In a rush for renewables

[peejay 327]

In a rush for renewables

Ted Turner calls for fast work in making the switch from fossil fuels

By BRETT CLANTON and TOM FOWLER

2007 Houston Chronicle

Feb. 8, 2007, 12:26PM

There's not much middle ground for Ted Turner when it comes to the future of energy in the United States.

"What we need is a moratorium on all new coal plants, on all new carbon-producing energy power technologies, and work on replacing them with renewable alternatives," the billionaire founder of CNN said Wednesday.

Turner also called for urgent action to address global climate change, which he referred to as the "single greatest challenge that humanity has ever faced."

"The biggest danger is we won't do enough soon enough," he said.

Turner was in Houston to speak before the Houston World Affairs Council, along with Timothy Wirth, a former U.S. senator from Colorado who now heads the United Nations Foundation, a charity to help support U.N. efforts formed by Turner in 1998.

He spoke with the Chronicle before the speech about his views on energy policy, his personal investment in DT Solar, a New Jersey company involved in large-scale solar power projects, and on a range of other topics.

And though he was in a city where the economy is powered by oil and natural gas, Turner pulled no punches.

"The days of fossil fuels as a fuel are over," he told a packed ballroom over lunch at the Hotel Intercontinental. "It's just a matter of how soon everybody recognizes it."

Call for widespread change

His speech, which was sponsored by British oil giant BP and Houston's Marathon Oil Corp., comes just days after a U.N. report was released that argued that climate science is getting more accurate and that there is "very high confidence" linking human activities to global warming.

But Turner said that in order to truly curb global warming in the long term, there needs to be a wholesale change in the way the world produces power, fuels its vehicles and heats its homes.

He said he favors nuclear power over coal, which should only have a future in the U.S. power industry if there's a way to safely get rid of the carbon dioxide emissions by sequestering it, or injecting it, deep into the ground. And he prefers wind and solar power to both.

He likes ethanol as an alternative to gasoline but sees more promise in making it from agricultural waste than from corn. Until the technology is widespread, however, he urges people to follow his example and buy gas-electric hybrid vehicles, such as the Toyota Prius, which get better mileage than most regular gasoline models.

If people aren't motivated by helping the Earth, they should be drawn by the financial opportunities in clean energy, Turner said.

"The greatest fortunes in the history of the world will be made in this new energy business," said Turner, who estimates his net worth at more than $1 billion.

Later, some doubts

Though the luncheon crowd gave Turner a standing ovation, reactions were more measured after he left the stage, especially to the idea that the era of fossil fuels is over.

"It's not,"said Sam Burkett, a partner in Vertex Green Energy, a Houston firm involved in alternative fuel production. Re-creating a new global infrastructure is not feasible without what could be trillions in investment, he said.

"A lot of the solutions have to use the current infrastructure as a backbone for change," he said.

'Energy mix is evolving'

Carol Battershell, a vice president with BP's alternative energy division, said while her company began embracing clean energy solutions and reacting to global climate change about a decade ago, it's a gradual process.

"I think we see that the energy mix is evolving," she said. "But I think many people may be underestimating the time needed for the transition."

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/4535625.html

[GaryC 7]

Idealism vs reality. What do you think will win?

[peejay 327]

Idealism vs reality. What do you think will win?

Whoever can make the most $$$ doing it. After all, this is America.

It will be interesting to see how far this will go (if it goes at all). I think some things will move in the green direction, but it will be half hearted if it gets too expensive. Especially to the consumer. It is real easy to talk the talk, but walking the walk is a whole different deal altogether.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Idealism vs reality. What do you think will win?

It is reality, Gary. There is great potential economically to invest in renewable energy...if you can get past the powerful lobbying of Big Oil and Coal.

Just in the state of Arizona, most - if not all homes and building could potentially produce their own electricity by have solar panels on the buildings themselves and it can be done right now for about $10 g's per house (although the cost could drop dramatically).

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Idealism vs reality. What do you think will win?

Ted Turner may be pretending to be idealistic, but once a businessman, always a businessman. You can bet your last dollar that when men like Turner begin to back renewables with more than just empty rhetoric, that they've figured out their 'angle'. And once people know how to make money on renewables, renewables will happen. It's the American way.

[GaryC 7]

Idealism vs reality. What do you think will win?

It is reality, Gary. There is great potential economically to invest in renewable energy...if you can get past the powerful lobbying of Big Oil and Coal.

Just in the state of Arizona, most - if not all homes and building could potentially produce their own electricity by have solar panels on the buildings themselves and it can be done right now for about $10 g's per house (although the cost could drop dramatically).

If it's something that the free market causes to happen then I agree! You see, this is the fundamental difference between you and I. We both want the same thing, unlimited energy that won't kill us in the end. You think it can be mandated and regulated. I think that the free market will find profit in it and that is how it will happen.

Idealism vs reality. What do you think will win?

Ted Turner may be pretending to be idealistic, but once a businessman, always a businessman. You can bet your last dollar that when men like Turner begin to back renewables with more than just empty rhetoric, that they've figured out their 'angle'. And once people know how to make money on renewables, renewables will happen. It's the American way.

Amen brother!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

If it's something that the free market causes to happen then I agree!

How "liberal"

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Idealism vs reality. What do you think will win?

It is reality, Gary. There is great potential economically to invest in renewable energy...if you can get past the powerful lobbying of Big Oil and Coal.

Just in the state of Arizona, most - if not all homes and building could potentially produce their own electricity by have solar panels on the buildings themselves and it can be done right now for about $10 g's per house (although the cost could drop dramatically).

If it's something that the free market causes to happen then I agree! You see, this is the fundamental difference between you and I. We both want the same thing, unlimited energy that won't kill us in the end. You think it can be mandated and regulated. I think that the free market will find profit in it and that is how it will happen.

Are you much of a sports fan, Gary?

[GaryC 7]

Idealism vs reality. What do you think will win?

It is reality, Gary. There is great potential economically to invest in renewable energy...if you can get past the powerful lobbying of Big Oil and Coal.

Just in the state of Arizona, most - if not all homes and building could potentially produce their own electricity by have solar panels on the buildings themselves and it can be done right now for about $10 g's per house (although the cost could drop dramatically).

If it's something that the free market causes to happen then I agree! You see, this is the fundamental difference between you and I. We both want the same thing, unlimited energy that won't kill us in the end. You think it can be mandated and regulated. I think that the free market will find profit in it and that is how it will happen.

Are you much of a sports fan, Gary?

Yes a baseball fan. Go Cardinals! Please don't try to draw the analogy about having rules to make it fair like in sports. The USA isn't a sports team and I don't see the connection.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Idealism vs reality. What do you think will win?

It is reality, Gary. There is great potential economically to invest in renewable energy...if you can get past the powerful lobbying of Big Oil and Coal.

Just in the state of Arizona, most - if not all homes and building could potentially produce their own electricity by have solar panels on the buildings themselves and it can be done right now for about $10 g's per house (although the cost could drop dramatically).

If it's something that the free market causes to happen then I agree! You see, this is the fundamental difference between you and I. We both want the same thing, unlimited energy that won't kill us in the end. You think it can be mandated and regulated. I think that the free market will find profit in it and that is how it will happen.

Are you much of a sports fan, Gary?

Yes a baseball fan. Go Cardinals! Please don't try to draw the analogy about having rules to make it fair like in sports. The USA isn't a sports team and I don't see the connection.

We can't you make the connection??? The market relies on what? Competition. Free market guru Milton Friedman pressed upon that fundamental trait as being crucial to free enterprise. He'd say that through competition - the best is brought forth. With sports it's no different and in the case of the MLB, all teams are competing to be the World Champions. Imagine how that competition would work without the rules of the league or umpires?

Perhaps you can think of a more fitting analogy?

[GaryC 7]

We can't you make the connection??? The market relies on what? Competition. Free market guru Milton Friedman pressed upon that fundamental trait as being crucial to free enterprise. He'd say that through competition - the best is brought forth. With sports it's no different and in the case of the MLB, all teams are competing to be the World Champions. Imagine how that competition would work without the rules of the league or umpires?

Perhaps you can think of a more fitting analogy?

There is a big difference between the US economy and a baseball team Steve. There are already a plethora of laws that govern business. Just let the free market do it's thing without all the regulations you want to add to everything and you will see great things from our way of doing things. You just can't force it. What you end up with is unnatural and cannot be sustained.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

We can't you make the connection??? The market relies on what? Competition. Free market guru Milton Friedman pressed upon that fundamental trait as being crucial to free enterprise. He'd say that through competition - the best is brought forth. With sports it's no different and in the case of the MLB, all teams are competing to be the World Champions. Imagine how that competition would work without the rules of the league or umpires?

Perhaps you can think of a more fitting analogy?

There is a big difference between the US economy and a baseball team Steve. There are already a plethora of laws that govern business. Just let the free market do it's thing without all the regulations you want to add to everything and you will see great things from our way of doing things. You just can't force it. What you end up with is unnatural and cannot be sustained.

You speak in generalities, expressing disdain for government regulation so how is one to know just what regulations you think are adequate and which ones you have disdain over? Going back to my comparison to MLB - the regulations are continually re-evaluated and changed to address the times. For example, 50 years ago, the league didn't need any rules regarding performance enhancement drugs or steroid use, so they didn't have any specific rules against it. The market is the same way - you are being simplistic to say that all current regulations are adequate, and just let the free market do its thing and utopia will be ours.

I've asked you this before - what do you think about corporate subsidies and tax exemptions? Specifically, do you think that Exxon/Mobil should be receiving any Federal subsidy?