Posted on 10/02/2005 8:27:40 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
As oil companies struggle to repair their battered Gulf Coast refineries, President Bush and his congressional allies want to make it easier to build new ones.
Legislation introduced last week would ease environmental restrictions on gasoline refineries and speed up the process for securing government permits to build them. Congressional Republicans, who introduced the measure, say the need couldn't be more obvious.
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita briefly knocked out more than a quarter of the nation's refining capacity, sending gasoline prices to record highs. Some Gulf Coast refineries flooded by the storms could take months to repair. And the nation's other refineries, already running full tilt before the hurricanes, can't make up the slack.
"We need additional refining capacity ... to be able to meet the needs of the American people," Bush said last week. "The storms have shown how fragile the balance is between supply and demand in America."
The number of domestic refineries peaked in 1981 -- with 324 scattered across the country -- and then started a steep decline. The last one was built in 1976.
Today, there are 144. California has 21, with the last one built, Valero's Benicia refinery, opening in 1976.
The amount of crude oil being refined also has fallen, from 18.6 million barrels per day in 1981 to about 16.9 million now. The United States makes less gasoline than it did 25 years ago, even as demand for the fuel grows.
Environmentalists and consumer advocates claim oil companies closed refineries as a way to drive up profit margins and shouldn't be rewarded for squeezing the market. Margins at refineries jumped 40.7 percent between 2000 and 2004, according to government figures.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
I continue to believe that if California needs more gasoline then they should be required to build refineries there.
Points up need?
This is the result of 30 years of enviro-wacko policies pushed by various administrations. The enviro-wackos would have us all resort to horses and buggies as our primary means of transportation - then they'd complain about stepping in horsesh%t!!
The rest of us could care less about the enviro-wackos and their backward policies. After several million years, earth has proven to be more resilient than it is credited with.
They should allow drilling in Alaska, provided it has environmental safeguards. The Alaska Pipeline is a model of environmental safety in fuel production, and with proper guidelines, ANWAR drilling can achieve the same.
Yes, and let's demand that these new refineries NOT be built in a region as prone to natural disaster as the American Gulf Coast.
"Posted by carl in alaska to Enterprise
On News/Activism 06/26/2005 12:47:27 PM PDT · 23 of 28"
"This article doesn't tell the whole story, of course. If I recall correctly, demand for gasoline declined significantly in the early 1980's as the average mileage of the US vehicle fleet increased dramatically in the 80's. (Introduction of the catalytic converter allowed engines to become much more efficient while still reducing emissions.) After gasoline demand declined for a few years, demand then started growing again as the number of vehicles steadily increased. So some of these refineries may have been closed in the early 80's when demand in many areas was flat or declining. Some of these refineries may have also been closed because nearby sources of crude oil were depleted so that the refineries could no longer operate efficiently near full capacity. As imports increased, we have had to move refineries near the coasts and the Gulf of Mexico so the refineries are next to ports where oil tankers unload. This exact scenario just happened recently in Bakersfield, CA, where a refinery was closed because there is no longer enough crude oil being produced in the San Joaquin Valley of California. The refinery didn't make any money because it was running way below its capacity. Shell Oil offered to sell it to any willing buyer but I don't think anyone wanted this refinery. This just goes to show, the MSM only tells you the anti-business side of the story and you have to dig around to find the other side. Oil refining was a lousy, unprofitable business all through the 80's and early 90's and it isn't the responsibility of investors to invest in a business that doesn't make a good return on investment. That said, government regulators need to keep an eye on this industry to make sure they're not working together to prevent profitable investments in refineries by independent refiners."
In searching through his past posts I learned that Carl has a Biochem degree from UC San Diego.
I nominate Carl as the resident oil industry expert at FreeRepublic!
Thats usually what kills drilling in the first place! The demand for safeguards is set so high that unless your using a Star Trek transporter to beam the oil out of the ground, you aint drilling, because it may endanger the rare North American hairy amoeba!
I'm so tired of this lie. Refineries closed because either a) they were losing money, of b) because they were required to retrofit millions of dollars of new equipment to keep up with all the new environmental regulations that were being imposed.
This assertion that it was a grand conspiracy is ridiculous. People got out of the refining business because it was a lousy business.
And once on line, we should immediately stop buying Saudi oil. Let's hit them in the wallot for a change...
That's right - put a refinery in Bayonne, NJ - there is ample storage capacity right next to the old MOT: This puts the refinery right in the middle of a major market in NE NY/NJ.
My suggestion:
Avoid the nutty envirokooks by building a refinery or two in Baja, Mexico. You have port access, little chance of damage from hurricanes, a place to give Mexicans jobs rather than streaming into the U.S. and less cost inherent with doing all of this south of the border rather than in the U.S. where it would be more expensive.
Your only danger is if the Mexicans raise up an unfriendly government that would nationalize the refineries. Other than that, you could make good cheap gas easily accessible to the West Coast outside the influence of OSHA, the EPA, unions, the Sierra Club and the other NIMBY envirokooks.
that's is what is happening with LNG plant to be built down there someday supposedly, having to go south to build them.. we(CA) already get a lot of energy from mexico as is..
good move.. buy wooden bike stock :-)
Bicycle sales boom in US amid rising gas prices
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20051001/ts_alt_afp/usstormenergyenvironmentbicycles_051001131528
-----
WASHINGTON (AFP) - More bicycles than cars have been sold in the United States over the past 12 months, with rising gas prices prompting commuters to opt for two wheels instead of four.
Not since the oil crisis of 1973 have bicycles sold in such big numbers, according to Tim Blumenthal, executive director of Bikes Belong, an industry association.
"Bicycle sales are near an all-time high with 19 million sold last year -- close to the 20 million sold during the oil embargo in the early 1970s," said Blumenthal, whose association is based in Boulder in the western state of Colorado.
The US Chamber of Commerce says more bicycles have been sold than cars over the past 12 months.
In a country where most of the population still relies heavily on cars, some 87 million people have climbed on a bike in the past 12 months, Blumenthal said.
While less than car sales, bike sales generate about five to six billion dollars of business a year, he said.
Bicycles are back mainly because the sharp increase in gas prices has made them a practical alternative, said Paul Gaiser, owner of Scooter Commuter in Bethesda, Maryland.
"Above all it's the higher price of gas, but also it's concern for the environment and the cost of another car," Gaiser told AFP.
The average price of gas in the United States has increased 47.3 percent in a year, according to figures published last week by the American Automobile Association.
Gaiser believes the bicycle trend is no passing fad.
"Our sales have quadrupled in the last two months," he said. "I think it's a major paradigm shift. It's here to stay."
Cyclists on the streets of the US capital agreed.
"I bought my first bike six months ago to go to college. I could not do without it. It's faster in traffic and less expensive," said Erik Lubell, a student at George Washington University wearing a multi-colored helmet.
Near the affluent district of Georgetown, Stella Hardwood said she had a different motivation.
"I don't want to put on weight and my bike forces me to exercise," Hardwood said.
The superstar status of cycling champion Lance Armstrong, who has won the Tour de France seven times, has also helped spark interest in the sport.
The US government has also done its part to promote a more bicycle-friendly environment. Some 3.5 million dollars in federal money has been set aside to create cycling trails over the next four years.
"Lets require that the refineries not be built on the Gulf Coast."........The Gulf Coast is one of the few areas that would allow them to be built. In fact, I bet the Beaumont -Port Arthur - Lake Charles area would welcome new refineries with open arms.
Yeah! Lets not put refineries near where the pipelines and tankers drop the oil off not to mention those pesky oil rigs in the Gulf! Lets bring it to Wyoming for refinement! Thats the ticket!
/sarc off
And while we are at it lets not rebuild New Orleans or the Gulf Coast. Or San Fran after a earthquake. Or New York after a terrorist attack. Or Oklahoma, Texas, Kansas after a tornado.
Sorry, now /sarc off
CA should be allowed no more gasoline than it had in 1976 when their last refinery was built. The freeways would make fine bike paths.
It's about time! They need to do the same thing to encourage more nukes, LNG terminals, clean coal and mine-mouth power plants, transmission lines, and on/offshore wind farms.
True, but what makes you think that CA wants more gasoline? In a disfunctional state like CA, the gas price could be $20 a gallon, and that would just be cause for attacking the oil companies, not for changing anything.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.