Pickens has a plan, and he'd like to share it with the nation. With a media blitz that began Tuesday, he's begun to do just that. If you haven't read, seen or heard Pickens recently, then you've been deliberately avoiding modern media or have been catching up on old reruns.

T. Who?

In a nutshell, he's an energy guy, an oil man from way back, and right now he's someone who is looking to the future and doesn't like what he sees. (For a more in-depth picture, check out his Website or this article I wrote back in April.) He's 80 years old, he's ornery and he's made and lost more money in the energy game than anyone else we can think of. So when he decides to spend millions of dollars on a personal media blitz, people - and importantly, the market - pay attention.

The highlights of his plan have been covered everywhere, but the best summary comes from his Wall Street Journal editorial on July 9. Here's how he defines the problem:

• Crude oil imports have risen from 24% to almost 70% between 1973 and today.
• The U.S. has 4% of the world's population, yet consumes almost 25% of the world's oil.
• The world produces 85 million barrels of oil per day, yet the world demands 86 million barrels of oil per day.
• World oil production has fallen every year since 2005, even though oil prices have risen.
• Over the next 10 years, the U.S. will spend $10 trillion on foreign oil.
• Dependence on foreign oil is dangerous.
• U.S.'s dependence on foreign oil can be reduced by one-third in 10 years.

The Pickens Plan

Simply put, use wind power to replace the natural gas currently used for electrical generation. That natural gas would then be used as transportation fuel in natural-gas-powered vehicles. The result would be a reduction of foreign imports by 38%. That's the whole, alluringly simple plan.

Mr. Pickens doesn't tout this as a way to reduce energy prices or even as the final answer. It is more of a "bridge" to allow the nation to have more time to develop other options - solar, ethanol, fuel cells and batteries - and also kick in with conservation.

His editorial call to action continues on to say:

"I believe my plan can be accomplished within 10 years if this country takes decisive and bold steps immediately ... It invests in the heartland, creating thousands of new jobs ... It will be accomplished solely through private investment with no new consumer or corporate taxes or government regulation.

The future begins as soon as Congress and the president act. The government must mandate the formation of wind and solar transmission corridors, and renew the subsidies for economic and alternative energy development in areas where the wind and sun are abundant."

The emphasis there is very much mine. The most incongruous part of the Pickens plan is right there in bold. He's very clear that he wants to make this part of the presidential debate, because, he says:

"I am going to get this into the presidential debate,'' Pickens said. "I am hoping this will be viewed very much like war.'' (Bloomberg)

And yet he's claiming that his plan will be both Libertarian friendly (zero tax impact, zero regulatory impact) and screaming-liberal friendly (government-mandated, -regulated and -subsidized.) If such a thing is even possible without medication for Multiple Personality Disorder, we should elect Pickens. But of course it's not. Boone's plan is carefully constructed to get as many people nodding their heads as possible.

Pickens is no stranger to presidential election politics. He was a large contributor to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth campaign against John Kerry and even offered a $1 million prize to anyone who could disprove the Swift Boat Vets allegations (not because he was actually looking for proof - but to make the point against Kerry).

So Pickens has thrown down the gauntlet. Will the candidates respond directly? Probably not. Boone Pickens is not running for office - he can (and will) say anything he wants and put forth any and all ideas that he has. McCain and Obama are trying to get elected. Now is not the time for them to make grand, sweeping "We will go to the moon"-type statements or to look like their policies will be swayed by the ad campaign of an energy baron.

 Prev12Next