Posted on: Wednesday, 28 September 2005, 15:00 CDT
E-mail this to a friend Printable version Discuss this story in the forum Change Font Size: A A A
Opec Plans to Build at Least 10 New Oil Refineries By 2011
Opec plans to build at least 10 new oil refineries in its member countries by 2011. This would increase the current capacities by nearly 3% and make it possible to process another 2.4 mil barrels/d worldwide
. The plans apply to Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Venezuela and some other countries. By end 2005 Venezuela is to announce it wants to build a new refinery in Brazil.
backstop wrote:Clv -
Given demonstrable foreknowledge of Peak Oil, what phenomena, or highly potent coalition, has prevented timely preparatory spending on alternative energies ?
.... I'm left with a range of possible "lobbies for strategic negligence" options.
Of the latter, I wonder which seems most credible to you ?
LadyRuby wrote:Refinery constraints are a good thing. How much do you want to bet that when Cheney had his top secret energy group meeting they came to the conclusion that forced but panic-free energy shortages would be a good way to cut our growing consumption?
This extra 2.4mbpd.....is that going to add to the world total oil refining capacity or is that simply just going to replace some old refineries that will be retired by then?seahorse wrote:.......... The problem is these projects will not be operational until 2011 and will only add another 2.4mbpd in capacity, when we need 9 mbpd more by 2011.
..........
retiredguy wrote:To my way of thinking it would be logical to site new refineries where the bulk of the remaining oil resides. That new refineries are being built in the ME makes sense.
Is there enough remaining crude in the US to justify the buillding of new refineries here? Wouldn't the new refineries rely primarily on imported oil?
My prediction: The US government will underwrite the construction of any/all new refineries in the US. Similar incentive to that given the nuclear industry in the new energy bill. The American public will assume the financial risk.
backstop wrote:However, the oil lobby also has strong disincentives in the economic turbulence that is now pretty inevitable, not least in being blamed for failing to act despite demonstrable foreknowledge.
backstop wrote: Second, there's the issue of the US hegemony resting on the petro-dollar (in the '90s roughly half the IIIW's foreign currency earnings went, in dollars, to pay the fuel import bills). Sustainable energies, by massively advancing energy self-reliance around the world, would have been developed at the expense of the hegemony the petro-dollar buys.
backstop wrote:Third, there's another option that fits but at first sight looks a little bizarre. It is that the nuclear industry has survived on thin air and no major accidents since Chernobyl. Serious investment in the sustainables would have been the death knell for its chances of using this time, with both GW & PO gaining sudden serious status, to bounce back to life & a swathe of fat contracts.
backstop wrote: As a result, turbines were imposed here and there across the beloved British landscape, splitting the public right down the middle on the issue. ...
Blair has accelerated Wind Power's deployment, and is threatening to impose thousands more on this land, overriding stiff opposition.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 132 guests