Totally coherent policy. Bravo!
Invest in more output right this second, but have that investment disappear in five years. Maybe a few paper mache cracking units at the Valero refinery?
#ThePros
Link: https://twitter.com/jason_howerton/status/1537214216989552641?s=20&t=wliJBPDLs0hixyhc4xu3pQ
be a drag on actions that need to be taken...we cannot lose sight of the primary objective...i.e. shifting as quickly as possible away from the burning of Fossil Fuels...while at the same time dealing with short term energy shortages which are by definition Fossil Fuel based.
What is holding you back from accepting the reality of Climate Change?...perhaps I can help you.
power wherever possible?
btw, the attached article should be of help.
the market.
You can't build something that will only work for a year or two. It's all made of steel to exacting tolerances in order to keep the whole operation from exploding in a giant fireball.
We had the same number of refineries in this country when gas prices were low, moderate and high. The problem is we consume too much and these companies want to make a buck. Why we can't explore getting off fossil fuels is mindboggling. Apparently when it comes to energy we are the epitome of crazy (doing the same thing and expecting different results).
And then host nicely clarifies the inconsistency: to paraphrase...Oil companies are saying, "Hey, you want us to increase investment now when administration policy indicates that is a bad investment in five years time?"
People who only want to speak with political spin say regulation is causing the refinery shortage, but this graph shows how steady it's been the last 40 years.
Link: https://www.statista.com/statistics/265273/oil-refinery-capacity-in-the-united-states/
It shouldn’t be that hard to figure out that what she is asking for is unattainable without new investment. Try to think about this as if you had ever taken an economics course or something.
hits in government.
