Steve Thrasher wrote in
:

I hate to break this to you. I live in Alaska. The crude is tankered
down to you guys, refined and tankered back up here. I saw it for
$2.1599 at one of the Fred Meyers yesterday. Meaning with my fuel
discount it's costing me $2.0599. Yep, I just filled up.


I used to be mobile cal lab manager for EIL Instruments, one of
Maryland's beltway bandits, and drove from their office in Va Beach
across to as far as the Mexican border calibrating CG, FAA and Navy
remotely situated test equipments at little bases, FAA VORTACs and Loran
C sites all over. (Try calibrating a scope while your cal lab is sitting
BETWEEN the capacitor hat and ground system of a multimegawatt 100Khz
Loran C pulse transmitter, some time.)

On one trip, some payback for voting the wrong way resulted in fuel being
made in Eastern Texas was allocated away from there to their pet states,
leaving poor Texans working AT the refineries with NO GAS at the 7-
Elevens!

I sat at a La Quinta Motor Inn in Beaumont, staring longingly at FOUR oil
refineries running full blast, trying to explain to my ****ed off boss
that the van's saddle tanks were EMPTY and this oil refining city had NO
GAS FOR SALE until Monday Morning at 9AM! We were gonna be late getting
to the CG Station in Brownsville, still half a world away across TEXAS!
Of course, my boss blamed me. Everything was my fault....(c;

Alaska needs to get in the refining business, then tell America what it
wants for gas and diesel...(c;....instead of just giving crude away until
it's gone.

Larry
--
Democracy is when two wolves and a sheep vote on who's for dinner.
Liberty is when the sheep has his own gun.

Larry wrote:

Alaska needs to get in the refining business, then tell America what it
wants for gas and diesel...(c;....instead of just giving crude away until
it's gone.

Larry

My understanding is that won't happen. As part of the agreement to
drill the north slope, no refineries would be allowed in Alaska. That
won't change because the environmental movement would never allow it.

"xorbit" wrote in message
...


Larry wrote:

Alaska needs to get in the refining business, then tell America what it
wants for gas and diesel...(c;....instead of just giving crude away until
it's gone.

Larry

My understanding is that won't happen. As part of the agreement to drill
the north slope, no refineries would be allowed in Alaska. That won't
change because the environmental movement would never allow it.



I'll bet Russia would be amenable to building refineries in Siberia, just
across the straights...

KLC Lewis wrote:

"xorbit" wrote in message
...


Larry wrote:

Alaska needs to get in the refining business, then tell America what it
wants for gas and diesel...(c;....instead of just giving crude away until
it's gone.

Larry

My understanding is that won't happen. As part of the agreement to drill
the north slope, no refineries would be allowed in Alaska. That won't
change because the environmental movement would never allow it.




I'll bet Russia would be amenable to building refineries in Siberia, just
across the straights...

Just across the straights? Have you measured how far that is from
Valdez compared to, say, Seattle? Against the current in the open North
Pacific / Bering Sea?

Valdez is a LOT closer to the lower 48 than Siberia.

"xorbit" wrote in message
news


....

Just across the straights? Have you measured how far that is from Valdez
compared to, say, Seattle? Against the current in the open North Pacific
/ Bering Sea?

Valdez is a LOT closer to the lower 48 than Siberia.




Sure, the lower 48 are closer, but Russia has that old entrepreneurial
spirit (and lack of regulation) that no longer exists in the US.

KLC Lewis wrote:

"xorbit" wrote in message
news

...

Just across the straights? Have you measured how far that is from Valdez
compared to, say, Seattle? Against the current in the open North Pacific
/ Bering Sea?

Valdez is a LOT closer to the lower 48 than Siberia.





Sure, the lower 48 are closer, but Russia has that old entrepreneurial
spirit (and lack of regulation) that no longer exists in the US.

Spent some serious time in Russia second half of last year. It might be
called "entrepreneurial" by some. We called it organized crime.

Its an academic discussion if federal law requires all the crude for
U.S. domestic use.

xorbit wrote:
My understanding is that won't happen. As part of the agreement to
drill the north slope, no refineries would be allowed in Alaska. That
won't change because the environmental movement would never allow it.

Here is part of an article published: January 23, 2007 in The Anchorage
Daily News:
NORTH POLE -- A small fire that broke out Sunday at Alaska's largest
crude oil refinery did not interrupt production and refining operations,
officials said.
There were no injuries resulting from the fire at the Flint Hills
Refinery in North Pole.

There's more if you want to go to the web site at www.adn.com
Now, it's MY understanding that none of the North Slope oil can be
exported. It's all for domestic use. Federal law of some sort.

Steve Thrasher wrote:

xorbit wrote:

My understanding is that won't happen. As part of the agreement to
drill the north slope, no refineries would be allowed in Alaska. That
won't change because the environmental movement would never allow it.


Here is part of an article published: January 23, 2007 in The Anchorage
Daily News:
NORTH POLE -- A small fire that broke out Sunday at Alaska's largest
crude oil refinery did not interrupt production and refining operations,
officials said.
There were no injuries resulting from the fire at the Flint Hills
Refinery in North Pole.

There's more if you want to go to the web site at www.adn.com
Now, it's MY understanding that none of the North Slope oil can be
exported. It's all for domestic use. Federal law of some sort.

I stand corrected. Thanks you for the information.

I knew there was some reason why the Alaska crude was shipped to the
lower 48. I just had the wrong reason. My information came from some
of the residents of Cordova, Alaska on one of our visits.