Chevron CEO Says No New Refineries In U.S—Ever

[Meredith Poor + 883]

Quote

 

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/meredithpoor_chevron-ceo-says-no-new-refineries-in-usever-activity-6938641347490807808-Fdh6?utm_source=linkedin_share&utm_medium=member_desktop_web

So lets see here - no methane to liquids conversions, no 'biocrude' refining, no oil excreting algae, no electrochemical ethanol or other fuel production from CO2 and water?

This suggests that the big oil executives are wearing blinders. The scientific research press is putting out announcements nearly daily of ways to either improve biomass to hydrocarbon refining or to make hydrocarbon fuels 'from scratch' from electricity, CO2, and water. If 'Big Oil' isn't interested, there are certainly others who will fill the gap.

I'm reminded of Tesco jacking up prices in 2008 as the financial crisis slammed households, opening the barn door for Aldi.

What this really looks like is energy blackmail - when we get a Republican administration we'll invest again - when it is 'safe' to do so.

 

I can only presume this means no 'mineral crude' refineries. There will be lots of other 'refineries' using emerging technologies.

[Boat + 1,315]

Not to mention the US refinery capacity is around 7 mbpd over consumption. 
 

Peter Navarro one of Trumps aides thought to be a Coup leader was cuffed and shackled and hauled to jail. I didn’t know they still shackled. I bet that seemed awkward for the old guy. Bet he thought he was untouchable. 

[nsdp + 449]

 Chevron is smart enough not to do a greenfields refinery.   You already have your water and air permits, utilities(electricity and NG on site) marketing facilities.  Those are costs that you don't have to pay for.

[TailingsPond + 473]

19 hours ago, Meredith Poor said:

I can only presume this means no 'mineral crude' refineries. There will be lots of other 'refineries' using emerging technologies.

Not necessarily.  Every additional conversion wastes energy (electrical to chemical to mechanical)

Using a lot of electricity to make a liquid fuel makes little sense unless you gain some value-added products or CO2 tax credits etc.

Good batteries are about 70% efficient, burning gasoline for mechanical energy is about 25% efficient.  Why would would you want to turn 100 units of energy into well less than 25 units?

 

 

[Meredith Poor + 883]

7 minutes ago, TailingsPond said:

Why would would you want to turn 100 units of energy into well less than 25 units?

One reason is that 25% 'will fly', as in jet fuel. The other is that it will last for weeks or months, compared to a battery charge that may only be good for, at most, a few days.

[TailingsPond + 473]

2 hours ago, Meredith Poor said:

One reason is that 25% 'will fly', as in jet fuel. The other is that it will last for weeks or months, compared to a battery charge that may only be good for, at most, a few days.

Traditional refineries would fill those airplane tanks without some massive incentives.

I'm not saying no innovative plants will be built, but I disagree with "lots" as you stated.  

Battery charge shelf life is far better than a few days. Even supercapcitors can hold charge for days to weeks. 

[Ron Wagner + 643]

On 6/3/2022 at 9:24 PM, Boat said:

Not to mention the US refinery capacity is around 7 mbpd over consumption. 
 

Peter Navarro one of Trumps aides thought to be a Coup leader was cuffed and shackled and hauled to jail. I didn’t know they still shackled. I bet that seemed awkward for the old guy. Bet he thought he was untouchable. 

Absolutely no need for shackles in his case. That is just the fascist Democrat administration stupidly revealing their evil ways. Soft power is much more effective. The whole rebellion thing is a bullshit Demoncrat lie which was setup by the FBI for Nancy Pelosi and the progressives. 

See: Who Invaded Inside the Capitol Building and its Grounds.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/19qLxuaWqyPKPsE7xyT2ATV6-I9J_BhfvkChb3E-NL4o/edit