Well, yah. BammyBoyzzz shut down oil drilling in the Gulf, which will diminish production and (potentially) raise the price of oil to $100++/bbl.
Then there's Part 2.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday officially overturned a 16-year-old Texas air permitting program it says violates the Clean Air Act, leaving some of the country's largest refineries in a state of limbo.
…The EPA's decision, announced in a statement, will force some 125 refineries and petrochemical plants to invest millions of dollars to get new permits. Many of the plants may also have to invest in updates to comply with federal regulations.
Of course, the EPA has not ISSUED any new refinery permits for over 25 years (and counting.)
HT: MoonBattery
"Many of the plants may also have to invest in updates to comply with federal regulations."
ReplyDeleteImagine that. Refiners in Texas may have to comply with Federal regulations.
"BammyBoyzzz shut down oil drilling in the Gulf, which will diminish production and (potentially) raise the price of oil to $100++/bbl."
ReplyDeleteThen oil futures must be exploding right now. Especially after hearing about the "Oil Squeeze, Part 1" news.
How's the Nymex crude data these days Dadster? How are crude oil inventories? Any word from OPEC about boosting production to offset this future trainwreck in oil exploration and refining yet?
Global markets have to be scared shitless of Obama's plan to bankrupt the oil industry in the largest economy in the world.
Hey--I only report what the Bloomberg folks report.
ReplyDeleteAs to 'Fed regs', you will note that these "fed regs" were NOT applied to Texas refineries for the last 16 years under agreements which EPA has just abrogated.
That's the reason for the concern.
"As to 'Fed regs', you will note that these "fed regs" were NOT applied to Texas refineries for the last 16 years under agreements which EPA has just abrogated."
ReplyDeleteShocking. I wonder why.
Ever been to Houston on a hot day?
It's lovely:
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/everydaylife/archives/HP_ILP_Feature_03.html
"Under my plan, energy costs will necessarily skyrocket"
ReplyDeleteKisses,
Barack Obama
Strupp - Houston is in the amateur league.. Check our our international competition in the pollution category.
http://www.chinahush.com/2009/10/21/amazing-pictures-pollution-in-china/
Houston: Our air sure is shitty but not as shitty as China's!
ReplyDeleteAt least in another 10 years, people in China will be able to afford to power their homes. Average Americans, not so much.
ReplyDeleteSo, J., gonna spread some of your wealth to folks who can't afford to spend any more on taxes and fees in Obamatopia?
Strupp completely missing the point *shocked*
ReplyDeleteWhen our prices necessarily skyrocket and what is left of American industry can't pay the bills, do you really think that the PRC won't welcome that industry all at the same time as not giving a shit about the EPA regs?
Which scenario is better for the planet?
Shorter version: Houston our air is cleaner but we are all on welfare (see Detroit for example)
Although on reflection, that seems to be the feature, not a bug, of Obamanomics. sigh.
You're both stretching bigtime.
ReplyDeleteAnd Detroit is a bad example.
And you are delusional
ReplyDeleteWhy is Detroit a bad example. Have you seen pictures of Detroit lately? It defines Progressive policies and industrial decline in America. Keep raising taxes, increasing regulatory burdens, and pushing every industry to (insert name of 3rd world country here) and every city will look like Detroit.
You're somehow linking the demise of Detroit to higher prices attributed to government regulation. Detroit is an exceptional example of a city that was almost exclusively reliant on 3 companies for employment and growth.
ReplyDeleteYou're stretching.
And do you think globalization might have had a bit to do with the "decline" of industry in America?
I think you're oversimplifying this issue.
And you are being obtuse about it.
ReplyDeleteWhy did the "Big 3" originally start moving away from Detroit? It wasn't global at first - it was regional. They moved South. Because of lower taxes and a non-unionized workforce. Lower costs/more flexibility.
How did Detroit, or Milwaukee for that matter, respond? Yet even more regulation and even higher taxes.
I am no enormous fan of globalization - especially how everyone when ga-ga over China. But Michigan, in and of itself, is a case study in how to do everything wrong regarding leadership and policy for economic growth.
Texas (and formerly Louisiana) is just doing far too well on its own with its low taxes and low unemployment, so the Obama Admin will make sure those pesky Texans share the pain.
Obama didn't just shut down deep water wells, he shut down shallow water wells too - by refusing to issue permits. No permit has been issued since May 6. Now the refineries. Since Cap/Tax is going nowhere in the Senate, he couldn't let that crisis go to waste, right?
I would argue now that the inept response to the spill was intentional. How better to destroy some red states and get them more dependent on the Feds?
Funny how Exxon Valdez didn't warrant so much as a visit to Alaska by HW Bush. Or a prime time address. Or a media inquisition.
ReplyDeleteMy how times have changed! Now it's gummint's fault when bidniz screws the pooch. Seems neomoms of the world WANT gummint intervention while bemoaning it. How cute.
As tragic as Valdez was, it was a 1-shot bad deal. It was contained. Alaska sued, it was cleaned up, etc.
ReplyDeleteDeepwater Horizon is now a what - 80-day ongoing disaster? The Feds have their fingerprints all over this. Approving the drilling plan and contingency plans, not shutting it down when it almost blew in February, giving them a freaking safety award!
The Feds also have maritime jurisdiction in the Gulf. But every move made delays or hinders action. Or flat-out makes it worse.
1994 NOAA plans for such a spill - not implemented through 3 adminstrations
Help with equipment from other countries with better technologies - delayed and partial approvals/acceptance. Still no waiver of the Jones act for close on-shore help
EPA waivers on the 99.985% purity requirement for the returned water - denied, so what few skimmers are out there have to bring all the oily water into dock for separation instead of separating on the water
Sand berms - delayed approval then shut down.
Rock barriers - denied
The plan all along seemed to be on-shore clean-up instead of trying to deal with it out in the water. Great way to maximize the economic and environmental damage.
Now add in the economic damage from shutting down all the deep and shallow water drilling and the playing with the refining permits... and the media blackout.
This is either the dumbest and most inept administration ever, or they are doing it on purpose.
Take your pick.
Funny how Exxon Valdez didn't warrant so much as a visit to Alaska by HW Bush. Or a prime time address. Or a media inquisition.
ReplyDeleteYou must be about 15 years old; there was a media inquisition of the first water over the Valdez, and it went on through the trial and conviction of the skipper several years later.
The FedGov involvement in the Valdez mess was textbook: assist in all ways possible and get out of the way. Exxon did its job (as did lots of others) as quickly and efficaciously as possible.
BIG difference compared to the Obama Incompetency.
Exxon did its job (as did lots of others) as quickly and efficaciously as possible.
ReplyDeleteWhat boat did you come off of???
Show me the links which disprove Exxon's good-faith good work.
ReplyDeleteI'm waiting.