San Diego Alternative Energy Group

Add a Comment

Comment by John Reed on July 5, 2009 at 8:11am

I am a Director of a Company that has been converting diesel and gasoline engines to run on CNG for more than a decade. I can tell you that the biggest hurdle to adoption of CNG technology in the USA has been the turf war between CARB (the California Air Resources Board) and the US EPA over just who exactly is the overlord of exhaust emissions.
These two agencie's unwillingness to streamline, clarify or adjust regulations for new technology is legendary.
My company currently has the product and capability to convert 85% of existing in use heavy duty diesel engines to run more efficiently ( more power, zero PM, 30% less CO2, etc) on CNG or LNG than on any form of "clean diesel fuel" for less than $10,000 per engine, but CARB won't allow it...
In California, thousands of trucking, construction and agricultural diesels must be retro-fitted with Particulate Matter (PM) filtration systems or be moved out of the state by this December. The cost of these systems range from $8,000-$25,000 per engine. This ruling will wipeout entire businesses, and thousands of jobs. The retrofitting of these diesel engines actually causes them to use more fuel for the same work, thereby increasing our dependence on foreign oil, and actually increasing Green House Gas production.
CARB will not allow conversion of these very same engines to run on CNG, even though it pays for itself through decreased fuel costs, eliminates PM pollution ( the target of all this legislation), and decreases CO2 and GHG production as dictated by AB32.
Conversion fulfills all the goals, but CARB won't let it happen.
HOW are they stopping it?
According to CARB, if you convert an existing in use heavy duty diesel engine to run on CNG or LNG, they consider it a BRAND NEW engine, and the converting party must now Guarantee/Warranty the motor as if new. For on road engines, this means for 500,000 miles, and the engine must meet 2012 exhaust emissions standard. Doesn't matter if the engine is 10, 20 or 50 years old.
Additionally, as a BRAND NEW motor, each model/engine variant must be CARB and EPA certified to pass the 2012 standard at a cost of over $350,000 per engine per model per year of production.
What if you sell retrofit filters instead? You only have to warranty your retrofit equipment for two years, and there is no requirement to warranty the motor at all. If your system kills the engine, too bad for the owner...
Certification of these retrofits involves a simple durability testing, and they can be certified across a Family of motors covering many variants and model years with a single certification..
We actually sell the PM filters to other companies here in CA making retrofit kits, but we pulled out of that business ourselves because it is THE WRONG SOLUTION.
If CARB would simply allow CNG conversion to be treated the same as the retrofit kits, we could convert thousands of AG pumps in the Central Valley, and eliminate a large reason why they are a federal "non-attainment" area in terms of clean air. We could convert the entire fleet of container carriers at the Ports of LA and Long Beach, allowing them to expand operations as they would now fall well below the air pollution cap that has held back expansion. This creates JOBS.
So if you really want to "INVEST" in the Pickens Plan, invest some time in calling California Legislators and tell them to clean house at CARB...
Oh wait, these are the same idiots that still can't pass a budget....
Dr. John Reed
Omnitek Engineering

Comment by Jeff Bohl on January 15, 2009 at 10:21am

PLEASE THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT!!!! VERY IMPORTANT!!! MOST OF THE COUNTRY DOES NOT EVEN KNOW THIS IS OUT THERE!!! PRES ELECT OBAMA HAS A SITE UP FOR CITIZENS THAT YOU CAN ACTAULLY VOTE ON ISSUES. THE MORE VOTES AN ISSUES GETS THE MORE CHANCE IT HAS TO BE SEE BY OBAMA HIMSELF. THIS IS AN ACTUAL GOV SITE!!! IM NOT SURE HOW LONG IT WILL LAST... PLEASE PASS ON THE INFO TO FRIENDS AND FAMILY!!! GO TO THIS SITE:::: http://citizensbriefingbook.change.gov/

Comment by Mary Anne Carter on December 9, 2008 at 1:18pm

If you live in one of the following congressional districts and want to take on a leadership role in the Pickens Plan, please contact me and I will send you details.

Congressional Districts 41, 45, 49, 50, 51, 53

Thank you.

Comment by Alan Stuart on December 3, 2008 at 6:50pm

Don't believe the hype! The whole plan is a trick to privatizes water. Here are some resources to educate yourself on water privatization and it's devistating impacts on human rights.

A World Without Water
Flow (T. Boone makes an appearance in the trailer)
Blue Gold

Information is Shock Resistant! Arm Yourself!

Comment by Michael, Houston on November 1, 2008 at 7:23am

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

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

Comment by Mike Anthony Fernald Sr. on October 23, 2008 at 9:59am

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 Renew_H2_Man on October 12, 2008 at 2:46pm

Hello my freinds,

I see that lots of you are going to be at Solar Power 2008. Does Pickens Plan have a booth for it? I want to volunteer to staff the booth if so. I have lots of booth demonstration gear for Solar Hydrogen. Take a look at my Pickens Plan page for photos and videos. Wowzer!

H24ever,

Doug Starfield
nfcep@yahoo.com

Comment by Renew_H2_Man on October 12, 2008 at 2:40pm

Solar Power 2008 in San Diego, California--next week--Let's MeetUp and Make Some Noise!

Hello My Friends,

I just joined your Pickens Plan Group, and am attending Solar Power 2008 in San Diego, California this next week. Here is the link to this event:

http://www.solarpowerconference.com


Let's meet-up there, and recruit more members for the Pickens Army. Also, let's promote the Pickens Plan there. I hope this invite and news doesn't arrive too late for you. Let me know if you'd like to meet-up there at the Show. Wednesday is a free day for the Public at the Show. We could circulate in the Show, and get exhibitors interested in joining the Pickens Plan. Also, now that we've over a Million members in our army, I think we could promote a March on Washington ...EVEN if it is a virtual one for those who can't physically be there.

H24ever,

Doug Starfield
nfcep@yahoo.com


PS: If this comment is not appropriate for this group, I apologize ahead of time. I just had the thought today that we could do some good for the Pickens Plan if we did something at Solar Power 2008. I'm all in for it if you are. DS

Comment by Shine Editor on October 2, 2008 at 10:47pm

Glad to find a local group. I am very involved in 2 large local San Diego organizations who are looking for helping hands to assist in spreading the word about their amazing sustainability plans, one being an historical landmark the other being a children's organization pushing forward to educate our children NOW. Look forward to introducing this group to them at some point.

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last