DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Gas Prices are Now Proven to be Bush's Fault

Quote:

---

A carpentry business has three cews and three trucks. One truck for each crew. One of those trucks breaks down. So what does the carpentry business do? Charges his existing customers MORE money to make up for his broken truck?


But see,the carpenter can't do that. Because he doesn't have the market cornered. People would just fire them and hire a company with more fair prices and business practices.

---

Quote:

---

Don't the oil companies OWN the refineries?? If so, how can you say that the lack of crude oil refining capacity isn't their fault? Of course it's their fault! If they invest in refining capacity, they lose an excuse to keep prices high. What am I missing here?

---

Quote:

---

What you're missing is that the oil companies want to build refineries and increase production. It's damn near impossible for them to do so due to all of the regulatory controls, environmental concerns and people just not wanting a refinery in their backyard.

Please don't misconstrue this into me being "pro big oil". I really think that they are taking advantage of the monopoly they hold.

---

Quote:

---

Here's the BIG glitch in this theory.

We have NAFTA in place. There's NO reason they can't build refineries just inside Mexico. Reglations? Not in Mexico.

EPA? Not in Mexico. And actually,to supply the west coast,this would make perfect sense. But that wouldn't equate to giving oil companies their "excuse" would it?

What amazes me is how many people buy into the oil companies BS. Building refineries just across the border could easily help supply the entire southwestern United States without "U.S. Government" regulations of any kind and ease these "excuses". But that just makes to much sense and is far too simple.

But just go ahead and buy into their BS. But you'll have to excuse me if I don't.

JMHO

---

Quote:

---

Here's the BIG glitch in this theory.

We have NAFTA in place. There's NO reason they can't build refineries just inside Mexico. Reglations? Not in Mexico.

---

Quote:

---

This report from the California Energy Commission notes that even though 10 refineries representing 20 percent of the state's refining capacity were closed between 1985 and 1995, "it is unlikely that new refineries will be built in California."

---

Again... WHO closed these facilities? BIG OIL closed them and then they DISMANTLED them rather than hold them in reserve for when they might be needed to boost production. So, Big Oil was extremely short-sighted AND/OR they knew precisely what they were doing as they no doubt saw the demand for gas-guzzling vehicles skyrocketing in the US in the 80's and 90's. Sooner or later demand would catch up to supply and Big Oil would be on their way to years of record profits. Smart business really.

Look, as I said, I'm not knocking the oil companies for cashing in on America's voracious appetite for gasoline. You'll never hear me complaining about gas prices. However, I don't blame people for being extremely skeptical of Big Oil when they proclaim their innocence where refining capacity is concerned. It's all complete BS because they HAD the refining capacity in place years ago that would have allowed them to keep prices more stable. However, Big Oil isn't in business to keep prices stable, are they?

Quote:

---

Look, as I said, I'm not knocking the oil companies for cashing in on America's voracious appetite for gasoline. You'll never hear me complaining about gas prices.

---

And yet, you just complained.............hmmmmmmmmm "you'll never hear me complain...", yet here "I" am complaining.

Quote:

---

The cost of complying with environmental regulations and low product prices will continue to make it difficult to continue operating older, less efficient refineries.

To comply with federal and state regulations, California refiners invested approximately $5.8 billion to upgrade their facilities to produce cleaner fuels, including reformulated gasoline and low-sulfur diesel fuel. These upgrades received permits since low-sulfur diesel fuel regulations went into effect in 1993. Requirements to produce federal reformulated gasoline took effect at the beginning of 1995, and more stringent state requirements for CARB reformulated gasoline went into effect statewide on April 1, 1996. That requirement was removed by Governor Gray Davis when it was found that the oxygenate, methyl tertiary butyl-ether or MTBE, was leaking from some underground storage tanks and polluting water supplies. MTBE was phased out and removed as of December 31, 2003, and replaced by ethanol.

---

Quote:

---

I don't know the age of the refineries that were closed. I know the newest one built in this country was in 76. I'm willing to bet they are the oldest or most efficent ones. Retro fitting isn't always cheaper.

---

Yeah, but facts like that don't fit in real well with the "Blame Bush for everything" attitude so many seem to have.

Quote:

---

Weren't you the one preaching all the "Buy American" BS in the Ford thread?

---

OMG! You guys ARE reaching big time!


Can you build a Ford plant in America? Yes you can.

But what are the oil companies complaining about?

"They won't let us build refineries in the U.S".

If you CAN'T build something in the U.S.,what option DO you have?

They either have to the "ability" to build them here,or they have to build them ELSEWHERE.

Are you guys so "dee dee dee" that you can't add 2+2 and come up with 4?

Sure,I'd rather see the refineries built here. Sure I'd like to see those jobs stay in the U.S.

But if they're not permitted to build them here how CAN they do it? Come on,you guys are the "big detractors" here,tell me?

You CAN build auto plants,textile mills and MANY jobs that have been exported to other countries. IMO-there's something terribly wrong with that.

But what if a business simply CAN'T build here due to regulations and zoning? Oranges and apples folks. But some people will "reach" for anything it seems....................

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Weren't you the one preaching all the "Buy American" BS in the Ford thread?

---

OMG! You guys ARE reaching big time!


Can you build a Ford plant in America? Yes you can.

But what are the oil companies complaining about?

"They won't let us build refineries in the U.S".

If you CAN'T build something in the U.S.,what option DO you have?

They either have to the "ability" to build them here,or they have to build them ELSEWHERE.

Are you guys so "dee dee dee" that you can't add 2+2 and come up with 4?

Sure,I'd rather see the refineries built here. Sure I'd like to see those jobs stay in the U.S.

But if they're not permitted to build them here how CAN they do it? Come on,you guys are the "big detractors" here,tell me?

You CAN build auto plants,textile mills and MANY jobs that have been exported to other countries. IMO-there's something terribly wrong with that.

But what if a business simply CAN'T build here due to regulations and zoning? Oranges and apples folks. But some people will "reach" for anything it seems....................

---

I'd say you're the one stretching here, pit. Refineries CAN be built here, if you want to deal with all the red tape (environmental red tape) if you want to deal years and years of getting through that red tape, if you want to pay millions for the land that is worth thousands, etc........Yeah, they CAN be built here...............but, when it would cost less than half as much to build them somewhere else.....well, what would you do?

I say, give the oil companies a big round of applause - because instead of outsourcing jobs by building refineries elsewhere, they are attempting to keep the jobs here.

But, people bitch about the price of gas. So the oil companies are in a no win situation - pay huge bucks to build refineries here, they are gluttons. Pay less to build them elsewhere, they are gluttons. Pay nothing to not build them, they are gluttons.

See, the way some people think, the oil companies can't win for losing (and again, if you have even $100 in a 401K, in an IRA, or if you have a company pension plan, or even if you have a savings account, you are invested in "big oil")

What kills me is some people hoot and holler about jobs going overseas, while just here, you heard one of the hooters and hollerers saying "build them in mexico". Amazing!!!!

Yeah, pit, the refineries would be cheaper in mexico, as you advocate. Building parts for cars is cheaper in mexico too.....making clothes, shoes, and electronics is cheaper in china.

So, pit, why do you advocate building refineries in mexico, but you blame Bush for other jobs leaving the u.s.? I mean, you yourself stated it would be cheaper in mexico for refineries, so what about the other stuff? Can't have it both ways there friend.

Quote:

---

Again... WHO closed these facilities? BIG OIL closed them and then they DISMANTLED them rather than hold them in reserve for when they might be needed to boost production.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Look, as I said, I'm not knocking the oil companies for cashing in on America's voracious appetite for gasoline. You'll never hear me complaining about gas prices.

---

And yet, you just complained.............hmmmmmmmmm "you'll never hear me complain...", yet here "I" am complaining.

---

Care to show where I "complained" about gas prices? All I said was that Big Oil isn't in the business of keeping gas prices stable. Of course they're not!! There in business to make money! LMAO That wasn't a complaint at all. Just an observation.

I do laugh, however, when Big Oil claims they can't build additional refinery capacity. Of course they can, but it doesn't make any sense at all for them to do so right now. So long as they can keep up with our demand for gas (which, so far, isn't a problem), they don't need to invest in new refineries. However, should the time come when their forecasts show they WON'T be able to keep up with demand (short-term outages due to unforeseen circumstances aside), you'll be amazed at how quickly new and/or refurbished refineries will come online around the country. It has always been that way in this industry.

Oh, while you're at it... why don't you also point out where I blamed the President for anything.

Quote:

---

However, should the time come when their forecasts show they WON'T be able to keep up with demand (short-term outages due to unforeseen circumstances aside), you'll be amazed at how quickly new and/or refurbished refineries will come online around the country. It has always been that way in this industry.

---

Quote:

---

Again... DISMANTLED them rather than hold them in reserve for when they might be needed to boost production. So, Big Oil was extremely short-sighted AND/OR they knew precisely what they were doing as they no doubt saw the demand for gas-guzzling vehicles skyrocketing in the US in the 80's and 90's. Sooner or later demand would catch up to supply and Big Oil would be on their way to years of record profits. .

---

Where do you work? Do you know of any places of business that keep excess production around for 20 or 30 years, "just in case"???????????

Do you know of any businesses that kept excess production around for 20 or 30 years that actually made money holding those places, empty and not producing?

If so, please list them. If not, don't blame the oil companies for gas prices. After all, the first thing they deal with is the cost of crude. (very volatile) Then, it has to get shipped here, of course. Then it gets refined. Then it gets shipped to a gas staion near you. and each company along the way makes a PROFIT, and profit is not a bad thing, cause otherwise, without progit, businesss cease to exist - show me a business that goes profitless.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Well now Florida,don't forget,any time there's a natural disaster in America,prices go up too.

The line we always get is..................."With this refinery down,we can't keep up production to meet the need so prices must rise."

It's always some line of BS from the oil companies and OPEC.

---

Lack of operating refineries does affect the gas prices, but those tend to not be spikes like regular increases like we see with OPEC pricing, unless there's a sudden demand for gas beyond what is considered normal. Such as an impending hurricane, forces residents to stock up on gas for generators, then we see a short term spike while more gas is directed to the affected area to meet demand.

---

Quote:

---

I say, give the oil companies a big round of applause - because instead of outsourcing jobs by building refineries elsewhere, they are attempting to keep the jobs here.

---

I think that's BS!
They make BILLIONS off of a refinery. You mean you buy,"But property and zoning laws and EPA regulations are too expencive. We can't afford to do it. We're trying."

You BUY THAT!??

Good Lord man! They make MULTI-BILLION dollar profits! They CAN afford it!

You mean you can't see corperate BS when it stares you in the face? WHY would THEY want to make gas cheaper? They're ripping you off and you are buying their BS lock,stock and "barrel".

I think the U.S. government should MANDATE they build more refineries based on the "public good" and "national security". I mean as of now,if terrorists blew up just two refineries,look what it would do to our nations fuel supply.


If oil companies can use the "poor me" excuse not to build refineries........................and if the U.S. government can use "national security" as an excuse to check "Aunt Sally's phone records",then by God they can use that same excuse to force big oil to produce the gas this country needs without putting a stranglehold on the American public.

If you're going to buy into BS excuses,it might as well be one that actually helps the American people instead of hurting us for a change.

Quote:

---

So, pit, why do you advocate building refineries in mexico, but you blame Bush for other jobs leaving the u.s.? I mean, you yourself stated it would be cheaper in mexico for refineries, so what about the other stuff? Can't have it both ways there friend.

---

Blame Bush?


I blame Reagan,Clinton (he is the one who signed NAFTA you know),and Bush! They have ALL contributed to the problem.

And no,I said NOTHING about it being "cheaper" for refineries. I simply stated they could build them "quickly,without red tape".

THEY claim they "can't build them here" and HAVEN'T built them here since 1976.

I'll bold this for you this time so you MIGHT actually remember what I said this time.......................................

If they CAN'T build them here because of regulations and red tape,they would NOT FACE those SAME problems in Mexico.

But I guess you'd rather buy into the oil companies THIRTY year old excuse that they just "can't build them here?

Well you just do that Arch................

Quote:

---

, and I bet the oil companies have looked at it, but for some reason haven't acted on it, or at least not to the point that it is apparent.

---

I'll bet they have too.

I'll also bet if there were enough refineries to insure that if something happenned to one ot two of them,they couldn't use it as an excuse to spike gas prices due to "supply and demand".

That's a GREAT reason for them to actually not want to build refineries ANYWHERE

They just keep giving excuses "why they can't". After all,THAT'S what's in THEIR best interest.

Quote:

---

And I keep forgetting about those "strong Mexican labor unions".


What was I thinking?

---

See!!!

Quote:

---

They just keep giving excuses "why they can't". After all,THAT'S what's in THEIR best interest.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I say, give the oil companies a big round of applause - because instead of outsourcing jobs by building refineries elsewhere, they are attempting to keep the jobs here.

---

Sorry, I should've put a at the end of that quote.

Quote:

---

Highest hurdle for building oil refinery is finding $2.5 bil.
Chicago Sun-Times, Jun 29, 2005 by KEN ALLTUCKER

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20050629/ai_n14807463
TACNA, Ariz. -- Glenn McGinnis surveys his 1,400-acre empire rimmed by the Mohawk mountain range and declares he will build what nobody else has in the past 30 years: an oil refinery.

But McGinnis and his group of investors must first take on the improbable task of persuading the nation's financiers and oil barons to pony up cash for the $2.5 billion plant.

"Before, most people would say this refinery project probably wouldn't happen," McGinnis said. "For the past four or five months, that's changed. The point of view is that the project is viable."

His group, Arizona Clean Fuels, achieved a milestone of sorts in April when the state approved an air-quality permit that allows construction of a 150,000-barrel-a-day refinery that would convert Mexican crude oil into gasoline, diesel and jet fuel for the southwestern United States.

No other oil refinery has progressed this far since 1976.

---

Quote:

---

http://www.cnsnews.com/viewnation.asp?Page=%5CNation%5Carchive%5C200509%5CNAT20050923a.html
Bill Aims to Encourage New Refinery Building
By Susan Jones
CNSNews.com Senior Editor
September 23, 2005

(CNSNews.com) - Rep. Joe Pitts, a Pennsylvania Republican, has introduced a bill intended to speed the process of building more oil refineries in this country, something that would boost the supply and possibly lower the price of gasoline.

Two major hurricanes have temporarily reduced America's oil refining capacity by as much as a third, at a time when world demand for oil has boosted prices to unprecedented levels for American motorists.

Rep. Pitts' bill calls on the Bush administration to identify three U.S. military bases slated for closure where oil refineries could be located. The plan, said Pitts, would eliminate one of the hurdles companies face - finding land -- before building a new refinery.

"Our ability to refine oil and supply gas to consumers has not kept pace with demand for gasoline," Pitts said in a press release.

"That's because we have not built a new refinery in more than thirty years. This is a driving factor in the level and volatility of gas prices. No matter how much additional crude oil is made available, we simply do not have the capacity to refine it. But experts say just one new refinery would make a significant dent in gas prices here at home."

Pitts is among those who say that too many regulations and skyrocketing litigation costs discourage the construction of new refineries.

"While we need to pass a comprehensive bill to streamline these regulations, there is one thing the federal government can offer right now: land. If we set aside unused military bases for new refinery construction it could eliminate several steps and lead to several new refineries," he said.

Pitts' legislation would give the secretaries of Defense and Energy 90 days to identify three military sites that would be suitable for refinery construction.

Once identified, that land would be set aside for two years and reserved exclusively for oil refinery construction. After that time, the land could be sold or otherwise used as the military sees fit.

---

Quote:

---

http://republicans.energycommerce.house.gov/108/News/10072005_1681.htm
WASHINGTON - The House today voted 212 to 210 to deal with the price spikes and dry pumps that drivers encountered nationwide after hurricanes shut down many Gulf Coast oil refineries.

Chairman Joe Barton"We use 21 million barrels of oil a day and only have the refinery capacity for 16 million on a good day. And after Katrina and Rita, we haven't had many good days," said U.S. Rep. Joe Barton, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

The legislation requires the Federal Trade Commission to investigate price gouging and, for the first time, grants the agency the authority to prosecute offenses. The bill also cuts the number of "boutique" fuels currently required for different parts of the country from 17 to six, and encourages carpooling to conserve gasoline.

The Gasoline for America's Security Act, H.R. 3893, reforms cumbersome siting procedures by requiring the Department of Energy to coordinate the refinery permitting process, but only if a state's governor requests the process or if the president has designated the site as potentially suitable for a refinery.

"In 1981, there were 324 operating refineries in the boundaries of the United States. Today there are 148. Do the math. There are a lot of reasons for it but one of the reasons is the law as it exists today," Barton said. "What company's board of directors in its right mind would want to go through this complicated process and tie up billions of dollars for years and years if they weren't certain whether this process would wrap up in a timely fashion?"

Many others agreed with Barton.

"1976 was a great year. We built our last refinery in this country and I graduated from high school. That's too long to go without building a refinery," said U.S. Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill. "People understand that we have to import crude oil. What they don't understand and find incredibly ridiculous is that we import refined gasoline."

The House rejected a substitute amendment which proposed to erase the refinery and conservation provisions, and to send fines collected from price-gougers to subsidize a government heating program for poor people.

The New Source Review provision was not included in the final version of the GAS Act.

"Initially, in the bill that is going to be on the House floor today, we took the administration policy and put it in the bill just to clarify and give certainty to the industry on what they could and couldn't do," Barton said. "But I have agreed to do hearings in committee, and go through the regular process, and bring it to the floor later this year as a stand-alone bill or as a part of another piece of legislation."

The legislation includes these provisions:

* Encourages new refineries in order to increase gasoline supplies and address soaring prices
o Reforms cumbersome siting procedures.
o Requires the president to designate sites on federal lands, including at least three closed military installations that are appropriate for the purposes of siting a refinery.
o Allows the president to permit the operation of a refinery to manufacture petroleum products for consumption by the Armed Forces of the United States.
* Requires the EPA administrator to identify six gasoline and diesel fuels for a Federal Fuels List, down from 17 today that inhibits the ability to transfer and sell excess fuel from one part of the country when shortages strike another part of the country.
* Encourages new pipelines
o Reforms siting and construction requirements for pipelines and for pipeline expansions.
o To encourage expeditious construction of the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline and thereby provide abundant and affordable natural gas to American consumers, sunsets loan guarantee on the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline within two years of enactment of the Gasoline for America's Security Act of 2005 if the state of Alaska and interested parties have not entered into an agreement regarding construction of the pipeline.
o Requires the DOE secretary to study whether crude oil or refined petroleum product pipeline facilities significant to the nation's supply needs have sufficient backup power to ensure availability of product.
* Encourages conservation
o Directs the DOE secretary to establish and carry out a program to encourage the use of carpooling and vanpooling to reduce the consumption of gasoline. The secretary may make grants to state and local governments for carpooling or vanpooling projects.
o Requires the EPA administrator to evaluate and assess carpool and vanpool projects funded under the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality program to reduce consumption of gasoline; determine the direct and indirect impact of the projects on air quality and congestion levels; and ensure the effective implementation of the projects under such program.
* Prohibits price gouging in gasoline and diesel fuel sales
o Outlaws price gouging, as defined by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), in gasoline or diesel fuel sales; requires the FTC to promulgate a standard for price gouging within six months of the legislation's enactment. The federal ban does not affect anti-gouging measures already in place in a number of states.
o Requires the Federal Trade Commission to draft a report on the price of refined petroleum products on the New York Mercantile Exchange.
* Allows the DOE secretary to draw down and sell petroleum products from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to finance additional capacity sufficient to permit filling the SPR to 1 billion barrels.
* Allows a city or region to petition for an extension of clean air requirements if local leaders can demonstrate downwind pollution from another area is to blame.
* Gives FERC new authority to monitor operators of natural gas "gathering" lines in the Outer Continental Shelf, to help prevent monopolistic practices that can increase costs for consumers.

---