ProudAmerican said:are ya ready to praise him because they are consistently falling?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,175561,00.html
One of the key factors underpinning the high price of gasoline is the cost of crude oil, which has been elevated by strong demand, tight global supplies and geopolitical uncertainties.
Aren't they closing two refineries in CA? The oil industry doesn't seem to be in a big rush to build more refineries... that might lower prices.shuamort said:He could be praised for working with Congress to ease construction regulations regarding more refineries. The only problem with that is that the bill would allow the agency to override local laws that prohibit refineries in the area. (We're talking emminent domain problems there).
Here are a couple alleged internal memos that suggest that.scottyz said:Aren't they closing two refineries in CA? The oil industry doesn't seem to be in a big rush to build more refineries... that might lower prices.
scottyz said:Aren't they closing two refineries in CA? The oil industry doesn't seem to be in a big rush to build more refineries... that might lower prices.
How do you think a few environmentalists could stop a billion dollar industry with lots of politicians in their pockets from building refineries? Why are they closing refineries themselves?Calm2Chaos said:Correct me if I am wrong here.. But the oil industry ad building refineries have nothing to do with each other. It's not the refineries that are unwilling to build them. It's the environmentalist and there lobby that are not willing to let it happen. Course these are the same people that are unwilling to allow drilling where the oil actuall is in this country.
scottyz said:How do you think a few environmentalists could stop a billion dollar industry with lots of politicians in their pockets from building refineries? Why are they closing refineries themselves?
I doubt the politicians or big oil care about a few thousand hippies rallying. I also doubt they have even close to the same amount of funds available for lobbying that big oil does. Even Bush's cabinet is made up almost entirely of people from the oil industry. It was Republicans, not environmentalists who have decided against artic drilling.Calm2Chaos said:So you think that the environmental lobby in washington is a few guys in there den organizing rallies? Or a more plausible scenario IMO is that it is a organization with huge numbers and is very well funded. In addition, carries a lot of weight with its votes. Who is stopping us from drilling in the Arctic and the gulf? It damm sure isn't the oil companies.
The FTC investigated them for closing the plants because they believed it was an attempt to raise prices, but ruled this wasn't the case.As for closing refineries I can't tell you. Stream line the process maybe, maximize profits probably. Could be due to new environmental laws or ordinances. Maye it has something to do with obslesence. The truth is this is a company, not a non profit organization. And as a publicly traded company they are by law required to maximize profits. I was listening to an econimcs professor concerning these profits. Vitually every retirment fund is tied in to oil companies. There profits are whats driving 401 k's ect ect. This money isn't just dropping into there pockets. I am under no illisions with the oil companies, I put them on the same list as lawyers and insurance companies. But to blame the problems we are having now soley on them seems short sighted. Specially considering the opposition they have to deal with just to do there job.
BAKERSFIELD, California (October 15, 2004) – Shell Oil Products has confirmed that it is negotiating with several parties for the possible sale of its oil refinery here.
Shell reconsidered its plans to close the refinery last April, in the wake of widespread public opposition. Critics charged the company was closing the plant as part of a strategy for driving up local gasoline prices, and their complaints drew the attention of the Federal Trade Commission and the California Attorney General. Shell denied the accusations, saying it had planned to close the refinery because of declines in the availability of the local crude it was designed to process.
In April, Lynn Elsenhans, President and CEO of Shell Oil Products US, said the company would renew its efforts to sell the refinery but did not expect to meet with success. “We still believe that once potential buyers take a close look at the facility and its available crude supply, that they will reach the same conclusion that we have: That this refinery is not economically viable going forward for a number of reasons, including the cost and availability of the crude needed to run the facility,” Elsenhans said then.
The 72-year-old refinery is one of only 13 remaining in operation in California. At the time it announced plans to close the refinery, Shell said that the refinery had lost money two of the three previous years and predicted it would lose money again in 2004. As justification for the closure, it also cited the declining availability of San Joaquin Valley crude, an unusual heavy crude available exclusively in the area around the refinery.
But critics of the plan claimed that Shell’s justifications didn’t stand up under scrutiny. Internal company documents secured by The Foundation for Consumer and Taxpayer Rights (FCTR), a Santa Monica-based group that led the battle to save the facility, indicated that the refinery was profitable in 2003 and in fact had the highest profit margin of Shell’s eight U.S. refineries at 55 cents per gallon. That is 36 cents per gallon more than at Shell’s refinery in Port Arthur, Texas.
FCTR also questioned Shell’s contention that locally produced crude oil is in short supply, citing statistics from Chevron Texaco and the State of California that indicate crude oil supplies in San Joaquin Valley are sufficient for another 20-35 years. Shell argued, however, that much of that crude is not available to it because it is produced by Chevron Texaco. CT cannot sell the crude to Shell, Shell contends, as a condition of Texaco’s agreements with the Federal Trade Commission that cleared the way for the merger of Chevron and Texaco. Those agreements required Texaco to sell its share in the Bakersfield Refinery and limited other, related activities.
“As observed over the last few years and as projected well into the future, the most critical
factor facing the refining industry on the West Coast is the surplus refining capacity, and the
surplus gasoline production capacity. The same situation exists for the entire U.S. refining
industry. Supply significantly exceeds demand year-round. This results in very poor refinery
margins, and very poor refinery financial results. Significant events need to occur to assist
in reducing supplies and/or increasing the demand for gasoline.”
Internal Texaco document, March 7, 1996
“A senior energy analyst at the recent API (American Petroleum Institute) convention
warned that if the U.S. petroleum industry doesn’t reduce its refining capacity, it will never
see any substantial increase in refining margins…However, refining utilization has been
rising, sustaining high levels of operations, thereby keeping prices low.”
Internal Chevron document, November 30, 1995
JOHNYJ said:The senate 's committee's hearing was a joke.What it did show was that the Republicans are in bed with the Oil companies.Republican Senator Stevens from Alaska blocked any hard questioning of the Oil company executives and gave the American People an
example of what, the word ' Stooge" meant by his behaviour.President Bush will never allow any harsh treatment of or inquiry into ,oil company behaviour.
Yeah, right...did you even read the very story you posted?ProudAmerican said:are ya ready to praise him because they are consistently falling?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,175561,00.html
Are you proud that the Oil Companies made record profits in the 3rd quarter this year while Americans were made homeless due to hurricanes? Are you proud that our automakers are about to file bankruptcy due to the price of gasoline?Pump prices are still 32.7 cents higher than a year ago.
He was just making sure their asses were covered in case they got caught... nothing wrong with that... :3oops:JOHNYJ said:The senate 's committee's hearing was a joke.What it did show was that the Republicans are in bed with the Oil companies.Republican Senator Stevens from Alaska blocked any hard questioning of the Oil company executives and gave the American People an
26 X World Champs said:Yeah, right...did you even read the very story you posted?
Are you proud that the Oil Companies made record profits in the 3rd quarter this year while Americans were made homeless due to hurricanes? Are you proud that our automakers are about to file bankruptcy due to the price of gasoline?
Lots to be proud of when it concerns oil prices and the oil companies...if you happen to be an oil company!
26 X World Champs said:Are you proud that the Oil Companies made record profits in the 3rd quarter this year while Americans were made homeless due to hurricanes?
Are you proud that our automakers are about to file bankruptcy due to the price of gasoline?
Lots to be proud of when it concerns oil prices and the oil companies...if you happen to be an oil company!
KCConservative said:I can already tell you their answer. The answer is no. Giving him any credit would go against the Bash-Bush-at-All-Costs plan. They are quick to blame him for the oil increase, but they will be silent as the prices fall.
I think the oil industry probably owns much of the GOP. They are not fooling anybody by calling these guys in. They didn't even make them testify under oath. And when Boxer and Cantwell requested they do so, they were shot down immediately. And then of course, 3-5 days later, it came out that the execs had been part of one of Cheney's task forces, which they said they weren't part of. If the show benefited anybody, it was the Dems.JustMyPOV said:The Oil Industry owns the government. This is a cute little show the Senate is putting on right now, calling all of the executives of the oil companies to explain record earnings for the summer quarter. They're only doing it because it's one of the current fads in the news, and a large number of them are up for re-election next year. Same reason they're all distancing themselves from Bush and his 36% approval rating.
I'm on the fence about blaming the Big Oil executives.I hear the economist say that the market dictates what the price per barrel is but at the same time prices came down fast after the Senate "investigation" (more like politicians getting face time).Industries are very afraid of the Senate. Did big oil get nervous and bring down the prices in fear of more Federal interferance?JustMyPOV said:The Oil Industry owns the government. This is a cute little show the Senate is putting on right now, calling all of the executives of the oil companies to explain record earnings for the summer quarter. They're only doing it because it's one of the current fads in the news, and a large number of them are up for re-election next year. Same reason they're all distancing themselves from Bush and his 36% approval rating.
Now that the companies have lowered prices, it will blow over fairly quickly, because the American people have a very short attention span. Oh, and isn't it funny that there hasn't been a full restoration of Gulf production, and yet, we're paying less now than even before Katrina ravaged the the Gulf Coast? Perhaps the bad press they've been getting over those record profits??? But what are we going to do about it? We have to get to work, right?
The reality is, all the tough talk and rhetoric is going to amount to nothing in the long haul, and nothing will be done to ease big oil's strangle-hold over the American economy, which will continue until all of the wells have run dry.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?