Could it be that it isn't Islamic Extremists clamping down on the valve
or Environmental Wackos preventing the siting of additional refineries
that is causing the current run up in prices?

Could it be that rather than campaigning to build new refineries (and
meeting insurmountable opposition from NIMBY's and greenies)
big oil is quietly closing down existing refineries all across the
country? Does selling a little less product for a lot more money put
BIG BUCKS in big oil's bib overalls?

Why did the State of California have to force Shell Oil to accept a
check for $130 million dollars from an independent oil company willing
to buy a refinery that Shell wanted to demolish? Could it be that
demolishing the refinery and raising prices for gasoline due to "short
supply" was going to make Shell a lot more money than the $130 million
it recieved for selling the refinery?

General question: We hear all this rhetoric about environmentalists
preventing the construction of an adequate number of refineries. Does
anybody know of a specific, recent, case where an oil company tried to
build a refinery and the attempt was thwarted by environmentalists?
Would be interesting to see a cite.


http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/energy/gasprices/

On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 08:55:18 -0700, chuckgould.chuck wrote:


General question: We hear all this rhetoric about environmentalists
preventing the construction of an adequate number of refineries. Does
anybody know of a specific, recent, case where an oil company tried to
build a refinery and the attempt was thwarted by environmentalists? Would
be interesting to see a cite.

To increase profitability, oil companies have been streamlining refining
operations. This includes closing refineries and expanding existing
ones. They are not building new ones. In 1982, there were 231 oil
refineries in the US. In 2000, there were 155. In that time, according to
Carol Browner of the EPA, there was *one* application made to build a new
refinery.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-...f:74099 .wais

To increase profitability ? They are making record profits as we type. Were
talking BILLIONS of dollars in profits. They are raping us because they know
they can.
"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 08:55:18 -0700, chuckgould.chuck wrote:


General question: We hear all this rhetoric about environmentalists
preventing the construction of an adequate number of refineries. Does
anybody know of a specific, recent, case where an oil company tried to
build a refinery and the attempt was thwarted by environmentalists? Would
be interesting to see a cite.

To increase profitability, oil companies have been streamlining refining
operations. This includes closing refineries and expanding existing
ones. They are not building new ones. In 1982, there were 231 oil
refineries in the US. In 2000, there were 155. In that time, according to
Carol Browner of the EPA, there was *one* application made to build a new
refinery.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-...f:74099 .wais

On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 09:50:12 -0700, ed wrote:

To increase profitability ? They are making record profits as we type.
Were talking BILLIONS of dollars in profits. They are raping us because
they know they can.

I should have been clearer. I was referring to the profitability of the
refining section of the industry. The refining/marketing section profits
have lagged considerably behind the production profits.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/p...ining_text.htm

wrote in message
oups.com...
Could it be that it isn't Islamic Extremists clamping down on the valve
or Environmental Wackos preventing the siting of additional refineries
that is causing the current run up in prices?

Could it be that rather than campaigning to build new refineries (and
meeting insurmountable opposition from NIMBY's and greenies)
big oil is quietly closing down existing refineries all across the
country? Does selling a little less product for a lot more money put
BIG BUCKS in big oil's bib overalls?

Why did the State of California have to force Shell Oil to accept a
check for $130 million dollars from an independent oil company willing
to buy a refinery that Shell wanted to demolish? Could it be that
demolishing the refinery and raising prices for gasoline due to "short
supply" was going to make Shell a lot more money than the $130 million
it recieved for selling the refinery?

General question: We hear all this rhetoric about environmentalists
preventing the construction of an adequate number of refineries. Does
anybody know of a specific, recent, case where an oil company tried to
build a refinery and the attempt was thwarted by environmentalists?
Would be interesting to see a cite.


http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/energy/gasprices/



Rush Limbaugh says the problem is environmental whackos, and that's the end
of the story. No questions permitted.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Could it be that it isn't Islamic Extremists clamping down on the valve
or Environmental Wackos preventing the siting of additional refineries
that is causing the current run up in prices?

Could it be that rather than campaigning to build new refineries (and
meeting insurmountable opposition from NIMBY's and greenies)
big oil is quietly closing down existing refineries all across the
country? Does selling a little less product for a lot more money put
BIG BUCKS in big oil's bib overalls?

Why did the State of California have to force Shell Oil to accept a
check for $130 million dollars from an independent oil company willing
to buy a refinery that Shell wanted to demolish? Could it be that
demolishing the refinery and raising prices for gasoline due to "short
supply" was going to make Shell a lot more money than the $130 million
it recieved for selling the refinery?

General question: We hear all this rhetoric about environmentalists
preventing the construction of an adequate number of refineries. Does
anybody know of a specific, recent, case where an oil company tried to
build a refinery and the attempt was thwarted by environmentalists?
Would be interesting to see a cite.


http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/energy/gasprices/


This is why Oil companies are freaking out about Ethanol.

"Dan J.S." wrote in message
...

wrote in message
oups.com...
Could it be that it isn't Islamic Extremists clamping down on the valve
or Environmental Wackos preventing the siting of additional refineries
that is causing the current run up in prices?

Could it be that rather than campaigning to build new refineries (and
meeting insurmountable opposition from NIMBY's and greenies)
big oil is quietly closing down existing refineries all across the
country? Does selling a little less product for a lot more money put
BIG BUCKS in big oil's bib overalls?

Why did the State of California have to force Shell Oil to accept a
check for $130 million dollars from an independent oil company willing
to buy a refinery that Shell wanted to demolish? Could it be that
demolishing the refinery and raising prices for gasoline due to "short
supply" was going to make Shell a lot more money than the $130 million
it recieved for selling the refinery?

General question: We hear all this rhetoric about environmentalists
preventing the construction of an adequate number of refineries. Does
anybody know of a specific, recent, case where an oil company tried to
build a refinery and the attempt was thwarted by environmentalists?
Would be interesting to see a cite.


http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/energy/gasprices/


This is why Oil companies are freaking out about Ethanol.


Ethanol is just another farm subsidy to ADM. The oil companies can meet the
emissions requirements without ethanol, and ethanol lowers the milage. What
do you think ethanol costs per gallon?

Ethanol is just another farm subsidy to ADM. The oil companies can meet the
emissions requirements without ethanol, and ethanol lowers the milage. What
do you think ethanol costs per gallon?

People who have studied ethanol have determined that if you add in all
of the secondary effects, it costs more energy to produce ethanol than
it delivers as a fuel. The ethanol lobby is very strong in farm states
however for obvious reasons.

wrote:
Ethanol is just another farm subsidy to ADM. The oil companies can meet the
emissions requirements without ethanol, and ethanol lowers the milage. What
do you think ethanol costs per gallon?

People who have studied ethanol have determined that if you add in all
of the secondary effects, it costs more energy to produce ethanol than
it delivers as a fuel. The ethanol lobby is very strong in farm states
however for obvious reasons.

I am considering developing an engine that runs on hemp. Easy and cheap
to grow in large amounts, and a renewable resource. Of course if the
darn thing doesn't run very well you can just go sit next to the
exhaust pipe, and after a little while you'll be convinced that you
don't really care.

wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
Ethanol is just another farm subsidy to ADM. The oil companies can
meet the
emissions requirements without ethanol, and ethanol lowers the milage.
What
do you think ethanol costs per gallon?

People who have studied ethanol have determined that if you add in all
of the secondary effects, it costs more energy to produce ethanol than
it delivers as a fuel. The ethanol lobby is very strong in farm states
however for obvious reasons.

I am considering developing an engine that runs on hemp. Easy and cheap
to grow in large amounts, and a renewable resource. Of course if the
darn thing doesn't run very well you can just go sit next to the
exhaust pipe, and after a little while you'll be convinced that you
don't really care.


And hemp is very available in the west.