First Name:
Last Name:
Email:
Zip Code:
All fields required.
Why do we want this?
We're asking for your zip code so we know what Congressional District you live in. We're trying to organize people in every district.
« Boone Blog: 996,557!
Take a Bow! »

Boone Blog: At the University of Texas

We moved the town hall operation down to Austin to talk to the students at the University of Texas.  As I always do, I laid out the problem - $700 billion a year being sent to countries who may not be our friends – so we can import 70 percent of the 21 million barrels of oil we use every day.  I told them that if we don’t do anything, over the next 10 years we will be importing 75 percent of our oil and we will be paying two TRILLION dollars a year because the price will grow to $250-300 per barrel.

Then I showed them how we can use wind to replace most of the natural gas which is used to produce electrical energy.  If we do that, we can reduce our oil imports by 38 percent.  At the same cost-per-barrel that we use to calculate the $700 billion per year that would be a savings of $266 billion.  A year.

Given the current state of our finances, we could sure use a quarter of a trillion dollars a year recycling through the U.S. economy rather than through the economies of Iran, Russia, and Venezuela.

We talked a good deal about the need to upgrade the national electrical grid.  I told them that if Thomas Edison came back and looked at the grid, he would see a lot of it that looked very familiar because it was built during his lifetime.

After we finished with the town hall, I went over to the Business School and did a lecture to a graduate level class on corporate governance.  I spent a good deal of my career trying to make certain that the executives of public corporations understood they were employees of the stockholders … and helping stockholders understand they were the executives’ bosses.


Here’s the old professor talking to a standing-room-only crowd in the Business School classroom.

These were MBA candidates and they wanted to know all about the Pickens Plan and what effect on the economy energy was likely to have over the next decade so they got the whole Pickens-Plan-White-Board deal and I guess they liked it because those who had seats stood up and applauded at the end.

Next week we’re off to Chicago.  More about that next time

— Boone

This entry was posted on Thursday, October 9th, 2008 at 5:30 pm by Rich in Pickens Plan.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

Comments7 Responses to “Boone Blog: At the University of Texas”

October 9th, 2008 at 8:03 pm

Charles Olmsted


and borrow from russia and china, to pay these high prices!

October 12th, 2008 at 6:11 am

Meredith Willis


Brilliant! I'm so excited about this plan and proud o be part of your army! Thank you for your tireless efforts on this vital matter. I am positive that together we can make this happen!

October 12th, 2008 at 12:28 pm

Joe Goodart


Hi, I was a the Austin presentation last Thursday. I was honored to meet Mr. Pickens afterwards. Mr. Pickens presented his plan on the white board and went though the numbers. This went fairly smoothly as he touted the merits of PP, mixed in with a occasional joke. Afterwards came the questions and boy all the environmentalist came out of the woodwork. Welcome to UT! It must be hard to answer questions on the spot. So little thought on just how this plan fits in with the environmental agenda is what these guys need. I just don't think they get it. I agree the Global warming is page 2 here, not page 1. This does not mean PP won't help, just that page one is to preserve our country by keeping our currency at home and creating jobs. Page 2 is a benefit of PP for the environment. Given that I don't see why they are all not on board. So far Mr. Pickens is not spending taxpayers money but his own. Everyone benefits to some degree. If we think of this in monetary terms this is a 38% cash outflow reduction, we have plenty of room for the environmentalist to help us get closer to 100% and at the same time achieving some greenhouse gas reduction. Conservation, new energy saving technologies, all can play into this equation. I would hate to think that there are folks especially in Universities that believe that we can be energy independent in 10 years no matter how much money is thrown at it. It just takes too long to build the infrastructure after you have the new source of energy. There never seems to be an R

October 12th, 2008 at 12:40 pm

Joe Goodart


Continued ------ There never seems to be an R

October 12th, 2008 at 1:01 pm

Joe Goodart


Hi, I was a the Austin presentation last Thursday. I was honored to meet Mr. Pickens afterwards. Mr. Pickens presented his plan on the white board and went though the numbers. This went fairly smoothly as he touted the merits of PP, mixed in with a occasional joke. Afterwards came the questions and boy all the environmentalist came out of the woodwork. Welcome to UT! It must be hard to answer questions on the spot. So little thought on just how this plan fits in with the environmental agenda is what these guys need. I just don't think they get it. I agree the Global warming is page 2 here, not page 1. This does not mean PP won't help, just that page one is to preserve our country by keeping our currency at home and creating jobs. Page 2 is a benefit of PP for the environment. Given that I don't see why they are all not on board. So far Mr. Pickens is not spending taxpayers money but his own. Everyone benefits to some degree. If we think of this in monetary terms this is a 38% cash outflow reduction, we have plenty of room for the environmentalist to help us get closer to 100% and at the same time achieving some greenhouse gas reduction. Conservation, new energy saving technologies, all can play into this equation. I would hate to think that there are folks especially in Universities that believe that we can be energy independent in 10 years no matter how much money is thrown at it. It just takes too long to build the infrastructure after you have the new source of energy. There never seems to be an R and D schedule for grant money, so no telling when a viable energy will be available. That is the reason for PP, as a bridge to the future. One of the biggest complaints Thursday was the 3% US Natural gas reserves. They claim that we would end up right back in the same hole as today since Russia and Iran would dominate the gas market in the future. This is a good point, so we need to make sure we have the reserves necessary to do PP and if the government needs to update their gas reserve tables considering the shale gas they should do so. The other thing not taken into account is home heating should be converted to electric. We are going to have to do this in the future anyway so might as well get started on it. I just means we need more clean energy. The Highlight of the day was when a student got up explained he has Three professors, and I guess they were jointly looking at the energy ,environmental and financial problems associated with energy. He asked Mr. Pickens What he wanted to ask the professors, as if he needed their input for some reason. After repeating the question Mr. Pickens replied “What is your Plan?” as the answer. Great reply and so practical, everyone laughed at that one. Now that we have a million members let's see what we can do with the new administration This plan to me is a very aggressive so we need to act quickly. Joe

October 13th, 2008 at 8:23 am

Jeanne Taylor


Pardon me ...I'm all for action, saving jobs and the economy and especially our environment but how soon we forget, that Mr. Pickens threw the science of Global Warming and energy change under the bus for (a conservative estimate) of the past 8 years. Today, in fact the Pickens Plan and "Army" has the sound of fascism. Our next president will have no choice but to push alternative energies through. Our arrogant leadership and its addiction to Foreign Oil has created a dire wake up call for all Americans. I thank Mr. Pickens for creating an outlet for a constant stream of ideas and OPEN discussion of our failed energy policy which relates to our failed economy and moral standing in the world. Better late than never. operative phrase: science of global warming

October 18th, 2008 at 7:41 am

Donald Mayfield


Sorry I could not make it. Just in the interest of truth about this $700 billion number: McCain on oil imports: "We have to stop sending $700 billion a year to countries that don't like us very much." Actually, the United States spent $246 billion in 2007 for all imported crude oil, most of it from friendly nations such as Canada, according to government agencies that track energy imports.

Leave a Reply

Sign Up