Two days to shut down the refineries...3-5 weeks to start back up.

[Atman]

In the meantime, gas shortages and price gouging.

How conveeeeeeenient.

[BlueEyedSon]

1. Maybe it's true... do you know something about the inner workings

of refineries you would care to share?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

7. Actually, you'd probably agree, he has no idea about the inner workings.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

2. these are really complex pieces of machinery. One mistake, and BOOOM!

no more refinery.
They deal with high pressure and temps, using differentials to create specific gases and liquids. All of which are highly reactive oxidizers. Meaning they burn.

about 10 yrs ago, a Joliet refinery had a little booboo. Afterwards, a 12 ton steel cover to a cracking center was found 5 miles away. most of the parts were never found.

[benburch]

4. And the fire crew...

There was a fire crew cooling the tower with fire hoses. Not a trace of them was ever found.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

12. oh my, how could I forget that?

I later met with one of the family members of one of them. The company tried to place blame on:
a) the firemen for doing their jobs; then,
b) the crew working that cracking station before the problem.

eventually, it turned out that poor maintenance as a result of cost-savings was the culprit.

[benburch]

13. It was always disturbing to me how totally they were obliterated.

Not a bone or a tooth or a belt buckle. Just like they never were.

[MadHound]

5. Yep, you can't just throw a switch and be producing gas.

It is like any major industrial plant, you have to start back up slowly, carefully. You throw everything on at once and you blow up the place.

[benburch]

3. That was ignorant.

You clearly have NO idea about how these things work. I do. 3 weeks would be a very fast restart time.

[ProfessorGAC]

9. Three Weeks To Full Output Is, Indeed, A Good Start Up Time

Generally, after a full turnaround, the refineries around here take a full month to get back to full production. One thing Atman ignores is that during the restart, their operating costs are EXACTLY the same as if they were generating gasoline at full production. So, they are spending all of the normal operating expenses and getting less than normal, all the way down to NOTHING for their money.

This would be a pretty stupid way to make additional profits.
The Professor

[benburch]

10. A big part of this restart is going to be inspection.

A lot of things that would suffer stress from high winds ought to be X-rayed and otherwise inspected. Things are going to have to be tested under pressure for leaks. Sensors and electrical cabinets are going to have to be inspected for water damage - Even a sealed enclosure can leak if put under enough wind stress.

[ProfessorGAC]

16. Even In Other Non-Disaster Cases. . .

. . .those Xray inspection take place because as systems like hydrocrackers are restarted, the temperature rise is so intense that different parts change in size & volume differently. This also puts enormous stress on the systems and at intervals, dye penitrant tests and localized xray work is done to assure no fractures in critical equipment.

So, i know what you're talking about, and it wouldn't just be because of the potential for wind damage.
The Professor

[benburch]

23. Right...

But in wind you have to inspect things not normally inspected. Guy wires, turnbuckles, bracing, etc.

[Javaman]

54. I'm curious, how do they actually x-ray the parts?

It sounds like it would be a very comples task, no?

[benburch]

56. Not complex, just time-consuming.

There are pre-defined ways to xray almost any sort of part. It is done much the way it is done for a broken bone, except much longer exposure times.

[Javaman]

58. Thanks for the info.

[Atman]

14. It WAS ignorant, I admit. I have no idea how refineries work.

Forgive me, all you oil-company defenders. Forgive me for feeling a bit untrusting of the oil companies who raise prices by a dollar when a thick cloud moves overhead, yet can't ever seem to lower the prices again when the sun comes back out.

Forgive me for not trusting the oil companies who are making more profit than anyone has ever made, but who want the taxpayer to foot the bill for new refineries, whose product they'll then gouge us for anyway.

Forgive me if the president and vice president are oil men, and are the most crooked individuals ever to walk the White House halls. Guilt by association.

Forgive me for not being as perfect as all of you. Thank you for putting me in my place.

[ProfessorGAC]

18. Hypersensitivity & Petulance Are Not Attractive Traits

Nobody here said they trusted the oil companies. So, you can be defensive and rationalize your statements all you like. You will still be wrong. And being chippy won't make you any less incorrect.
The Professor

[benburch]

21. Just so.

I trust oil executives about as far as I could throw one of the fat bastards.

But inventing "facts" in order to attack them only make our side look like "moonbats".

[ProfessorGAC]

24. There Are Plenty Of Valid Reasons To Attack & Criticize

We don't need to make up any more than we already have! They've been wrong about foreign policy, about economic policy, about social policy, and in each case, PROVABLY wrong!

They screwed up the intelligence on 9/11, they screwed up prep for Katrina, and overreacted for Rita. (The president going to "run things" in Colorado is definitely an overreaction.)

Pals are stealing from the Treasury and high ranking R Congresscritters are under investigation.

That's a pretty good list without having to make things up.
The Professor

[Atman]

29. Show me a "FACT" I invented.

I accepted and acknowledged my ignorance of oil refineries, but I never posted ANYTHING that could be even remotely construed as "inventing facts."

[Atman]

28. "Being chippy?

I had a dozen of you guys jump all over my shit and accuse me of everthing from ignorance (which I accept, for Christ's sake...I even said so!) to outright hatred and disrespect for the guys working the refineries. I've never seen so much made up shit! Lighten the fuck up!

[ProfessorGAC]

35. Me?????

When did i say you were stupid. I said that you were wrong about how long it took a refinery to start up. That's it. Then you got defensive and started sarcastically referring to others as "oilmen" et al.

I would think it chippy to not simply admit that your opinion was based in a lack of knowledge and now that you know what you know, perhaps there is something less nefarious than you first presumed.

But, no. You're still at it.
The Professor

[Atman]

39. Christ, I didn't start referring to anybody as anything.

We're talking about OIL REFINERIES. I said "oil men." There was nothing sarcastic about it. I got sarcastic when you told me not to call oil men oil men! What the bloody hell are you on about??????

[ProfessorGAC]

41. Oblivious To One's Own Sarcasm?

I guess this discussion moved beyond the point of diminishing returns.

"Shhh, the oilmen have told me i'm an idiot. . ." is not sarcastic?

Originally i was just trying to set the record straight. But, now you're boring me. I'm out.
The Professor

[Javaman]

57. Got to remember, there are oil men and then there are the people that...

actually run the plants. I don't trust oil men either but I do trust the working stiffs trying to support families via our ever hungry oil needs.

We as Americans are such hypocrites. We bitch and complain about the price of oil, but yet, how many really of the 300 million Americans voluntarily conserve gas? Let alone, stop using any oil produced products? We as Americans have demanded these products to make our life easy thus increasing the need for more oil.

Yeah, the damn oil men are making record profits, but who is giving them the money? We are! Drive less, conserve more, make your meals at home. Simple things to save yourself money and keep it from the oil men.

But what is really obscene is: our gov't has yet to come up with a plan to transition this country to another form of energy.

This is where the problem is: as long as we continue merrily down the rabbit hole as a nation, the price will get higher and higher.

This is nothing more then a vision of things to come. All that Katrina and Rita did was accelerate the process.

Demand a new energy policy that rewards ingenuity and condemns inefficiency.

[SunDrop23]

6. Yes, how convenient. And you know that 3-5 is probably an "estimate"

[benburch]

11. A very optimistic estimate, actually.

See above.

[Bridget Burke]

8. Refinery start-up is a dangerous job.

I had a long discussion with a guy who did that for a living. Refineries that have been shut down for years are really bad.

But even a simple start-up is generally done behind earthworks--just in case.

[benburch]

19. I designed part of a pipe corrosion monitor for cracking & similar plants.

It worked on the principle that the electrical resistance of a pipe goes up when the walls thin from corrosion. We would short this HUGE tractor battery through a length of pipe, and then take voltage readings at a large number of points on the pipe while the battery was connected. We could measure the pipe without shutting down that section of the plant as would ordinarily have been required. Works for almost any sort of plant- nuclear, chemical, petrochemical. Though the amperage we used was high, the voltage was low enough not to be able to cause a spark that might have been a safety issue.

[ThomWV]

15. I Believe It Took 5 Days In LA

Just for comparison, in LA, where the damage was much more concentrated and of course much more severe as well, it took 5 days to get them back up and running.

[Atman]

17. Shhh...I'm an idiot.

All the oilmen on here already said so.

[benburch]

22. Not an idiot...

just ignorant and unwilling to rectify that deficit. A little study would be good before you attack the guys who work on these plants. Fuck the oil executives; You just trashed the industrial engineers, pipe-fitters, and other workers who literally risk their lives so that we can have oil.

[Atman]

27. Talk about hypersensitivity!

Jesus, I didn't attack ANYONE! Don't put words in my mouth! I have great respect for anybody, oil workers or not, who work in such hazardous conditions, and I never said on single disparaging word about them. If you can find such statements I made, let me see them. But don't twist this into an attack I never made.

[benburch]

31. You would have to have all those guys in cahoots to do what you suggest.

All of the workers would have to be "in" on an attempt to keep the refineries offline longer than necessary to force prices up, and that is just what you suggested was happening.

So, yes, you are trashing those good men and women with your ignorant assertion.

[Atman]

34. Yeah. Right.

The workers set the policy, not the oil execs...er, excuse me, "the dairy farmers."

:crazy:

[ProfessorGAC]

25. Name Calling, Now?

Where is your proof that i'm an oilman? Apparently, when you've got nothing to support your assertions, name calling is all you've got left.

The fact that you can't admit you're wrong about this, is on you, not on me.
The Professor

[Atman]

30. "oilman" is name calling? Weren't we talking about OIL refineries?

I'll refrain from talking about oilmen, then. I'll call them milkmen if it makes you happier.

:crazy:

[ProfessorGAC]

36. You Called ME & Burch Oilmen

You clearly stated that the "oilmen" told you, . . .

I'm far too aware of how forums like this work to not read between the lines, and you're not as much shrewder than me as you think you are. It's an insult to accuse someone of being an oilman, immediately after implying that the start-up times are the result of a nefarious plan. Don't try to pin that type of behavior on me, slick!

I'm just telling you that you can hate the oil companies all you want, but taking 6 times longer to start one up than shut one down is not based upon some conspiracy. It's based upon physics and safety.
The Professor

[DemocratSinceBirth]

32. Jed Clampett Was An Oilman

He was a damn site better than Mr.Drysdale the banker...

[ProfessorGAC]

38. Read Atman's Post Carefully

He was referring to ME and Burch. And, my dog is smart enough to see that he was using it to slam us because we were pointing out inconvenient facts about the effort required to start up a refinery.

When you've got nothing, i guess it's ok to disparage the bearer of bad news. You know. Sort of like Republicans.
The Professor

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProfessorGAC]

42. Zzzzzzzzzzzzz!

The Professor

[Atman]

44. My sentiments exactly. Let's drop this.

My initial post obviously touched a nerve with some people. I was about to post a simple "my bad," but then started reading the rest of the attack posts, including yours, not saying "sorry, you're mistaken," but instead outright attacking me for being some sort of idiot, which I assure you, I am not.

FYI, I called CHENEY and BUSH "oil men," not you. I acknowledged I didn't know how refineries work, but also indicated a well-deserved distrust in the oil industry as a result of the recent price gouging. Somehow, you and Ben took that as an insult. We're clearly not communicating, and we should stop this. I don't know you, you don't know me, but you sure are willing to make a lot of assumptions. You know, kind of like you are accusing me of doing about you, right?

So let's drop this, 'kay? I've acknowleged my ignorance of oil refineries, and you seem to be taking this all very personally. Let's just call it a truce, for I have no quarrel with you. Just don't put words in my mouth, please.

Oh, and I was going to try to fit in a snarky comment about your name "Professor," as you were expressing such vast knowledge above us all...but I didn't...so, for an irony-soaked laugh I think you'll be able to appreciate, look up my screen name.

Again...PEACE, brother. We have bigger battles to fight than this silliness.

[benburch]

46. Look in the dictionary...

ig·no·rant - adj.
1. Lacking education or knowledge.
2. Showing or arising from a lack of education or knowledge: an ignorant mistake.
3. Unaware or uninformed.

-----

id·i·ot - n.
1. A foolish or stupid person.
2. A person of profound mental retardation having a mental age below three years and generally being unable to learn connected speech or guard against common dangers. The term belongs to a classification system no longer in use and is now considered offensive.

-----

I called you ignorant, and that was accurate. YOU were the one to use the word idiot.

o-o

[Atman]

48. I give up.

Jesus. Sorry I tried to be civil, Ben. I won't make that mistake with you again.

[benburch]

20. No, that was 5 days for the pipelines to start up.

Moving stored product. Many of those refineries are still offline. A few that were not damaged are getting close to normal operations finally this week.

[ProfessorGAC]

26. Care To Show The Proof Of That

If they got back up in 5 days, that means the refineries were never taken all the down. There is no way to start up an operation that big, that high temperature intensive, and that dangerous in five days.

Sorry, but your information is in error. Worse, it's making the chip on Atman's shoulder get bigger.
The Professor

[ThomWV]

33. Proof? It Hasn't Been 3 Weeks Yet and They Are Running Today

How much more proof do you need other than that they were down and now they are back up and it hasn't been 3 weeks yet. Granted that there are a few that are not back on line but most are. Seems like proof enough to me.

[Atman]

37. In all fairness, the headline DID say 3 to 5 weeks...

That does seem to fit within that timeline. Thanks for stepping in, though. There appear to be some milkmen here with some spare time on their hands, and very thin skin.

[Bridget Burke]

47. I'm not an oilman. In fact, I'm not a man at all.

But Texans do learn things about the petrochemical industry.

[Atman]

49. Good thing I wasn't addressing you then, isn't it?

Americans do learn things about the oil industry, too. The men in the boardrooms are greedy motherfuckers who took advantage of America when she was down.

I have no forgiveness for them.

[Bridget Burke]

50. I made one post that mentioned petrochemical startups....

So I'll answer you again whenever I wish.

[Atman]

51. Bridget, I'm so sorry this thread has gone so wrong

I was only pointing out that I never made reference to you at all, yet you seemed to think I did.

Ben and "the Professor" seem to think there is something I'm not gettting, and don't seem to want to back off that stance, no matter how many times, or how many different ways I attempt to "accept responsibility."

I'm really disappointed in my fellow DUers on this thread. I've posted here for a long time, and I'm not prone to fighting with allies. That is why I can't figure out Ben's and "the Professor's" attempts to put words in my mouth I never said.

I apologize for putting you in the crosshairs. Apparently, according to a couple of others in this thread, people are not allowed to misspeak, or even acknowledge their mistakes afterwards. I understand that sarcasm is hard to discern in a message board post, which is why I attempted to be so clear to point it out. Yet, even after trying to call a truce, Ben still has to jump in and say there is something I'm not getting, and therefore not worth talking to. You came along right after I read Ben's last snark.

I tried to gracefully end this thread or at least get it back on track by holding an olive branch, but instead got dumped on even more.

I know there are a lot of tense poeple in Texas. I know there are a lot of tense people on DU and in the US in general these days. What I don't know is when so many DUers completely lost any semblence of a sense of humor. I really, really have no gripe with you at all. I didn't appreciate being talked down to by "the Professor," and our back-n-forth took and unfortunate turn. As for Ben, I simply don't know what his problem is.

I am not here to make enemies or pick fights. But I am completely serious when I say that some people here simply need to sit back and take a chill pill. My initial post was shown to be wrong, I acknowledged it, yet here we still are.

I'm am truly, truly sorry I started this thread. I had no idea there were so many thin-skinned DUers. And my apology to you for jumping on you, but I honestly was NOT referring to you in any way, shape or form.

Please, for god's sake, let's stop this nonsense! I think I am entitled to be wrong every now and then without being crucified for it. Isn't there some guy in Washington who made a mistake that we should be worried about?

[ProfessorGAC]

43. You're Simply Wrong

Those refineries are not back up. THe ones that went into full shutdown are in start-up mode. It will take weeks to get back to full production. That's typical. Geez, even a food canning plant takes a week to get their lines back up to full speed. And there isn't much danger in an automated food processing system.

And, as someone who's been in industry as a consultant to manufacturers for over 20 years, i can tell you that proof to me would be to see a refinery operating at full capacity after a total shutdown. The "few" not back up would not constitute proof, nor would those that in the process of starting back up.

It's just not the way professionally structured start-ups work. Recommissioning, revalidation, and measurement plans around quality, yield, and energy consumption all are part of the plan, and those are never done by simply turning everything all the way back up. It's dangerous, stupid, and unproductive. And, anyone who does that just so we can pay a few cents less at the pump is an idiot. I don't want a refinery manager or engineer who thinks that way. People could get killed.

The Professor

[benburch]

45. Not worth arguing any more, Professor.

He won't be convinced, and we've made our point.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

53. actually, it was the pipelines, not the refineries.

and Cheney made a big deal about getting them running again.

A refinery - a modern one - has multiple things going on, some of which are dependent on one another. Shutting one down is a delicate balancing act, involving a highly trained crew. As the Professor correctly states, starting one up is even more dangerous and time-consuming.

A simple (too simple, really) description of what happens in a cracking tower might help. Take a big tube. Fill it with oil. Apply heat. Lots of heat. And pressure. Lots of pressure. Lighter stuff rises, while heavier, thicker stuff tends to go to the bottom. So, once you get it hot enough (we are talking VERY HOT, by the way) you stick a pipe in at different levels to recover the kind of byproduct you are looking for. Of course, the slightest leak, and kaBOOM. And the gaskets and connections have to be super good. The slightest gas leak, and your system explodes. And, you have to prevent the wrong stuff from coming into the wrong level.

There are other systems, depending on the refinery, the raw material they prefer to use, the products sought and the additives they use, which might include using vacuums to boil off other products, filtering, etc. For ex, sweet crude is great for gasoline, but not that good for heating oil. Heavier crudes have other particular uses, including plastics, but don't do well with gasoline production.

It is not a matter of attaching raw oil from a pipe, turning on a switch, then going to fill up your car.

[benburch]

59. antifaschits, some people just want to hear all news as lies.

Try to tell them that part of what they are hearing is the truth, and you become part of the conspiracy, even if - especially if - you are right about it.

[Silverhair]

52. To some people, EVERYTHING is part of a great conspiracy theory.

You don't know anything about refineries, or what is needed to get them back up and running. Instead of learning something about it, you just trot out an ignorant conspiracy theory.

[Atman]

55. And instead of reading any of the thread, you just trot out ignorant posts

Thanks for your input. Read the thread next time before you decide to pile on hours after it was posted.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

61. honestly, there was no one piling on. to the contrary, several people

pointed out some serious facts which cannot be ignored. I think we can agree on most of the following:

Oilmen are greedy, crude and extremely rich people, who prefer not to have hybrid cars, solar technology or really good batteries and energy storage on the market.

Oil pipelines were shut down and a few days later, turned back on in the Louisiana and Alabama regions because of Katrina.

Oil refineries are large, complex, dangerous, noisy, and stinky places, which require many highly trained people doing maintenance, shut downs, start ups and more in order to operate. To shut one down takes time. To start one up takes LOTS of time. The extremes in pressure and temps are such that it is always a potentially dangerous operation. Politics, greed or similar motives play no role in whether a refinery can be started up in days vs. weeks. Politics and NIMBY DO play a role in location of new refineries - and for that reason, I do not believe that a new one has been built in the last 16 years. (the old ones are refurbished)

Artificial shortages, created by politics or greed would be short-sighted and unreasonable. Any radical changes in pricing/availablity combined with people's ultimate willingness to change behavior, seek out alternatives and invest in serious conservation would be disasterous to the petro-kings. If we learn to live without, we ain't ever going back - and they know it. They want us exactly where they have us until they develop another profitable alternative they can force feed us. If we don't play their game on their rules, they lose us forever.

So, it is not that we (or anyone) are pounding on anyone. It is that the facts are what they are. Greed vs. physics is not the proper comparison for a discussion. However, they can both be part of our discussion here. Both do play a role in what will happen to our country and its energy supplies fr the foreseeable future.

And, don't forget. The hurricane and himacane season is not even half over.

[Atman]

62. "So, it is not that we (or anyone) are pounding on anyone."

Well, yes, that is exactly what it is, because way back in post #14 I said, oops, you're right, I don't know much about oil refineries. Yet there you are in post #52 calling me an ignorant conspiracy theorist.

Period.

Your follow up post actually says something, and points out all sorts of related and non-related facts about oil refineries, but that is not what you posted as your initial response to me nearly 40 posts after I admitted my ignorance regarding how refineries work. You called me an ignorant conspiracy theorist instead, and now you're back-peddling and trying to claim that you weren't piling on, when that is exactly what you were doing.

All that said, thanks for your eventual factual post. Lots of good points. Too bad a couple of other posters couldn't have taken the same tack. This could actually have been a pretty educational thread for a lot of us, a lot sooner, and a lot of bandwidth could have been saved.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

63. ahem. I did not post #52. Nor did I call you any names. Not even a

conspiracy theorist. Unfortunately, that favor was not returned. My post was #53, not 52. But no need to split hares, hairs or heres.

However, I do agree that here at DU we really need to keep our facts factual, especially when there are FruitRepublic people ready to poke holes in any and all of our positions. They take numerous liberties with facts as it is. We don't need to help their cause.

[Atman]

64. My sincere apology.

I misread who posted it...I confused your's and Silverhair's posts, and wound up responding to both at the same time. Entirely unintentional, and entirely my bad. Again, sorry, and again, thank you for all the good info in your post.

[Warren DeMontague]

60. Oh, fuck!

I wish someone would have told me that gas prices might go up (you know, finite resource and all) when I bought THIS thing!



'doh!