No,,, that means I've insulted the "Normal Liberals", when I've added you the limited attention span catagory they've shown.

Now I'll have to add "Limited Comprehension" to the List. Mulp, Take care.

__________________
A Liberal is a Man too broadminded to take his own side in a quarrel (Robert Frost 1874-1963).

So, we are back to the question of when did Canada join the Union of the USA.

The US refineries are capable of refining 12.5M barrels a day in excess of what the US produces. In other words, the US refineries are capable of processing three times the US production. Adding another refineries is only going to require that more crude be imported, but the supply of crude on the world market doesn't seem to be increasing.

I found this little tit-bit of info Mulp. It has a mix of every perspective known on this subject. But the Key to it all is: More Refineries are going to be built.


Why aren’t there more oil refineries in the US?

PendingWritten on Dec-26-07 12:40pm - Not yet published to a wikizine From: Bizmology

With gas pump prices sitting at $3 or more a gallon, a question keeps coming up. Why aren’t there more refineries in the US?

According to the Energy Information Administration, the US had more than 300 operating refineries in the early 1980s. By 2007 the number of refineries in the US had been cut in half (down to 149). From 1975 to 2000, the US Environmental Protection Agency received only one permit request for a new refinery. A new refinery has not been built in the US since 1976.

Why the dearth of activity? The answer is about as divisive as other hot-button political issues in this election season — the Iraq War, gun control, abortion, illegal immigration, and the national budget. In one corner, the oil companies and their free market supporters bewail the myriad environmental regulations that make the costs of building new refineries or expanding older ones onerous. The demands of the Clean Air Act and the 50 separate gasoline blends required by the Federal and State governments to meet various air pollution reduction schemes have meant refits of many aging refineries are too cost-prohibitive for many companies. Oil companies have chosen to close inefficient, highly-polluting refineries in favor of expanding the capacity of fewer, more cost-efficient ones. A nationwide NIMBY (not in my back yard) mood — would you want a new refinery in your neighborhood? — has also crimped plans for new refineries.

In the other corner, environmentalists and consumer advocates point to greedy corporate entities that have intentionally reduced the number of refineries, and deliberately built no new ones. Through industry consolidation, a few major acquisitive companies have limited competition and reduced refining output, which in turn has jacked up prices at the pump, bringing misery to the motoring masses and megabuck profits to the oil companies.

According to Public Citizen, the largest five oil refiners in the US (Exxon Mobil, ConocoPhillips, BP, Valero Energy, and Royal Dutch Shell) control more than 56% of US oil refinery capacity; the top 10 refiners control 83%. According to CorpWatch, because of upgrading and expansion operations, refining capacity during the last 30 years has shrunk only 10% from its peak of 18.6 million barrels a day. At the same time, gasoline consumption has risen by more than 45%. The American Petroleum Institute, which represents oil and gas companies, would beg to differ with most of the above statistics and their causes.

Whatever side you come down on in this debate, the good news is that there is a renewed spate of activity going on in the refining sector. Here are three recent events:

On December 10, US Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman praised the planned $7 billion expansion of a Motiva Enterprises oil refinery in Port Arthur, Texas. Motiva, a joint venture between Royal Dutch Shell and Saudi Aramco, is doubling the size of the refinery’s capacity to 600,000 barrels per day. Expected to be completed by 2010, the facility will become the largest oil refinery in the nation.

On December 11 it was reported that Valero was considering an overhaul of its refinery portfolio, focusing on 10 refineries that process oil more cheaply and divesting its others. In making this move Valero was following the lead of integrated oil companies such as Royal Dutch Shell and ConocoPhillips in reducing their refining capacity. Valero is looking to focus on big refineries (on the East Coast, the West Coast, and the Gulf of Mexico) that have greater access to oil and are capable of processing oil that is tougher to refine and therefore cheaper to purchase.

__________________
A Liberal is a Man too broadminded to take his own side in a quarrel (Robert Frost 1874-1963).

>>>A lot of refineries were shut down. Most of those that didn't shut down were expanded. Output didn't change all that much.

What I don't understand is that the Federal Government has leased millions of acres to drillers, but very few are doing any new drilling. I think they'd rather sit back on their depletion allowances.

__________________
"All the problems we face in the United States today can be traced to an unenlightened immigration policy on the part of the American Indian."

Pat Paulsen for President

Earth to Commish ... pwned.

They have been sitting back waiting for Bush to have American taxpayers pay them to take the oil of the American people for nothing so they can sell the American people their oil for profit.

You have to ask yourself a very important question Mulp...Why would Liberals (such as yourself), be against new drilling, oil refineries, nuclear power plants, being built to provide America with Power?

I'm aware of the answer based on past Liberal Green idiots. (It might endanger the caribou, or field mice). Again I say,,,I'd much rather pay taxes to support the Power Structure of our Nation.

Which you oppose.

__________________
A Liberal is a Man too broadminded to take his own side in a quarrel (Robert Frost 1874-1963).

I have no objection to the oil companies drilling on the land they own or have obtained leases on from the private owners.

As far as drilling on my land, and your land, I want them to pay $250 a barrel for any oil they obtain from my land and your land.

Don't you want to be paid for what you own?

Or are you the kind of person that if I came over to your house and said, "hey, I like your house, let me have it for $1" you would say "give me a buck and its all yours."

And nuclear power plants should be built by private corporations and run by private corporations under the same terms that Bush demands that Iran, et al follow, and that the corporations get the same kind of Federal aid and favorable legislation as wind farms, solar farms and so on. If nuclear is in the set of solutions to the power needs of the world, then it must be possible to build nuclear power plants everywhere power is needed, inside Iran, Venezuela, Brazil, Cuba, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Palestine, et al.

And if someone wants to build a refinery using entirely their own money and no public money at a time when demand for gasoline and other petroleum products are going to fall dramatically, well, let them lose all their own money, but don't look to me for a bailout.