Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: JZelle

I don't believe in the price gouging argument. However, I do believe that oil companies are not trying very hard to increase the gasoline supply to meet the nation's demand.

If any law should be passed, it should be strictly limited to requiring oil companies to increase their supply to meet the nation's demand.

IE - if the current refining capacity of US oil companies is 17 million barrels/day and the US demand is 21 million barrels/day, then the oil companies should increase their capacity by 4 million barrels/day.

And if, after a set timeframe (let's say... a year), the oil companies cannot show a sizeable increase in refinery construction or expansion, then the law should mandate that the oil companies be required to spend a set portion of their profits (let's say... 25%) into increasing their supply production. For Exxon, 25% would mean that they would spend $10 billion/year into increasing their refining capabilities, leaving $30 billion for their shareholders. Even with the insane environment regulations, $10 billion would easily cover the cost of building a new refinery (and grease the palms of stubborn lawmakers). Once supply then meets demand, the law should then go into remission.

The biggest problem right now is that the oil companies are abdicating their free market duties. Which is to increase supply to meet demand. And all the talk of 'windfall profit' taxes just adds more ammunition for them not to increase supply.


30 posted on 09/29/2005 12:50:03 PM PDT by gogogodzilla (Raaargh! Raaargh! Crush, Stomp!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: gogogodzilla
And if, after a set timeframe (let's say... a year), the oil companies cannot show a sizeable increase in refinery construction or expansion,

Uh, they can't. Do you have any idea how hard it would be to get a refinery past the regulators, environmentalists, and the courts? Perhaps you should do it, you can make a fortune.

41 posted on 09/29/2005 1:18:37 PM PDT by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]

To: gogogodzilla
Even with the insane environment regulations, $10 billion would easily cover the cost of building a new refinery (and grease the palms of stubborn lawmakers).

Under current law and regulations, it would be much easier to build a new nuclear plant in the US than it would be to build a new refinery. In fact, the US Government has offered incentives for the power industry to build new nuclear plants. There is no such offer on the table for new refineries.

I'm sure the oil companies would love to build new refineries if for no other reason than to utilize new technology to lower their marginal costs per barrel of product. But no one in the industry is stupid enough to play "bet your corporation" on projects that under existing rules would never get past endless court cases. If you think $10 billion would build a refinery (probably less than $2 B would do it) then double or tripple that cost for the effect of endless construction delays and compounding interest charges resulting from those delays which can be instigated by one single "concerned citizen" and one idiot Federal judge.

The oil industry saw what the idiotic legal/regulatory system did to the nuclear industry back in the 70s and 80s, and they aren't going to make the same mistake. They will build refineries, but they won't be in the US unless something changes.

86 posted on 09/30/2005 11:01:45 AM PDT by Ditto ( No trees were killed in sending this message, but billions of electrons were inconvenienced.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson