U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Philadelphia
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-08-2019, 07:03 PM
 
2 posts, read 862 times
Reputation: 10

Advertisements

All the anti-Philadelphia gasoline refinery people - the environmentalist, the not-in-my-backyard and other critics - are extremely irresponsible members of the region.

At this time when our motor vehicle and truck fleets are almost entirely powered by petroleum this refinery is one of the regions crown jewels, it's our power over our own economic destiny, its been reported that when it was fully operational it was producing around twenty-eight percent of the gasoline used in the northeast section of the United States; permanently shutting down this refinery will likely expose the region to dramatically higher gasoline and diesel fuel prices in the mid and long term future significantly hurting our region's economy and making the region less economically competitive causing a loss of businesses settling and staying here!

These critics with their effort to permanently shut the refinery are setting an economic time bomb for the region. These critics and their media allies are not thinking things through. Yes Climate Change is a huge deal and yes it will cause dramatic governments policy shifts in regard to carbon fuel use throughout the world despite the aberration of a climate change denier currently in the White House. After this President the U.S. will re-join the Paris Carbon Use -Reduction accord and it will be even more stringent because the salvation of the world's climate requires this. The bottom line will be that there will be less refineries throughout the world for the respective countries to meet their accord targets and although vehicle fleets throughout the world will turn to electric power to reduce their carbon footprint, truck fleets won't because electric batteries aren't strong enough to make the use of this technology practical for trucks; the result will be a tight margin between world wide refinery capacity and world-wide petroleum product needs. With the permanent closing of the Philadelphia refinery and as mentioned other refineries throughout the world in ten to twenty years the Philadelphia region will see significantly higher prices for gasoline and diesel fuels compared to other areas of America like the Gulf Coast region.

At this time the Philadelphia region will have to rely on refineries from the Gulf Coast region and imports from foreign countries for these fuels and the basic supply and demand curve will cause a significant escalation in fuel prices in the region that will be permanent. America got a taste of this refinery shortage problem back in the George W. Bush Presidential Administration when gasoline prices spiked because of a refinery shortage in America the problem was largely resolved by expansion of the Gulf Coast refineries and increased imports of petroleum fuels but this solution won't be so available ten to twenty years from now for one energy companies want the highest prices for the energy they are producing in the U.S. and the only way they can get that is to be able to sell their product in the world market so they are converting a lot of pipelines to natural gas pipelines so there won't be an abundant pipe line capacity to transport diesel fuel to the East Coast and this problem will not be readily solvable because these is a growing resistance among the American people as a whole toward pipelines their construction contaminates water wells and the periodic explosions are frequently deadly. Utilizing wisdom on this whole issue calls for the conclusion that the Philadelphia region should look out for itself here meaning that if it is economically viable to keep the Philadelphia refinery we should!

In regards to the economic viability of the Philadelphia Energy Solutions refinery government officials should dig and get to bottom of this and inform the public for one the stakes are really big for the region here and the public through the state government threw the refinery a big financial lifeline in 2012 so what has become of the taxpayers efforts here what is the entire deal with this refinery the past public investment entitles the public with the right to know! The media has reported that even before the June fire the Philadelphia refinery was teetering on the edge of bankruptcy! I think a big question is how much did the unions who represent the workers at the refinery have to do with the financial demise of the refinery; was the plant run efficiently from a labor expense point of view? As an ordinary member of the public looking at the Refinery from the outside I have my doubts. In 2012, when the refinery was in danger of being closed because the prior owner Sunoco wanted to get out of the business one of the leaders of the refinery publicly mentioned that there was 800 jobs at the refinery. With the current shutdown pending one high level executive at the refinery said there is 950 jobs at stake why did the employment rolls of the refinery go up by 150 employees. In articles about the June fire and the region dodging a catastrophic industrial accident bullet they mentioned that there was multiple control rooms at the refinery for different parts of the refinery facility; for a refinery that was financially drowning why would management not have one control room thereby saving on duplicative control room staff - was the union to blame? This writer is not against union workers getting good wages and good benefits but this writer and all good Americans and good people should be one hundred percent against unions causing excessive labor or personnel on a job or for an employer; was that what was going on at this refinery.

One of the other problems for the Philadelphia Energy Solutions refinery is the continual significant cost they incur because they don't blend ethanal alcohol with the gasoline they produce it is called the RFS (Renewable Fuel Standard) Expense. This system came into being during the George W. Bush Administration its purpose was to push ethanol to help get America off a dependence of having to import oil from the Middle East, to help U.S. farmers (ethanol is primarily made from corn) and to conserve a natural resource, oil, for future generations (for every gallon of ethanol used that saves basically a gallon of oil). The RFS system basically works like this for refiners if they don't blend ethanal into the petroleum product they produce they have to buy these RIN credits which the EPA checks to insure they get and the RIN credits are produced by the businesses that actually buy and use the ethanol. This RFS credit expense is a huge expense for the Philadelphia refinery for the year 2017 the RIN expense was $218 million dollars over twice as much as the labor expense for the refinery. Also part of the problem with the RIN system is that they trade on a completely free market and a RIN credit can climb as high as a dollar a piece. It is a good thing that the government promotes a ten percent mixture of ethanol into a gallon of gasoline for it helps the gasoline burn more completely and it does conserve oil which we should be doing for future mankind but it is a policy which is onerous on the U.S. refinery industry.

Good U.S. Federal government public policy should recognize that it is good for people throughout America if the country has refineries spread throughout America and many local refineries have a major disadvantage to refineries in some parts of the U.S. and throughout the world because these advantaged refineries get oil at low cost like the Gulf Coast refineries because of their close proximity to oil producing fields. Moreover, the Federal government during the Obama Administration took away the key advantage that all U.S. refiners had in that prior to President Obama signing the respective bill into law producers of oil within the U.S. could not export oil directly out of the U.S. if it was processed into gasoline it was okay to export this created low price oil for U.S. refiners which enabled them to compete against foreign and domestic producers with the President Obama change most U.S. refiners pay market price for the oil they use.

The point is the Federal government because of this takeaway owes local U.S. refiners help and they could do this by putting a price ceiling on a RIN credit that for those credits produced after enabling legislation is signed into law cannot be sold for more than thirty-five cents a credit and allow the ceiling to be raised on a yearly basis by the inflation rate! I don't know if it is economically viable to keep the Philadelphia gasoline refinery in business and if it doesn't make economic sense the community's leaders should scrap the effort but by far what is best for the community and every responsibly prudent person in the region should want is our leaders to make a great effort in trying!

Last edited by toobusytoday; 08-11-2019 at 12:01 PM.. Reason: Added paragraphs for easier reading
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-08-2019, 07:04 PM
 
Location: Brackenwood
3,918 posts, read 1,534,557 times
Reputation: 8300
Anyone wanna give the Cliffs Notes version?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2019, 07:27 PM
 
Location: Center City, Philadelphia
4,689 posts, read 2,896,697 times
Reputation: 3054
The day Energy Transfer Partners bought Sunoco and moved 95% of the good jobs to Texas was the day it should have closed. The RIN system was created and RFS was set not to punish good ole American capitalism. They were created because the product being produced is dirty and bad for everyone. The place was opened the year after the civil war. It had a good run. It’s not vital to the regions economy and having ANOTHER government bailout is a massive waste of taxpayers money. Maybe we should take that taxpayer money and invest in more futuristic technology.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2019, 11:01 AM
 
9,935 posts, read 5,640,711 times
Reputation: 3478
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedirtypirate View Post
The day Energy Transfer Partners bought Sunoco and moved 95% of the good jobs to Texas was the day it should have closed. The RIN system was created and RFS was set not to punish good ole American capitalism. They were created because the product being produced is dirty and bad for everyone. The place was opened the year after the civil war. It had a good run. It’s not vital to the regions economy and having ANOTHER government bailout is a massive waste of taxpayers money. Maybe we should take that taxpayer money and invest in more futuristic technology.
Fwiw, I went on a Rt49 bus excursion ( I wanted to see where that bus travels with my own eyes) and it goes past what's left of it. Considering the number of parked cars I saw something is still going on there whether it's a shutdown crew or something else people are still working there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-10-2019, 10:24 PM
 
3,738 posts, read 1,799,254 times
Reputation: 2705
20-dirtest cities in America.

https://www.escapehere.com/destinati...in-america/18/

Philly at #3

From link:
- The City of Brotherly Love is situated on the banks of the Delaware River, which has been lined with operating chemical refineries for several decades.
- High concentrations of pollutants get released into the river water each year,
- area has a water quality index of 12 as well as an air quality index of 22.

Refineries mentioned and now we know the land it was on is fully polluted too. In this closing one and where it us,

Last edited by toobusytoday; 08-11-2019 at 12:04 PM.. Reason: deleted orphaned comment
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-11-2019, 05:37 AM
 
Location: Germantown, Philadelphia
5,570 posts, read 2,721,309 times
Reputation: 3501
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavePa View Post
20-dirtest cities in America.

https://www.escapehere.com/destinati...in-america/18/

Philly at #3

From link:
- The City of Brotherly Love is situated on the banks of the Delaware River, which has been lined with operating chemical refineries for several decades.
- High concentrations of pollutants get released into the river water each year,
- area has a water quality index of 12 as well as an air quality index of 22.

Refineries mentioned and now we know the land it was on is fully polluted too. In this closing one and where it us,
[b]

The OP wanted to be critical and sound an alarm, I understand. But as I plowed through that dense thicket of words, I too got confused. I think these are some of his points:

--Climate change will dictate that we use less petroleum, so there will be less gasoline use in the years ahead. But we will need this refinery because the trucks will still use petroleum-based fuel.

--This refinery once supplied a quarter of all the gasoline consumed on the East Coast. We will face higher fuel prices if it closes because we will have to get it from the Gulf Coast refineries.

--Yet this refinery was on the brink of bankruptcy when the explosion happened. How could this be? Were they running it efficiently? Employment had risen by 150 since its current owner took it over. Was this union featherbedding? Why does the refinery need four different control rooms?

--The fact that the refinery didn't blend its gasoline with 10 percent ethanol hurt its bottom line, for it had to purchase pricey renewable fuel credits to compensate. But a change in policy during the Obama administration made those credits even pricier. We need to put a cap on their price in order to give this refinery a fighting chance.

--And even if it closes, the surrounding community should have a say in its future.

--Oh, and: the media and the environmentalists have been reporting this story all wrong.

I guess I'd respond with:

--We've had three other refineries in this region either close or scale back over the past 10 to 20 years. If keeping refinery capacity in this region was so crucial, I would think this one would have picked up the slack. It didn't really.

--It is an old facility, and the current tricky problem of neutralizing a dangerous chemical that's no longer necessary for the refining process in the course of the shutdown suggests it would have needed major updating to continue operating.

--As has been noted - accurately - the presence of that chemical at the plant was a disaster waiting to happen. We dodged a bullet when the explosion didn't cause a release of that chemical too.

I don't want to slight the 950 employees who are losing their jobs. But if the future's going to be low-carbon, then this becomes a forward-thinking move.

Last edited by toobusytoday; 08-11-2019 at 12:05 PM.. Reason: removed orphaned comment
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-11-2019, 11:09 AM
 
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
22,638 posts, read 27,973,166 times
Reputation: 9306
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarketStEl View Post

DavePa
: I hate to break it to you, but good writing, clear syntax and understandable prose matter. Long rambling sentences, long paragraphs and too many ten-dollar words discourage people from reading and understanding what you have to say.

Every good writing guide and stylebook I've read or run across gives advice like this, from the Kansas City Star stylebook back when Ernest Hemingway was a cub reporter there:

"Use short sentences. Use short first paragraphs. Use vigorous English. Be positive, not negative."

I don't always follow these rules myself. Especially when I'm trying to be diplomatic rather than blunt about some sensitive issue. But I try to follow them.

The OP wanted to be critical and sound an alarm, I understand. But as I plowed through that dense thicket of words, I too got confused. I think these are some of his points:

--Climate change will dictate that we use less petroleum, so there will be less gasoline use in the years ahead. But we will need this refinery because the trucks will still use petroleum-based fuel.

--This refinery once supplied a quarter of all the gasoline consumed on the East Coast. We will face higher fuel prices if it closes because we will have to get it from the Gulf Coast refineries.

--Yet this refinery was on the brink of bankruptcy when the explosion happened. How could this be? Were they running it efficiently? Employment had risen by 150 since its current owner took it over. Was this union featherbedding? Why does the refinery need four different control rooms?

--The fact that the refinery didn't blend its gasoline with 10 percent ethanol hurt its bottom line, for it had to purchase pricey renewable fuel credits to compensate. But a change in policy during the Obama administration made those credits even pricier. We need to put a cap on their price in order to give this refinery a fighting chance.

--And even if it closes, the surrounding community should have a say in its future.

--Oh, and: the media and the environmentalists have been reporting this story all wrong.

I guess I'd respond with:

--We've had three other refineries in this region either close or scale back over the past 10 to 20 years. If keeping refinery capacity in this region was so crucial, I would think this one would have picked up the slack. It didn't really.

--It is an old facility, and the current tricky problem of neutralizing a dangerous chemical that's no longer necessary for the refining process in the course of the shutdown suggests it would have needed major updating to continue operating.

--As has been noted - accurately - the presence of that chemical at the plant was a disaster waiting to happen. We dodged a bullet when the explosion didn't cause a release of that chemical too.

I don't want to slight the 950 employees who are losing their jobs. But if the future's going to be low-carbon, then this becomes a forward-thinking move.
I, too, got bogged down by the OP.

Freightliner has been making natural gas powered trucks for a while. It usually is happening with large companies who provide their own refueling locations.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2019, 07:22 AM
 
Location: Pocopson
354 posts, read 143,921 times
Reputation: 371
Tesla is developing a battery-powered semi-truck too: Tesla Semi

There's major drawbacks to a battery-powered truck (range decreases as weight increases), but at the same time, a driverless truck would be a game changer for the industry. The time spent charging would cancel out the driver's mandated rest periods.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Philadelphia
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top