HOUSE PASSES HALF A GESTURE ON US REFINING

Bob Tippee

Gestures don't build refineries. Half-gestures build even fewer of them.

The US House has passed half a gesture on US refining.

Its Gasoline for America's Security Act acknowledges that energy supply is important to US security and that refining deserves attention (OGJ Online, Oct. 10, 2005). That's the gesture. But it's only half the story.

The legislation also zig-zags between minor inducements for refinery construction and signs that little about chronic US hostility toward refining has changed.

It directs the Department of Energy to expedite refinery permitting—but only for officially sanctioned projects.

It mandates a reduction in the number of specialty fuels sold across the nation—but leaves refiners subject to product-defect lawsuits because they met clean-air fuel specifications with nondefective methyl tertiary butyl ether.

It promotes the use of old military bases as refinery sites—but doesn't approve reform of a New Source Review program thrown into punishing confusion by the Clinton administration.

It encourages pipeline construction—but mandates a federal investigation of "price-gouging" after Hurricane Rita, stipulating that evidence is any price increase unrelated to cost following the storm.

The House thus has expressed concern about a problem having to do with refining capacity but hasn't addressed the real problem: embedded resistance to refining.

In fact, it has aggravated the resistance by using a national problem to exploit discredited suspicion about gasoline pricing. And with the "price-gouging" bluster, it has put refiners on notice that selling gasoline after a hurricane may constitute criminal behavior.

On balance, the Gasoline for America's Security Act makes only a modest effort to encourage investment in new refining capacity but leaves large impediments to construction and upgrades in place.

It affirms that decisions about refining investments in the US must account for more than the risks associated with price volatility and a recent history of chronic unprofitability. They also must anticipate the caprices of an antagonistic political climate.

Perpetuating such a climate is no way to encourage refining construction in the US or anywhere else.

So anywhere other than the US is where most if not all future refinery construction will occur.

(Online Oct. 14, 2005; author's e-mail: bobt@ogjonline.com)

Related Articles

Phillips 66 considers splitter at Sweeny refinery

03/21/2014 Phillips 66 is evaluating the potential for the addition of a condensate splitter near its 247,000-b/d Sweeny refinery in Old Ocean, Tex., just sou...

Second small diesel refinery planned for North Dakota

03/21/2014 Quantum Energy Inc. (QEI), Tempe, Ariz., said it has secured land for the construction of a 20,000-b/d grassroots hydroskimming refinery in North D...

Flint Hills settles Port Arthur pollution case

03/20/2014 Flint Hills Resources (FHR) has reached a settlement with the US federal government to implement innovative technologies to control harmful air pol...

WoodMac: Global ethylene demand, production on the rise

03/20/2014 Ethylene-producing assets that have access to low-cost natural gas feedstocks, such as the ones in North America, will lead the competition in glob...

Careers at TOTAL

Careers at TOTAL - Videos

More than 600 job openings are now online, watch videos and learn more!

 

Click Here to Watch

Other Oil & Gas Industry Jobs

Search More Job Listings >>
Stay Connected