Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Maybe it's time to move the refineries to South Dakota

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-12-08 05:43 PM
Original message
Maybe it's time to move the refineries to South Dakota
or Nebraska or West Virginia.. It seems to me that it may just be too expensive to continue to have these things in harm's way..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
AldebTX Donating Member (739 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-12-08 05:45 PM
Response to Original message
1. Ports
Most are near ports....we've got to import that oil don't ya know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbonds Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-12-08 05:45 PM
Response to Original message
2. They are there because that is where all the offshore rigs are.
Edited on Fri Sep-12-08 05:49 PM by dbonds
If you move them too far way then gasoline goes up because of shipping prices of the crude to the refinery. We might need to build a pipeline from that area to maybe somewhere more inland though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-12-08 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Ratface Cornyn just said the damages could be 100BILLION
and they could be offline for 9 months.. surely it would be cheaper to ship it up the mississippi and then truck it...or build the refineries more inland..even if it means land or river transport....Rebuilding the infrastructure every year seems like a lose-lose to me:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbonds Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-12-08 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. I agree. Wouldn't have to go too far inland, N LA area, or NE texas.
We could build a pipeline to reduce the transport cost.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nebenaube Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-12-08 05:46 PM
Response to Original message
3. I voted earlier for Nevada
West Virginia is just to green still.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wiley50 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-12-08 06:00 PM
Response to Original message
6. No Oil Company In US Has Applied For Permit To Build A New Refinery In 35 Years n/t
They are and have been aware of Peak Oil and the need to transition from hydrocarbon fuel for decades

and have not wanted to invest money in new infrastructure when it won't operate long enough to turn a profit.

That's why they are fighting the world for the last reserves these days and delaying the transition unti

they capitalize as much as possible. They are making a killing on these days of short supply.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr.Phool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-12-08 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. They shut a lot down in the 90's. A couple I know of in Ohio.
With the intent to create a bottleneck, and tighten supply. There are documents to prove that they conspired.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU9598 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-12-08 06:06 PM
Response to Original message
7. Funny you should mention South Dakota
Just across the river from Sioux City, Iowa, the Houston-based energy company Hyperion is in the early stages to secure land to build the nation's newest and hopefully greenist oil refinery. Read about it here: <http://www.absolutedsm.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=2202&start=210>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-12-08 06:15 PM
Response to Original message
9. what about tornadoes?
i don't think that they would be too kind to a refinery.

it's best to have them closer to the source- i.e. tankers and off-shore rigs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sal Minella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-12-08 06:19 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Think this one (in So. Dak) is intended for oil piped down from Canada --
'member when The Dark Lord of Dark Matter went to Canada to check on the oil sands resources? So what that it's an ecological disaster, you think he cares?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 10:59 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC