In case you didn't hear, it passed. -John
From: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/08/washington/08energy.html House Passes Bill to Help Spur New Oil Refinery Construction By MICHAEL JANOFSKY Published: June 8, 2006 WASHINGTON, June 7 — The House passed a bill on Wednesday that its Republican sponsors said would streamline the permit process to build the first domestic oil refineries in a generation. The vote was largely along party lines, 238 to 179, closely mirroring a vote on the same bill last month, when 237 lawmakers supported it in a procedure that required two-thirds approval for passage. The bill would create a federal coordinator to manage the permit process for a new refinery by bringing together agencies from all levels of government. Another provision would require the president to identify at least three closed military bases as suitable refinery sites, a provision that President Bush supports. For now, the Senate has no comparable bill under consideration. Citing the rising demand for oil products and an industry operating at near peak capacity, the bill's proponents said new refineries would create added supplies. Representative Joe L. Barton, Republican of Texas, who is chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee and a chief sponsor of the bill, said it was intended "to show America that we're doing everything possible to alleviate high energy prices." But detractors argued that the measure would have little bearing on gas prices and was largely unnecessary, saying that the energy bill passed last year had suitable provisions for refinery construction. They also said oil company executives have told Congress that adding capacity through expansion makes more economic sense than building new facilities, with its risks of community opposition. Company executives have also testified that environmental laws have not impeded expansion plans. "Between September 2004 and September 2005, refiners have made 255 percent profit," said Representative Rick Boucher, Democrat of Virginia, who was leading the opposition to the bill. "When you're doing that well, why would you change anything?" While the number of domestic refineries has fallen to 148 from 324 since 1981, largely through mergers and consolidation, American oil companies are producing about 17.3 million barrels of the daily demand of 21 million barrels of oil and have plans to add 1.4 million to 2 million barrels a day over the next several years. The last time a refinery was built in the United States was 1976. Alan Greenspan, the former chairman of the Federal Reserve, told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday that sharply higher oil prices have not seriously hurt economic activity in this country or around the world. However, he added, "Recent data indicate we may finally be experiencing some impact." On Jun 11, 2006, at 6:04 AM, Keith Addison wrote: > http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/06/06/no_new_refineries.php > > No New Refineries > > Frank O'Donnell > > June 06, 2006 > > Frank O'Donnell is president of Clean Air Watch , a 501(c)3 > nonpartisan, nonprofit organization aimed at educating the public > about clean air and the need for an effective Clean Air Act. > > Sterling Burnett, a senior fellow at the National Center for Policy > Analysis (and Exxon defender) recently compared Al Gore to Joseph > Goebbels for his new film "An Inconvenient Truth." If there is a > Goebbels reference to be made it should start with the "Big Lie " and > it is not to Al Gore that it applies. Goebbels is credited with > inventing the idea that if you repeat a lie often enough it > eventually will be believed. Naturally, conservatives think that if > they keep using Gore and "Nazi-environmentalist" in the same sentence > pretty soon the rest of us will, too. > > And, painful as it is to draw the analogy, it's deplorable to see a > similar tactic being used today by congressional Republicans, who > seem desperate to find a scapegoat for high gasoline prices. In this > case, the Big Lie involves politicians and others scapegoating > environmental requirements for blocking the construction of new oil > refineries. > > With the House planning to vote this week on yet another bogus bill > which ostensibly is designed to promote more refining, it might be > worth examining both the rhetoric and the reality. > > Here's the Big Lie, as uttered May 3 on the House floor by Rep. Joe > Barton, R-Texas, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee > and a principal sponsor of new refinery legislation: > > The last American refinery to be built from scratch in this country > was over 30 years agoŠ. It takes as long as 10 years just to get the > permit to build or expand [an] existing refinery. > > And here's what President George W. Bush said, in a speech on April > 25: "There has not been a new refinery built in America in 30 years." > > Again on May 16, Bush said: "There has not been a single new refinery > built in America since 1976." > > This mindless mantra is generally accompanied by calls to > "streamline" or "simplify" environmental permit requirements-the > implication being that if only we could shut up those mouthy > environmentalists, we'd have lots more refineries and be enjoying > 99-cents-per-gallon gasoline. > > That rhetoric is the wind in the sails of the House Republican bill. > This bill would have the president designate at least three closed > military bases as sites for new refineries, and call for creation of > a federal refinery czar-technically called a "federal coordinator"-to > speed along permit applications. > > It's tempting to not to let the facts get in the way of a good story, > but even the oil industry itself admits this issue is a red herring. > For example, the National Petrochemical and Refiners Association > conceded at a May 23 Senate hearing on price gouging that gasoline > supplies were temporarily tight. But the oil industry lobby went on > to note that: > > This situation will ultimately be addressed through announced > additions to U.S. refinery capacity, estimated at 1.4 to 2.0 million > barrels per day. This is an 8-11percent increase in U.S. capacity, > which should be in place by 2010 at the latestŠ. over the past 10 > years, domestic refining has increased by an average of 177,000 > barrels per day of production each year or the equivalent of building > one new, larger than average refinery each year. This fact should > assuage some concerns about the fact that no new grassroots refinery > has been built in the U.S. in over 30 years. > > Indeed, at a Senate hearing last year, BP's chief executive officer > explained that "[refinery] margins over the last 10 to 15 years have > not been high enough on average to justify building a new refinery." > And in a recent closed-door briefing with congressional aides, an > Exxon Mobil official said that company foresees no need to build new > refineries at least through the year 2030. > > If that weren't fast enough, last year's Energy Policy Act included > provisions to coordinate state and federal permitting for new > refineries. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman hailed the refinery > provisions as "easing the constraints on new refinery construction." > > So much for the baloney about "no new refineries." But what about the > related argument about alleged barriers and permit delays for > expansions of existing refineries? First, note that all the > expansions mentioned above have taken place and are expected to > continue without any change in current rules. Backing up that > experience, CEOs for BP, Shell and Conoco all testified to Congress > last year that environmental requirements have not blocked a single > planned refinery expansion. And, contrary to Joe Barton's wild > assertion, then-EPA administrator Carol Browner testified to Congress > in 2000 that about half the permit modifications for refineries were > issued within five months and that most of the others were issued > within a year. That conclusion was bolstered by a new survey by state > air pollution regulators, which concluded that environmental > requirements have not delayed refinery expansion plans. > > Despite all evidence to the contrary, Republicans such as Barton and > chief bill sponsor Rep. Charles Bass, R-N.H., continue to assert that > environmental permits are limiting refineries-and causing higher gas > prices. > It's one thing for a noted industry shill like Barton-christened > "Smokey Joe" by the Dallas Morning News for his consistent > pro-polluter positions-to mindlessly bash environmental requirements. > It is more disturbing to see that this legislation is supported by > more moderate Republicans like Bass or retiring Rep. Sherwood > Boehlert, R-N.Y. > > Unfortunately, as long as these lawmakers continue to repeat the Big > Lie about refineries, we are not likely to see real reforms that > could better address the root problem-our reliance on foreign oil. > > _______________________________________________ > Biofuel mailing list > Biofuel@sustainablelists.org > http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/ > biofuel_sustainablelists.org > > Biofuel at Journey to Forever: > http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > > Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 > messages): > http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ > _______________________________________________ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
