St. Louisians for the Pickens Plan

Comment

Comment by KENN DRESCHER on July 8, 2009 at 9:43am

Please visit / join this site:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/reform-autos/

There's an opportunity to have an impact now. W/O an effort status quo will remain. They'll be no major changes in the Automotive products we'll be offered. Frankly I don't believe even the Auto manufactures themselves have a clue as to what will get the American Public buying. They need direction. If they feel that they continue to be able to design, market, and sell vehicles based on high HP and high speed, that's what they'll continue to build. They'll be supported by the "Criminal" Enterprizes - Cities, police departments, courts, judges, attorneys, insurance agents, ect. which prey like vultures off the high speed offenders; despite the carnage. Heck, that's their Bread & Butter...

Comment by Codi Prachar on March 26, 2009 at 6:09am

T. Boone Pickens to Speak at University of Missouri System's First Energy Summit
Monday, March 23, 2009 :: Staff infoZine

Texas oilman T. Boone Pickens, architect of the "Pickens Plan" to reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil, is the keynote speaker for a statewide Energy Summit hosted by the University of Missouri's four campuses April 22-23 in Columbia.

Columbia, MO - infoZine - Pickens' keynote address is scheduled for 12:15 p.m. Wednesday, April 22 (Earth Day) in Jesse Hall Auditorium on the University of Missouri-Columbia campus. The speech is free and open to the public, but due to limited seating, registration is required. To register, visit www.missourisummits.com.

Missouri University of Science and Technology Chancellor John F. Carney III is chair of the Missouri Energy Summit.

Pickens is the founder and chairman of BP Capital Management, one of the nation's most successful energy-oriented investment funds. His Pickens Plan calls for revamping U.S. energy policy to harness domestic energy alternatives while promoting the development of new technologies for alternative energy.

Pickens elevated energy reform into the national debate during the 2008 presidential campaign, with both candidates using direct facts and statistics provided by the Pickens Plan on the campaign trail. Many aspects of the Pickens Plan were included in President Obama's stimulus package, including incentives for advancement of wind, solar, and other alternative energy sources and a new transmission grid. Taking advantage of abundant domestic alternative fuels like natural gas to reduce our country's staggering dependence on foreign oil, which has reached nearly 70 percent, remains a top priority of Mr. Pickens as he continues his call for a comprehensive energy plan.

University of Missouri System President Gary Forsee announced in December that the Energy Summit would be one of two statewide economic development forums spearheaded this year by the university's four campuses. The second summit, slated for Oct. 7-8 in Kansas City, will focus on biological and life sciences.

"We want to bring together our state's best researchers, faculty, companies, entrepreneurs, investors, federal and state agencies, students and others who can help our state assume a leadership role in achieving energy and health advances for this century," Forsee said. "Cultivating renewable energy sources and improving human health are important goals in their own right, but they also can play a huge role in advancing our state's economy by creating more jobs."

Pickens' speech kicks off an afternoon lineup of leading national energy experts at the Energy Summit. First-day speakers include:

* Dale Klein, chairman, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
* Joan Woodard, Ph.D., executive vice president and deputy laboratories director, nuclear weapons program, Sandia National Laboratories
* Gary Rainwater, chairman, CEO and president, AmerenUE
* Fredrick D. Palmer, senior vice president, Peabody Energy
* Richard Sayre, director, Enterprise Rent-A-Car Institute for Renewable Fuels, Donald Danforth Plant Science Center
* Bob Dixon, incoming chair, Alliance to Save Energy Board
* Bob Kruse, executive director of global vehicle engineering for hybrids, electric vehicles and batteries, General Motors
* Karen Harbert, president and CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Institute for 21st Century Energy
* Michael Chesser, chairman and CEO, Great Plains Energy and KCP&L
* Research officers from the University of Missouri System's four campuses



Day two of the Missouri Energy Summit will feature presentations and panel discussions by researchers invited from public and private universities across the state, governmental and nonprofit agencies, energy companies, and others.

More information about the event is available online at www.missourisummits.com

Source: Missouri University of Science and Technology

Comment by KENN DRESCHER on December 21, 2008 at 9:31am

I hope to elaborate, have almost a BOOK, I could relate, I'm going to stary doing Videos. Was attempting to read Jeri's composition, (By the way, I grew up most Summers across the Mississippi River from Portage - in Chautauqua, IL. Wrote a song titled: "Our Lady of the Waters".) and it's just plain tough to READ all this stuff!!! Here we are in the A\V age, this communication was deemed futurist just 20 years ago. Now it's here, + we're TYPING? Same with the Auto Industry...
Here's the crux of my efforts -
I've been depressed apparently most of my Life. I wanted to do something REAL for the Planet. Gave it much thought and concluded it's AUTOS, and all the related destruction they've caused. Than I drilleded into what aspect of Automotive Design was the most outrageous, ubsurd, + EASILY CORRECTABLE. Answer = TOP SPEED! Simple right? Instead of attempting to force Drivers to observe a Sign with a Top Legal Speed Limit, LIMIT TOP SPEED AT THE POINT OF MANUFACTURE! Hey! Whay hasn't any1 else thought of this?!! Well, as my Grampaw, Gus Faugust always said, "When things don't make sense... There's a Con in the Works!!!" Boy, Grampaw Gus, were U right, Big Time. Lotz Cons, and Corruption. Our Government is rotten to the Core.
I suggested this to these "Leaders", (they ain't Leaders by no streach -). Was told, it's not that simple. WRONG!!! It is PRECISELY that SIMPLE. And, when some1 tells me it's not, I KNOW THEY'RE A CON!!!
TOP SPEED can be limited, and the point of manufacture to the SINGLE R.P.S. (Revolution Per Second) of the Drive Shaft. IN FACT, Ford has stolden my idea: "STAY ALIVE = 75 m.p.h., and will incorporate into 2009 Vehicles under the Trade Name of: Smart Key. And most recently manufactured vehicles can be retrofitted to obtain a pre determined = Top Speed, via Retro Fit.
Why is this important? Mass X Velocity + Energy (required). This is the 1 variant lowest common denominator which MUST be set in order to force Automotive manufactures to build the vehicles we need!!! EX: Saw a 2008 Dodge Charger, Rammed Hemi. 425 HP! That's a legal lethal weapon. MUST BE BARRED from the Street. That vehicle, with a set target Top Speed, with Road Command, and viable torque to withstand gusting headwinds, could easily be built with an engine producing no more than 80 HP!!! Do the math... Up fuel economy by 500%. I'll add more later.
IF ANY1 tells You that it's too complicated, or not possible to limit Top Speed, tell them right to their face that they are LYING... It is. It's just that SIMPLE. More on the Corrupting which is preventing Common Sense solutions in future comments!

Merry Xmas!

Comment by KENN DRESCHER on December 21, 2008 at 7:35am

Ur up against an organized, instituionalized corruption machine. From the Top, to the patrolman on the street.

PS: Great shot of the Arch!!!

Comment by Jeri Zerr MO 2nd Congressional District Leader on December 20, 2008 at 9:24pm

Hi! We need your help here in Missouri. We need to get our Governor, our Congressman and our U.S. Senators on board. Will you please join us in this endeavor?

We are hosting a meetup for Missouri District 2 on Monday, December 29, 2008 at 7pm. Please check here for further information and to RSVP: MO District 2 Meetup - December 29, 2008 7pm

Comment by Jeri Zerr MO 2nd Congressional District Leader on November 7, 2008 at 11:43pm

I wrote this for a group in our local community and thought I'd share it here. It's long since I needed to explain the various energy sources as the target audience is generally not familiar with some of these concepts, advantages and limitations.

My idea of an ideal energy plan: reduce our dependence on foreign oil while creating jobs here in the Homeland thereby helping our economic crisis, as well.

I support T. Boone Pickens' energy plan to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Pickens himself explains that his plan is not THE answer, rather a BRIDGE until we develop THE answer. I agree with him, CNG is not the final answer, but it is indeed a component of an answer that we so desperately need. I'm also confident there are several technologies that when combined will indeed provide THE answer to our energy situation.

We all understand that the power grid currently has a minimum load which I will refer to as the "base load." Logically this base load typically occurs during the night in the moderate seasons of spring and fall. This is when the power demand on the power grid is generally at the very lowest levels. Traditionally the very peak demands on the power grid occur in the mid afternoon through early evening on the very hottest of summer days. Any viable energy plan developed must be scalable to the current and instantaneous demands on the power grid. This means the base load must be maintainable at all times, at a minimum level, and the energy plan *must* be adaptable to take into consideration the peak loads during hot summer days.

Power is currently generated many ways: nuclear, coal, hydroelectric (both from rivers and from containment ponds such as Ameren's Tom Sauk), solar, geothermal, wind, natural gas (NG), methane, etc.

T. Boone Pickens is a former Republican who states he is now non-partisan. He's also a former oilman so he understands the energy crisis currently at hand. He's also a very wealthy multi-millionaire who's put his money where his mouth is - he's personally financing most, if not all, of those tv commercials you've undoubtedly seen during the recent campaign days. Mr. Pickens did NOT promote one candidate over another - he was simply promoting his plan to all American Citizens to adopt so hopefully our 44th President (now we know the 44th POTUS will be Obama) will adopt a viable, sustainable and resilient energy plan. The Pickens Plan calls for a substantial reduction of our reliance on foreign oil. Pickens' plan is to develop wind power (currently 1% of power generation in the US) to replace the natural gas currently being burned to supply a portion of the power to the grid, then convert fleet vehicles and some personal vehicles to Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) that is currently burned for the grid. Pickens states this will reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Pickens himself states this is a short-term plan to buy us time to develop the next phase to fix our energy problem.

In Pickens' words:

"Building wind facilities in the corridor that stretches from the Texas panhandle to North Dakota could produce 20% of the electricity for the United States at a cost of $1 trillion. It would take another $200 billion to build the capacity to transmit that energy to cities and towns. That's a lot of money, but it's a one-time cost. And compared to the $700 billion we spend on foreign oil every year, it's a bargain." http://www.pickensplan.com/theplan/
I AGREE WHOLEHEARTEDLY. I agree with Boone we need a solution, however I do not believe we simply need a "bridge plan." I think we need a real plan that is sustainable while making our nation more resilient. I have reason to believe we have the capability here and now to *rapidly* deploy new power plants onto the grid using *existing* technology. Meanwhile this technology that is being developed by US companies is now being outsourced to foreign countries who have a stronger and clearer vision of where we all need to be in the coming years so they have already begun the process and are signing into agreements with our US companies.

So what are we waiting for? Why are we standing idly by while the rest of the world moves into the future?

My thoughts on existing technology..

Nuclear is available of course and it's generally available 24x7. However nuclear is NOT the final solution. As a teen while living with my father who was an electrical engineer for a well known U.S. power company, I initially believed nuclear power was the ultimate solution to the world's power needs. However as an adult who's experienced many disasters, I now firmly believe nuclear is NOT the answer. I have first hand seen the devastation left behing after the powerful forces of destruction of mother nature and I seriously doubt any nuclear power plant is safe in the scope of a mega disaster. My opinion is besides being a terrorist target; besides having it's own innate potential for causing a man-made disaster; natural mega-disasters such as earthquakes, hurricanes and tornadoes may also compromise a nuclear power plant (though I'll leave that for the experts to debate.) It also has a very long lead time to develop new power plants. Then there's the matter of what to do with the spent fuel rods.

Solar is a great! source of power - during the peak times of day. There are low tech solutions to store radiant solar heat in ponds or pools of water or bricks or clay or other material then released again over time. While this passive energy may provide some radiant heat to homes and businesses, I don't believe this is viable for supplying power to the grid. Nor is it viable to have massive banks of batteries to store the power, either. So we'll reserve solar for the daytime moderate to peak power consumption loads.

Wind is another GREAT source of power - yet we currently only utilize wind to generate 1% of the energy on the grid. The U.S. has quite a resource in wind - so much so that the U.S. is known as the "Saudi of the world" for the wind capacity for power generation. New wind power farms can be built rather swiftly - and since they also generate AC power they don't have conversion loss converting from DC to AC as solar typically does. As long as there are wind farms throughout the US and some even in the windy areas just off the coast, wind is a viable source of power for the grid and should contribute to the ideal energy plan. Wind farms may also be a viable utilization of flood plains thereby keeping that land from being developed for homes and businesses lessening the impacts from disasters. (Mr. Adolphus Busch, I hope you are looking into this!)

Geothermal, until now, was only viable in small portions of the US - and not typically where the larger populations live and work. However recent technological advances have opened up many suitable sites that were previously considered unusable for geothermal. Geothermal is available 24x7 - no matter the outside conditions. The great aspect is new power plants can be developed quickly - in 6 months to a year. Geothermal is the same as wind on the lack of conversion loss since geothermal power plants produces AC power.

Hydroelectric is already around and is available 24x7 - usually. There are some situation where it isn't (similar to nuclear). Hydroelectric plants also produces AC power (unlike solar).

So ultimately this is my idea of an ideal energy plan:

The "base load" can be met utilizing a combination of geothermal, wind, hydroelectric (such as found on rivers and dams) and for now existing nuclear power plants and the current existing power generation plants such as coal and NG. Alternate capacity needs to be continually developed from wind, hydroelectric and geothermal to compensate for the nuclear plants as they are expected to come off the grid.

The "peak load" can be assisted by solar generation farms and hydroelectric plants on containment ponds, such as Tom Sauk. And for the time being we'll still have nuclear plants which also increase generation to a point during peak loads. Also some production can be created from burning natural gas and some of the remaining coal plants (which can be left viable for the foreseeable future and only utilized during the very highest demans of the peak load.)

Again, as we transition from the current energy model to the ideal energy plan we need to continue to develop the infrastructure and additional sustainable and renewable alternate means of power generation as we replace the existing power plants based upon non-renewable energy sources.

What about those existing nuclear plants? Existing nuclear plants, as they are decommissioned and brought offline, if located correctly, can possibly be converted to "low temperature" geothermal power plants using existing technology. The infrastructure is already in place to get the geothermal power onto the grid. In the meantime we continue to hope that mega-disasters do not hit one of the existing nuclear plants nor the spent fuel rods when they are being transported.

The other aspect of my plan - power conservation. When I was in public schools in the 1970's, we were taught about energy conservation. Is this still being taught to our youth today? Each and every one of us needs to look around our home and our offices, our schools and our community buildings and figure out ways we can reduce the power needs in each aspect of our lives. I believe we can readily reduce our current consumption by 10% without much effort and 20% or 30% or more with some effort. Some possible ways to conserve power are listed here, but there are many articles devoted strictly to this subject: Raising the thermostat a degree or two in the summer, lower it a degree or two in the winter. Insulate and caulk better. As lower efficiency appliances wear out they should be replaced with higher efficiency appliances. By converting our lighting to lower wattage lighting sources such as LEDs (I have one here on my desk - it generally provides enough light for my needs!) and more efficient construction methods are implemented (such as determined by the LEED green building rating system), we can significantly reduce our demand on the electric grid.

Now we just need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.
We need to raise the bar on the cars being manufactured in the here and now. Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV) and Electric Vehicles (EV) will soon become more feasible to be developed. Battery technology is improving and there have been remarkable strides made in the efficiency of electric motors (an R&D company in Detroit is currently developing a 100 mpg SUV based upon this new technology). I believe solar panels can be built into the roofs (and other parts of the vehicles such as hoods, trunks and upper framing) of these vehicles to automatically recharge these vehicles during the day (flexible solar panel technology already exists.)

We can also look into newer technologies to help reduce our current demand, over time. In the 1880s, over 120 years ago, Nikola Tesla demonstrated broadcast power. That's correct, he successfully demonstrated the ability to illuminate light bulbs from over 20 miles away without any power transmission lines ("Look ma, no wires!") Today Intel is developing a technology to wireless recharge batteries on laptop computers. Taking that one step further: Simply working to reduce power lost through wires and cables will also help reduce some of the power demands on the grid. Or having a bank of batteries in each home to help supplement the demand during the day and then recharge at night would also be another aspect to research and develop. Also that allows the power generation stations to be located more optimally (such as the wind, solar, geothermal and hydroelectric generation plants) to increase their production capacity. There are MANY future technologies that can be developed - the key is that we continue on this path and each and every one of us do our part to make this happen.

The side benefit of this energy plan - we will reduce our dependence on foreign oil therefore eliminating the reason that we are currently embedded in a war in Iraq. By keeping our foreign oil dollars here at home we'll be boosting our economy while making money available to reinvest into our energy infrastructure. By investing and reinvesting in our energy structure we'll be creating very important jobs here in the Homeland to have decent paying jobs so the employees can support their families. Ultimately, this will help our currently demoralized society regain the lost PRIDE in America and what we stand for without constant reminders of the contradictions we live each and every day.

Jeri Zerr
Saint Charles County, Missouri

PS Does anyone know how to get this energy plan before Mr. T. Boone Pickens, our 44th President-Elect Barack Obama, Mr. Samual Bodman, and the yet unnamed new Secretary of Energy? I would also like to see Adolphus Busch look into the feasibility of utilizing flood plains for wind farms. Anyone who's spent much time on and around the Mississippi River near Portage and West Alton realizes the significant amount of wind that seems to be bountiful year round along our mighty river.

Comment by Dianna Brown on October 26, 2008 at 8:23pm

If you are interested in joining our March on Washington in Spring 2009 - or just helping us organize, please consider joining our March on Washington group, started today. We hope to have booths and/or demonstrations... what a perfect way to bring your favorite alternative energy source to the forefront! Read more on the group site! Tell your friends!

Pickens Plan March on Washington

Comment by Shel Sherman on October 17, 2008 at 7:38am

I am interested in joining the group. I can be contacted at ssherm32@sbcglobal.net. Please advise of any upcoming events/activities.

Comment by KENN DRESCHER on October 7, 2008 at 10:30am

Demanding change in Neighborhood Preservation, and other crooks which prevent state of the ate technology from being deployed.

(Notice all the Electric Co. Poles, and Lines. Beautiful, huh...)

Also, if a Owner monifyies his vehicle to get BETTER Fuel Economy, by like installing a Weber Carb, over the Factory installed Unit, should be able to either have it Tested, rather than be rejected, if it falls under the new Vehicle Testing Regulations.

Comment by Semperfi on October 6, 2008 at 9:53am

Does anyone know of any Liberty Meetings or such that happen in STL? I asm relatively new to the area and have not been out much in the last year.

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last