Michelle Malkin » Nan and the Big Wind Boone-doggle

Nan and the Big Wind Boone-doggle

By Michelle Malkin • August 13, 2008 08:17 AM

My syndicated column today looks at Do-Nothing Nancy’s financial interests in pushing T. Boone Pickens’ quixotic Big Wind dreams, as spotlighted here, at #dontgo, and first by Jason Gillman at Michigan Taxes Too Much. More from #dontgo here.

I’ve mentioned Pickens’ backing of Proposition 10 in California. There’s another another eco-boondoggle on the ballot as well. Proposition 7 has been nicknamed the “Big Wind” ballot measure; it would “California utilities to procure half of their power from renewable resources by 2025.”

Related item of snortworthiness: Nancy Pelosi…Washington “outsider.”

***
Pelosi and the Big Win Boone-doggle
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2008

Pelosi and the Big Wind Boone-doggle

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called congressional Republicans who want up-or-down drilling votes “hand maidens of the oil companies.” Let’s call Pelosi what she is: House girl of the Big Wind boondogglers.

Though she seemingly backtracked on labeling drilling a “hoax” this week, Pelosi refuses to consider GOP energy proposals that don’t include massive government subsidies for eco-fantastical alternatives that have never panned out.

Which brings us to Madame Speaker’s 2007 financial disclosure form. Schedule III lists “assets and ‘unearned income’” of between $100,001-$250,000 from Clean Energy Fuels Corp. – Public Common Stock.” Clean Energy Fuels Corp. is a natural gas provider founded by T. Boone Pickens. Yep, that T. Boone Pickens– former oilman-turned-wind power evangelist whose ads touting a national wind campaign are now as ubiquitous as Viagra promos.

Pickens and Pelosi now share the same talking points downplaying the need to drill and open up more access to American oil. Instead, the Pickens pie-in-the-sky plan campaign proposes to completely replace natural gas with wind power in power generation and theoretically free up natural gas for America’s transportation needs.

All well and good in la-la land. But let’s be real about the limitations and costs of wind power. Past and ongoing experience has demonstrated the notorious unreliability of wind and the miserably low operating capacity of wind power facilities here and around the world. Depending on wind requires supplemental fossil fuel plants as back up to be turned on and off to compensate for wind power supply shortfalls– nullifying any reductions in carbon dioxide emissions (which are miniscule, according to the National Academy of Sciences).

Not to mention the thousands of sliced-up birds and other wildlife that have become wind power casualties (a problem that scientists say would be solved by “repowering” old turbines at a cost of untold billions).

Fittingly, the environmental mascot of the Democrat National Convention– the showcase of their alternative energy approach — is an eastern Colorado wind turbine propped up with Democrat carbon credit funds that has never produced any energy because of chronic equipment malfunctions.

But I digress.

Naturally, the Pickens Big Wind plan is proudly endorsed by Do-Nothing Pelosi’s friends at the obstructionist Sierra Club. Through another company, Mesa Power, Pickens has committed upwards of $12 billion in wind farms on the Texas panhandle. CEFC and Mesa Power are separate entities. But what benefits one piece of the Pickens puzzle benefits them all. The wind venture, as Pickens himself acknowledges, depends on permanent federal subsidies.

Pickens is banking on ‘em. And Pelosi’s banking on him.

As reported on #dontgomovement.com, Speaker Pelosi bought between $50,000 and $100,000 of stock in Pickens’ CLNE Corp. in May 2007 on the day of the initial public offering:

“She, and other investors, stand to gain a substantial return on their investment if gasoline prices stay high and municipal, state and even the Federal governments start using natural gas as their primary fuel source. If gasoline prices fall? Alternative fuels and the cost to convert fleets over to them becomes less and less attractive.”

CLNE also happens to be the sponsor of Proposition 10, a ballot initiative in Pelosi’s home state of California to dole out a combined $10 billion in state and federal funds for renewable energy incentives. Namely: Natural gas and wind.

Follow the money. Or, to put it in economist terms as energy analyst Kenneth Medlock III did in an interview with the Dallas Morning News about the Pickens multi-billion wind farm investment: “A lot of what he’s trying to do is add value to a stranded asset…he’s obviously got millions of dollars on the line.”

And so, potentially, does the Democrat Speaker of the House windily wagging her finger at the financial motivations of others.

Posted in: Enviro-nitwits, Nancy Pelosi

Regular View

comments (197)

trackbacks (34)

See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

Trackback URL

Comments

« Older Comments

#406344

On August 13th, 2008 at 9:45 pm, dakine said:

I’ll bite GK and take you at your word. Expand on the “Pickens Plan” and lay out the “Goldwater Knight Plan” if you don’t mind (and I’m being sincere at the risk of getting my cyber teeth knocked out).
#406348

On August 13th, 2008 at 9:48 pm, TVG said:

Good job Michelle. Another great expose of hypocrisy and greed. Plus, now we can more accurately and justifiably call Pelosi an Old Windbag.
#406352

On August 13th, 2008 at 9:53 pm, Barry F. said:

On August 13th, 2008 at 9:43 pm, dakine said:

I do agree with Michelle, most of the time. Otherwise, I wouldn’t frequent her site, wait to register those many months ago and post here. But, in isolated instances, I have held a different view on things. Again, those are limited instances.

But, the problem is, you just throw out generalizations insinuating that her research is lacking in this column. However, you have failed to produce anything to the contrary. If you can’t produce anything, just say so. Otherwise, if it is so lacking, put it out there.
#406358

On August 13th, 2008 at 9:59 pm, Boomer said:

I can’t thank Michelle enough for using her column to get the word out on this significant conflict of interest. It appears Comrade Peloski should be doing some talking with members of the DOJ for using her position to stifle debate, prevent a vote, and artificially inflate the price of fuel to make the snake-oil scheme of wind power seem like a real affordable alternative solution while filling her pockets at the expense of the taxpayer.
#406359

On August 13th, 2008 at 10:00 pm, WarTip said:

On August 13th, 2008 at 9:11 pm, Attica said:

West Texas is not by any means the only place that would be adversely impacted however. I lived in the desert of Northern Nevada where we consistently have winds over 100 miles an hour. Tractor trailers regularly blow over when they are not re-routed and out as far in the desert as I live, the wind picks up trailers and other objects. A passing motorist traveling down the dirt road that leads to my goat path of a drive way would probably see no wildlife and no reason not to use the land.

When I walk through or even drive, I see the coyotes, the foxes, the eagles, the antelope, the wild mustangs and burros and many other creatures … including a burrowing owl on a few occasions. I live about five miles away from town which is a ghost town. I live about twenty-five miles away from a real town in Nevada and about 15 miles travel to the closest town in California. Would you ask me to “trust” the government to decide what is best for me and for my land that my father and I spent twenty years building up so that you could power a few more homes in Reno? I would rather see them building a nuke reactor out in the middle of the desert. At least that would bring in people and jobs and not be nearly as unsightly or as detrimental to the local wildlife and those few of us who do live so far off the grid.
#406362

On August 13th, 2008 at 10:04 pm, WarTip said:

Let’s not forget the vast amounts of geothermal (renewable) energy that is already being used in Nevada to generate power … much of which is sold to California at a loss and regularly subsidized by increased power bills for We the People.
#406423

On August 13th, 2008 at 11:03 pm, AKT said:

I don’t think we should be surprised Generalismo Pelosi pushes “wind” as
the solution for motorists facing rising prices at the gas pump. Wind is
something Madame Nanny knows much about and the only useful product she produces.
#406528

On August 14th, 2008 at 2:52 am, Christian Soldier said:

Hey —thanks Nevada ! # 187 WT
#406531

On August 14th, 2008 at 3:26 am, Papa Louie said:

KING: The speaker of the House isn’t an insider?
PELOSI: Well, they didn’t want me to be Speaker of the House.
KING: But you are.

So, let me get this straight. These unnamed, all-powerful Washington Insiders didn’t want Pelosi to become Speaker of the House. But she became Speaker anyway with the help of a lowly group of fellow Outsiders.

Wouldn’t that mean that Nancy’s Outsiders were actually more powerful than the Insiders? And wouldn’t that mean that her Outsiders were the real Insiders because it’s always the Insiders who yield the most power in Washington? Pelosi’s doublespeak makes my head spin.
#406607

On August 14th, 2008 at 8:35 am, Daria said:

I’m coming into this thread kind of late, but I just wanted to commend Michelle for her excellent, well-informed (as usual) appearance on Neil Cavuto yesterday. Keep up the great work!
#406652

On August 14th, 2008 at 9:22 am, guitarplayer said:

Health problems realted to wind farms? Uh oh. Better see if Nan is ok with it.

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/1218250522129010.xml&coll=7&thispage=1
#406684

On August 14th, 2008 at 9:51 am, Milwaukee Mike said:

I’m T. Boone Pickins, and I’m hedging my bets.
#406694

On August 14th, 2008 at 9:57 am, HappyGene said:

Anyone know the price Nan got in at? I’ve read $14.30 (not far from current price) and $3.50 (cue “We’re in the Money” music).
#406758

On August 14th, 2008 at 10:36 am, legendx3 said:

we need to put nancys pic on all the gas pumps so everyone can see who is screwing us.plus when i was over there we see on tv folks were yelling the war is for oil most i knew said WHY NOT
#406764

On August 14th, 2008 at 10:40 am, legendx3 said:

ok MM start a drive to get her pic on all the pumps we all have printers and tape (-;
#408131

On August 15th, 2008 at 12:58 am, Sethery said:

On August 13th, 2008 at 12:20 pm, FamilyMan said (#130):

You need helium 3 for the fusion reactor to work. The only place helium 3 can be found in large enough concentrations is on the moon.

Helium-3 isn’t the only fuel that will work, but it is the best in terms of radioactive end-products. The beauty of getting it from the Moon is that it’s replenished by the solar wind. Soooo…IT’S RENEWABLE!!!