Pickens' Plan -- Reduce Foreign Dependance On Oil by 38%

Use the right energy for the right use. That concept lies at the core of a U.S. domestic energy plan unveiled Tuesday by legendary oilman T. Boone Pickens.

The United States uses close to $700 billion in foreign energy supplies, primarily oil, Pickens pointed out on CNBC's "Squawk Box." It will be impossible for one energy source to totally replace that supply, he noted.

But developing wind and solar power could lower the use of natural gas in some instances, he said. The some of that natural gas could be redirected to uses normally reserved for oil, like transportation. That, in turn, could lead to a 38 percent reduction in the use of foreign energy supplies, he concluded. (See Pickens explain the details of his plan in the video).

"That's a pretty good start," he said, adding that it would take about five years to "pretty far down the path" and 10 years to totally accomplish.

And that reduction would be accomplished with energy that doesn't run out, he pointed out.

It's not like finding an oil field," Pickens said. "You find an oil field, and it's not long before it starts to decline, and then deplete. Then, the oil field's gone. The wind doesn't stop."

The layout of the United States lends itself to wind and solar development, he said. The central corridor is ripe for wind development, provided the U.S. government makes corridors available to transmit power out. And the southwest is ideal for solar development, he added.

Pickens, who will long be remembered for his $1 million challenge to anyone who could disprove the swift boat veterans claims against John Kerry, wants to see America move away from its 14 million barrel a day import habit, which he claims costs America $700 Billion a year. His plan is to move America towards renewable resources, wind and solar. Such sustainable energy sources would reduce America's reliance on foreign oil, as well as reduce the world price of oil, by reducing demand.

And Pickens makes no bones about letting us know that this is good for his economy as well. He is investing in the largest domestic wind farm in the United States, with the goal of bringing that energy from the Midwest to Texas. He plans on making money for himself, with the added benefit of helping the United States. The problems, as Pickens sees it, is that wind and solar energy need to get from where they are generated, to where they are needed. He sees the solution in government investment of transmission lines.

Pickens is right. America is giving away $700 Billion to nations that literally have us over the barrel. That's $700 Billion that could, and should, be invested in the United States. And projects are under way that will help reduce America's reliance on foreign oil. Solel, an Israeli company, is investing in a solar project in the Mojave Desert, that will supply 1,388 gigawatts of energy annually at a price competitive with plants powered by fossil fuels for California homes (can you say no more rolling blackouts?) Winergy, is creating a wind farm off of Orient Point, New York. The Plum Island Project will be located 2 miles off shore and will consist of three 3.6MW turbines. Larger projects are being studied. Winergy is also considering projects in Asbury Park, NJ, Davis Bank (Mass.), Five Fathom Bank (2 sites – NJ), Great Egg (NJ), Gull Bank (Maryland), Indian River (Delaware), Isle of Wight (Maryland), Nantucket (3 sites). As I pointed out back in May in the comments to one of Lawhawk's posts, with "the fact that one of NJ's nuclear power plants, Oyster Creek, is either swiftly approaching its expected life span or has already surpassed it, is facing an uphill battle for relicensing (http://www.app.com/assets/swf/B318999210.SWF), NJ needs alternative fuel sources now!"

Moreover, these renewable resources will drastically reduce the United States carbon footprint, will reduce greenhouse gasses and emissions, and will help reverse the effects of global warming.

Additionally, with China and India expanding their need for fossil fuels, the world supply will decline (whether by depletion of the resource or by artificially created scarcity by OPEC.) There is no need to let this happen, when Arizona, New Mexico, Utah and California have vast deserts that can supply cheap renewable solar power, and wind farms can be created off shore and in the Midwest. Why do we need to rely on coal and oil burning plants for electricity?

Lastly, why are we not using natural gas to power our cars? Natural gas produces almost zero emissions and is in abundant supply in the United States. Also, at $12 - $13 per btu, are much cheaper than oil ($140 per barrel). Plus, natural gas is a higher burning fuel than oil, thus increasing engine output of cars. That is why buses use it. It also has the added benefit of not having to go to a gas station to refuel your car. You can refuel your car from your home -- the same way you tap your gas line for your BBQ or clothes dryer, you can refuel your car.

UPDATE (lawhawk):