TED Conversations

Boone Pickens

TEDCRED 50+
TED Speaker

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Live Q&A with T. Boone Pickens: Let's transform energy -- with natural gas.

This conversation will go Live at 11 am CT/ 12 pm EST. on March 20th, 2012.

I will be answering your questions/comments about my TEDtalk for 1 hour. Please submit your questions below.

Related Talks:
Topics: energy fracking natural gas
0
Share:
progress indicator

  • Boone Pickens 50+

    • +1
    TED Speaker
    Mar 20 2012: In conclusion to a great session, the politicians are on the TV with a ham on their should everyday. We have the cheapest energy in the world in this country. Our gasoline price is half of Europe, natural gas price here is $2.50, Beijing $16 mcf, Mideast is $15, and Europe is $13. And oil here is $106/bbl and global price is $123/bbl. I can't understand why we don't get on our own resources. Join me in putting political pressure on Washington.

    Thanks for joining me. Enjoyed your questions and the conversation.

  • Michael Sher

    • 0
    Mar 20 2012: Mr PIckens As a proud Oklahoman the two Senators Coburn and Inhofe have called global warming a hoax, debunked evolution and thereby questioning Einstein. What are you views and on these issues and how can we trust a our government if psuedo science is given preference?

  • Jonathan Ravenhill Lloyd

    • 0
    Mar 20 2012: I can imagine it isn't as big as possibly hoped for.
    But if a city's entire organic-waste was cooked, couldn't that contribute sizeably?

    Also if gas-usage was limited to certain feilds, perhaps heating water or cooking or industrial process. A process in which that intense instant heating is required?

    Limit the need not only the supply?

    also - the more there is the cheaper it becomes, no? isn't that the entire theory behind the capitalists' arguments for world betterment through business?
  • thumb

    Karen Cartwright

    • +1
    Mar 20 2012: Don't you think thiere has been enough damage to the environment and water sytems already. Fracking is a disaster and more research needs to be done. Drillers claim fracking does not pollute ground water and underground water supplies, called aquifers. But growing numbers of Americans, many in rural communities, report that wells and other water sources have become unusable since fracking operations started up nearbyCompanies inject into each well up to 8 million gallons of water, chemicals and sand at high pressure to create underground fractures that free up trapped natural gas. Commonly used chemicals include: carcinogenic benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene and other toxics.
    EXPLOSIONS
    In December 2007, a Bainbridge, Ohio, home exploded after a natural gas company improperly drilled and fractured a nearby well. No one was injured, but releases of gas contaminated 23 water wells and forced evacuations of 19 homes.
    WASTEWATER
    Fracking a single well produces up to several million gallons of wastewater. In 2008, Pennsylvania authorities took remedial measures after determining that a water pollution control plant had accepted drilling wastewater that contaminated the Monongahela River.
    CHEMICAL SPILLS
    Gas drilling in shale deposits requires heavy use of chemicals. Spills happen. Pennsylvania authorities fined Cabot Oil & Gas $56,650 for three spills of hydraulic fracturing fluid near the town of Dimock in September 2009. Two of the spills polluted a wetland and caused a fish kill.
    TRUCK TRAFFIC
    Drilling can require 1,300 truck trips per well, often in areas where roads do not exist or are not built to handle heavy trucks. Trucks cause significant air and noise pollution and can spill their loads, endangering water supplies.

  • Tomas Piedrahita

    • +1
    Mar 20 2012: Why is there need for the government to push in this direction? Isn't the market capable of doing this by itself?

  • Molly Lin

    • +2
    Mar 20 2012: With 2 mins left I wanted to say THANKS so much to TED and Mr. Pickens for this chat! This was great!

  • cameron naramore

    • 0
    Mar 20 2012: Where is the evidence that fracking is safe, besides "we've been doing it for years"?

  • Kris Schmidt

    • 0
    Mar 20 2012: Is it feasible to run a residence off of multiple energy sources?
  • thumb

    Carolyn Roesbery

    • +1
    Mar 20 2012: Shouldn't people think twice-- and double that again, before giving blind support to a new private industry where there stands to made billions of dollars for a few, and with so many environmental questions yet to be cleared? Do we want this industry in our back yards? Is it a healthy industry-- We dont know-- cleaner? how much cleaner . . but still not clean , not renewable. On a world wide scale removing a natural resource changes enviromental balance-- smart or not smart? Are we not concentrating enough effort getting off oil, getting and going local with goods and supplys. The BIG money in NG is not local-- its supply massive transportation industries; marine, trucking, air. Bottom line , Big Money?
  • thumb

    inthegarden beyondthecave

    • +1
    Mar 20 2012: It would make sense to me to try to save as much of our hydrocarbon materials for the future so they will be available for making composite materials (plastics) rather than burning them now and dispusing them into the atmosphere where they cause gloabal warming and will not be available for use by future generations.

    If a million generations might inhabit our planet in the future, should we not save some hydrocarbons for them?
  • thumb

    Mike Voss

    • 0
    Mar 20 2012: If we were to convert such a large group of consumers (trucking industry) over to a domestic fuel source would the direct effect be that oil prices also drop significantly due to an increased supply for the rest of us that drive light vehicles? That may be just another bonus to your excellent plan!

  • Christopher Edwards

    • 0
    Mar 20 2012: Do you think if we emphasized the past use of natural gas in the USA we could change peoples' minds about using it in the future- now that we have too much. You mentioned the "margin" that energy prices are tied to the lowest cost competitor, how come most people don't grasp how important that is? Is it the lag between saying nat. gas is the right choice and when they see a nat. gas fueling station or have a nat. gas car?

  • Karl Knudson

    • 0
    Mar 20 2012: Hi, Thanks for your work in pushing for alternative fuels. Basic question: How quickly could the heavy haul truck fleet be converted to natural gas if there was a significant effort to do so?

  • cameron naramore

    • 0
    Mar 20 2012: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phelim_McAleer

    The director of Frack Nation also directed Not Evil Just Wrong, a film opposing An Inconvenient Truth. Are we supposed to believe that someone that doesn't believe in global warming is qualified to speak on fracking? Seems awfully convenient.
  • thumb

    Thomas Hull 500+

    • 0
    TEDx Organizer
    Mar 20 2012: I think we are going to need as much energy as possible for the future, that is true. I think the future of energy is a DECENTRALIZED one, one where every home owner is also an independent producer, and seller of energy. Fracking gas extraction is dangerous and can have serious environmental consequences. Do we really want to sacrifice our well being and health in order to squeeze out another dollar before the renewable paradigm finally takes over? In the end this is about making money, not about the absolute NEED to have access to this energy. Japan has shut down 52 of 54 nuclear power plants because they realize its a risk to their well being to continue to operate. How many contaminated water supplies will it take to put an end to fracking?

    This article was published yesterday: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/9153228/Fracking-could-pose-health-threat.html

  • Barry Digman

    • 0
    Mar 20 2012: Where do I put my money today to take advantage of the transition to natural gas?

  • Edward Bolton

    • 0
    Mar 20 2012: I have a lot of respect for you persistence on this issue Mr. Pickens. My question is... isn't the current power structure in gasoline/crude oil a tremendous limiting factor in creating the change we need in energy since they make so much money with the current situation? How do we get these companies on board with your concepts and move away from a strategy that has made these companies the largest and most profitable businesses in the world? The special interest delimma seems to be a major limiting factor in my opinion.

  • Mike Evans

    • 0
    Mar 20 2012: To me the ruining millions of gallons of water for the sake of fracking individual wells is obscene. I believe I am correct in saying that at some point there are millions of gallons per well that can no longer be used for any human purpose.

    I saw the other day that the cost of natural gas has fallen by a third since 2005 thanks to fracking. Doesn't it make sense to close the Halliburton loophole before we pursue this avenue further?

  • Laci Lopez

    • 0
    Mar 20 2012: What about the Bloom Box Mr Pickens?

  • Pierre Vallee

    • 0
    Mar 20 2012: Mr. Pickens’s conversation didn’t touch on the desirability of a liquid fuel compared with a compressed (or refrigerated) gas. Back in the 80’s there was a project in New Zealand called “Gas-to-Gasoline” which used chemical means to make a synthetic gasoline-like liquid fuel from natural gas. It was later shut down as uneconomical based on gas prices and the cost of the process. Now that gas has become cheap, is it time to resurrect “GTG.” The process is fully developed and could be implemented virtually anywhere.

  • Andrew Buks

    • 0
    Mar 20 2012: I wonder what you think about the Oil Boom in ND and do you think it will spill into SD making the alternative energy less appealing to Midwest?

    • heath flowers

      • 0
      Mar 20 2012: You may see derivative affects - but the Williston Basin doesn't really go into SD.

      • Andrew Buks

        • +1
        Mar 20 2012: Actually many people in SD believe it does.... BTW, I used to live in Belmont MA :-) small world.

  • Shawn Hamilton

    • +1
    Mar 20 2012: Are you in favor of the three suggestions below to wean the US off of OPEC oil and place more investment in "green" technologies?

    1. Ban all Oil and Gas contributions to Political parties which runs in the tens of millions of doallrs per year.

    2. Ban all Oil and Gas companies from exporting any fossil fuels obtained from within the US or place a tariff on US fossil fuel exports to make it more attractive to keep in the US.

    3. And eliminate the over $46 billion in subsidies that Oil and Gas companies receive and put those subsidies towards "green" technologies.

    • Boone Pickens 50+

      • +3
      TED Speaker
      Mar 20 2012: Why do we all think the oil and gas companies are the bad guys? I am not in favor of these three options.

      • Shawn Hamilton

        • 0
        Mar 20 2012: Unfortunately, until there is serious political action taken to take financial contributions out the equation, you will have a hard time changing the OPEC policy.

  • Christopher Edwards

    • +1
    Mar 20 2012: How do you feel about natural gas flaring? I'm not a fan, but perhaps with your experiences in the field you would see it very differently. I think we're wasting fuel at an astonishing rate. Would you like to see flaring decrease globally?

  • Matthew Ives

    • 0
    Mar 20 2012: My question is, if NG is a bridge solution, how can we ensure that we find the real solution while on it? I think the US is like a heart attack patient who gets an emergency fix, like a bipass, but then just resumes bad habits until another crisis. As soon as energy is no longer an emergency maybe people will forget that we have to find a permanent alternative and we will be in the same mess again in 20 years. What real incentives can we build into the plan (ie, economic) that will cause the shift?
  • thumb

    pat gilbert 50+

    • +1
    Mar 20 2012: Mr Pickens

    It seems paradoxical that you lost so much money in wind power.

    Were you lobbying to get subsidized by the government?

    Did you not see the price drop coming because of fracking of natural gas?

    Doesn't the supply of a commodity become more prevalent as the price goes up and technology enters that market thus lowering the price as with fracking?

    • Boone Pickens 50+

      • +2
      TED Speaker
      Mar 20 2012: Bad call on timing (wind power) and I'll be back with better timing. I may be a player in wind again.

  • Kenneth Bell

    • +1
    Mar 20 2012: Looking at the numbers, if we double our natural gas consumption, we should be out in 20 years. Is it worth changing all the infrastructure for such a short-term project?

    • Boone Pickens 50+

      • +1
      TED Speaker
      Mar 20 2012: So first off, I'm not talking about doubling our natural gas consumption, if all the 18 wheelers were converted it would be 15 bcf/day which would be about a 20% increase in demand. Second off, I think we have closer to 100 year supply, not the 40 year supply that you implied.
      • thumb

        Brian Cerda

        • +4
        Mar 20 2012: running out in 40 or 100 is still running out. humans have been on this planet a very long time, and will be here a long time to come. we need to build a future for the species, not produce cheep fuel for industry.

      • Enrico Petrucco 20+

        • 0
        Mar 20 2012: Mr. Pickens, the investment and energy required to convert all of the 18-wheelers to natural gas would not be worth the longterm commitment. Surely, as you admit that we must take action about CO2 emissions, it would be an inappropriate intermediate due to the effects of the required longterm commitment for NG conversion to be feasible. To hit the 80% targets we must consider realistic step-change technologies and methods rather than uncertain half measured steps. A 25%less CO2 is not satisfactory when looking for >80% reduction. Doesnt the math preclude the option?
  • thumb

    Tigran Asriyan

    • 0
    Mar 20 2012: Can you elaborate why the freight industry is slow to adopt natural gas if at all. Also, why is there political opposition to using natural gas as a bridge fuel when it seems like such a great alternative in terms of environmental safety and foreign security?

    • Boone Pickens 50+

      • 0
      TED Speaker
      Mar 20 2012: It has been a classic chicken and egg scenario but that is changing rapidly. The economics of natural gas -- $1.50 per gallon cheaper -- cannot be ignored.

    • heath flowers

      • 0
      Mar 20 2012: Engine sizes have been a problem - but Westport should be tackling that challenge in short order.

  • Tomas Piedrahita

    • 0
    Mar 20 2012: In other countries that have already gotten into natural gas as a fuel for transportation, the market drives this movement mostly because it's actually cheaper. I believe that an energy plan is definitely desireable to push this move harder, but the natural market is capable of moving ahead by itself because consumers enjoy the very low pricing that it has. A normal combustion engine requires very little modification to use this fuel and the savings are very considerable.
Load more comments…