer & Earn Miles.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/local/story/256349.html

Comment by Ed Matricardi on October 16, 2008 at 10:41am

Is the future of N. Carolina's electric power blowing in the wind?

By LIZ MITCHELL lmitchell@islandpacket.com
Published Sunday, October 12, 2008

Five years from now, 210-foot-tall wind turbines could be spinning off South Carolina's coast, generating electric power.

That's the prediction from the S.C. Energy Office, which was recently awarded a $500,000, three-year grant from the U.S. Department of Energy to study the potential for generating wind energy off the coast. Clemson and Coastal Carolina universities and the Savannah River National Lab are also participating in the research.

"The purpose of this (grant) is to develop all the necessary regulations and get a better feel for what's available (in wind resources offshore)," said Erika Hartwig of the state energy office.

EXAMINING THE RESOURCES

The state hopes to build an 80-megawatt wind farm of between 12 and 15 turbines about 3 miles offshore. On a clear day, the turbines would be faintly visible from the beach, Hartwig said.

One megawatt of wind power can produce enough electricity to serve 250 to 300 homes on average each day, according to the DOE.

The pilot project could serve between 20,000 and 24,000 homes.

It would be paid for by utility companies interested in using the power that's generated, Hartwig said. The wind farm location would be determined from studies now under way, but the most likely sites would be between Charleston and North Carolina, Hartwig said.

"The wind field drops offshore as you go south," said Paul Gayes, director of the Burroughs and Chapin Center for Marine and Wetland Studies at Coastal Carolina. "Here at the Grand Strand and on Hilton Head (Island), there is a large demand for power right along the coast. ... (However) wind energy is not as viable (off Hilton Head)."

The farther off from shore the turbines move, the more expensive wind energy becomes.

In addition to potentially harnessing the wind, the grant provides money to study other possible energy sources, including tidal flows and wave currents, Gayes said.

"There are very strong tides in Hilton Head where turbines driven by tidal flow are feasible," he said. "Part of this overall cooperative is looking at how to integrate all the resources that are out there."

THE TOOLS

Ralph Nichols, an engineer at the Savannah River National Lab, said the best way to measure the potential of coastal wind, wave and tidal energy is to use data-collecting technologies.

Buoys, for instance, can measure wave speed, height and temperature.

A 6-foot cube-like box called a sodar can measure wind speed and direction. The box can be placed atop buildings onshore or on platforms in the ocean and measure wind data up to 600 feet high, Nichols said.

Aside from assessing the resources, Nichols said, the study will also:

• Identify the needs and barriers of integrating offshore wind energy into the power grid.

• Identify technology that can transfer the power to the shore.

• Establish a state task force to determine the economic and environmental effects of wind energy and create a permitting process for wind farms in state waters.

THE BENEFITS

Off the coast of South Carolina, winds are estimated to blow between 15 and 16 miles per hour, fast enough to power a wind farm, Nichols said.

"The power you can get out of wind is very strongly related to" wind speed, he said. "If you double the wind speed, you can increase your amount of power by eight times (based on current modeling)."

Nichols said wind power could help decrease the Palmetto State's dependence on other states for energy and boost local economies.

"Wind by itself won't power the whole state, but it can certainly help," he said.

"And, in some of our most congested places, the population ... is expected to grow 20 to 30 percent in the next 30 years. It's hard to get nuclear and coal-powered plants permitted, much less built. So I hope (wind is) one way we can meet the increasing demand."

WHAT IS WIND ENERGY?
Wind energy is a form of solar energy. Winds are caused by the uneven heating of the atmosphere by the sun, the irregularities of the Earth's surface and the rotation of the Earth.

Wind energy or wind power describes the process by which the wind is used to generate mechanical power or electricity. Wind turbines convert the kinetic energy in wind into mechanical power, which can then be converted into electricity.

http://www.islandpacket.com/news/local/story/636429.html

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last