Irving Oil to build new refinery

[Greendruid]

http://www.irvingoil.com/company/erock.asp

I remember a while back someone was saying that there are no new refineries being built and that this is a sign of the oil production slow down due to reaching peak oil. Any thoughts on this new direction? As far as I'm aware this new refinery proposal has already been cut to start with half capacity to see how it goes. Personally, I don't think it's going to come to fruition but this seems like a ridiculous idea at this time in history.

[Michael]

Yes, I've seen the data on 'new refinery construction' so yes, this announcement does seem like an anomoly.

But then again, even a half-dozen new refineries ain't going to change the overall picture. It is to be noted that it is North America that has the oldest generations of refineries. We've had all kinds of regional supply problems popping up all over North America these last few years due to refinery breakdowns. Obviously there's room in the marketplace for some new refineries just due to the breakdown rate of the exisiting (ancient) machinery.

If you see a press release talking about 20 new refineries, that would be way different. One new refinery in the last 20 years isn't a trend-changer.

[Americano]

I can only speak for the US, but the simple fact of refining capacity is that we have what the market demands under normal conditions. There are no lines waiting to fuel or fuel rationing due to refinery limitations.

It would be difficult if not impossible to raise capital for an 'emergency' refinery to supply product during periods of shortages from breakdowns or natural disasters (Katrina). The ROI just isn't there.

[Michael]

I can only speak for the US, but the simple fact of refining capacity is that we have what the market demands under normal conditions. There are no lines waiting to fuel or fuel rationing due to refinery limitations.

It would be difficult if not impossible to raise capital for an 'emergency' refinery to supply product during periods of shortages from breakdowns or natural disasters (Katrina). The ROI just isn't there.
Irving didn't go from rags to riches making dumb investments. Irving grew from one single gas station to a $10 billion dollar empire. He's a shrewd bastard.

Reading the press release, it looks like the US Northeast is the primary market Irving would be serving with this new refinery.

[Greendruid]

This seems to have failed in the wake of the big halt that is the slow crash and burn of the industrial revolution.

Source (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/irving-oil-scraps-plan-for-nb-refinery/article1229933/)

For anyone not in the know about the Irvings and their relationship to New Brunswick, let's just say that only the Crown owns more land in New Brunswick than the forestry, oil and gas family of the Irvings. For them to pull the plug on this new refinery is a clear death knell to me. Not even the big boys think there's enough left to rape from the earth to make it worth their while.

[Michael]

Well that's not good news. Looks like Irvings finally got their hands on 'peak oil' data.

And yes, it is a common euphemism to say that the Irving family owns New Brunswick. I heard they've been expanding into Maine & New England.

[Americano]

They did complete the LNG (liquefied natural gas) terminal. From what I've read over the past few years the US industrial community (what's left of it) is in the process of converting from electrical power fired by coal and oil to natural gas.

The US, of course, has no natural gas production independence and significant controversy is in progress in states with seaports capable of off-loading and storing imports in what amounts to giant bombs known as holding tanks for the pipeline network. Europe is also involved in that energy usage repositioning, hence backing down from interfering in Iranian and Russian government actions.

[Lasher]

http://www.irvingoil.com/company/erock.asp

I remember a while back someone was saying that there are no new refineries being built and that this is a sign of the oil production slow down due to reaching peak oil. Any thoughts on this new direction? As far as I'm aware this new refinery proposal has already been cut to start with half capacity to see how it goes. Personally, I don't think it's going to come to fruition but this seems like a ridiculous idea at this time in history.
It's very good news that Irving is building a new refinery; we need many more to fill our needs so we won't have to rely on foreign sources. We also need to start drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and other wetlands where we already know the oil is. Lash believes there is a bill in the Florida House to do just that in the near future. Great news!!

[Lasher]

This seems to have failed in the wake of the big halt that is the slow crash and burn of the industrial revolution.

Source (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/irving-oil-scraps-plan-for-nb-refinery/article1229933/)

For anyone not in the know about the Irvings and their relationship to New Brunswick, let's just say that only the Crown owns more land in New Brunswick than the forestry, oil and gas family of the Irvings. For them to pull the plug on this new refinery is a clear death knell to me. Not even the big boys think there's enough left to rape from the earth to make it worth their while.
Is that what you call the extraction of natural resources for the benefit of all the people - raping? How do you expect this nation's industries to continue to produce without a source of energy?

[Americano]

It's very good news that Irving is building a new refinery; we need many more to fill our needs so we won't have to rely on foreign sources. We also need to start drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and other wetlands where we already know the oil is. Lash believes there is a bill in the Florida House to do just that in the near future. Great news!!

You might want to learn the application and market differences between sweet light crude and sour heavy crude along with who has what before getting excited about destroying wetlands.

[Lasher]

You might want to learn the application and market differences between sweet light crude and sour heavy crude along with who has what before getting excited about destroying wetlands.
Lasher is neither excited nor an expert on the application and market differences between sweet light crude and sour heavy crude, but he is a logical thinker and extremely good at weighing the pros and cons of everyday situations, and doesn't let superficially knowledgeable pretenders who might be trying to impress Him sway his opinions. It is apparent to anyone with a working mind that this nation runs on oil, and without it we will cease to exist. All the posturing ecofreaks who are so complaining about the oil industry and its profits need to rethink all their silly thoughts, and accept that we need oil.

As far as destroying wetlands, Lash is mystified how you inferred that from what He said. Do you have a reading comprehension problem?

[Donkey]

It's very good news that Irving is building a new refinery; we need many more to fill our needs so we won't have to rely on foreign sources. We also need to start drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and other wetlands where we already know the oil is. Lash believes there is a bill in the Florida House to do just that in the near future. Great news!!
You do know that Canada and the United States are separate countries, right?

[Lasher]

You do know that Canada and the United States are separate countries, right?
Please advise Lasher how He was supposed to know where you live, my friend. You are a cipher to Lash, who assumes everyone is American until otherwise told. LOL!

Oh, BTW, is Mexico a separate country too?

[Donkey]

Please advise Lasher how He was supposed to know where you live, my friend. You are a cipher to Lash, who assumes everyone is American until otherwise told. LOL!
I live in the US. You may want tor e-read the first post.


Oh, BTW, is Mexico a different country also?
Indeed, but irrelevant to the thread.

[Lasher]

I live in the US. You may want tor e-read the first post.


Indeed, but irrelevant to the thread.
Since there is so much difficulty in posting here without getting persnickety retorts, Lasher will try to remember to eschew this thread.

[Greendruid]

Is that what you call the extraction of natural resources for the benefit of all the people - raping? How do you expect this nation's industries to continue to produce without a source of energy?

OED definition three for rape:

"The act of taking something by force; esp. the seizure of property by violent means; robbery, plundering. Also as a count noun: an instance of this, a robbery, a raid. Now rare (chiefly arch. and literary)."

Sorry I can't link that - university library proxy users only. Nonetheless, I do indeed equate the forceful taking of oil from the earth with rape as the definition supplies. Make no mistake, I would never believe that a nation should run on no source of energy. Be that my nation or yours. However, I also believe that the using up of sources of energy that cannot be replaced within the lifetime of the users is irresponsible management of a planet that none of us has the right to do. With great power comes great responsibility. We have so many sources of power that can be used that we ignore or classify as too cumbersome or not powerful enough. Amazing that we got this far for the last 90,000 years without a source of power like oil or coal until the last 500 years. You are quite right, you will cease to exist without oil. I won't.

[andrewl]

http://www.irvingoil.com/company/erock.asp

I remember a while back someone was saying that there are no new refineries being built and that this is a sign of the oil production slow down due to reaching peak oil. Any thoughts on this new direction? As far as I'm aware this new refinery proposal has already been cut to start with half capacity to see how it goes. Personally, I don't think it's going to come to fruition but this seems like a ridiculous idea at this time in history.

The Edmonton area is talking about two huge new refineries. Their idea is to not ship the unfinished tar oil straight to the US for upgrading, but to upgrade it first then pipe it off to the US.

Their concern has nothing to do with existing North American refining capacity, it all to do with money. They got oil that needs upgrading and every time a US refinery upgrades it they feel they have lost money and jobs.

Andrew

[Americano]

Lasher is neither excited nor an expert on the application and market differences between sweet light crude and sour heavy crude, but he is a logical thinker and extremely good at weighing the pros and cons of everyday situations, and doesn't let superficially knowledgeable pretenders who might be trying to impress Him sway his opinions. It is apparent to anyone with a working mind that this nation runs on oil, and without it we will cease to exist. All the posturing ecofreaks who are so complaining about the oil industry and its profits need to rethink all their silly thoughts, and accept that we need oil.

I suggest you educate yourself on those subjects rather than using emotion and blind patriotism as talking points.

As far as destroying wetlands, Lash is mystified how you inferred that from what He said. Do you have a reading comprehension problem?

It doesn't sound like you're at all familiar with oil recovery operations.

[Michael]

The Edmonton area is talking about two huge new refineries.
Talk is cheap.

The return on investment for building an oil refinery is based on a fifty year lifespan of the plant.

That's why no one's building refineries. They may be profitable for the next ten or twenty years, but how does one earn profits 45 years from now with an oil refinery and no oil?

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that no one in their right mind is going to invest in any new oil refineries right now.

[andrewl]

Talk is cheap.

The return on investment for building an oil refinery is based on a fifty year lifespan of the plant.

That's why no one's building refineries. They may be profitable for the next ten or twenty years, but how does one earn profits 45 years from now with an oil refinery and no oil?

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that no one in their right mind is going to invest in any new oil refineries right now.

The tar sands are not going to run out any time soon. These refineries could operate easily for 50 years. Hell, they are even talking about multiple nuclear plants to power the oil sands so as not to burn too much natural gas...



Andrew

[Michael]

The tar sands are not going to run out any time soon. These refineries could operate easily for 50 years. Hell, they are even talking about multiple nuclear plants to power the oil sands so as not to burn too much natural gas...


Andrew
That's a lovely spin the Alberta media is putting out there. :lol:

The nuke plants are intended as an attempt to reduce the massive carbon footprint of the project because as it stands now, it is illegal to import oil from tar-sands into California due to GHG emissions used to create the oil. I'd expect similar laws from Europe.

Burning massive amounts of GHG producing fossil fuels in order to produce more GHG producing fossil fuels is not a particularly viable plan, given the size of our GHG problem.

[andrewl]

That's a lovely spin the Alberta media is putting out there. :lol:

The nuke plants are intended as an attempt to reduce the massive carbon footprint of the project because as it stands now, it is illegal to import oil from tar-sands into California due to GHG emissions used to create the oil. I'd expect similar laws from Europe.

Burning massive amounts of GHG producing fossil fuels in order to produce more GHG producing fossil fuels is not a particularly viable plan, given the size of our GHG problem.

It would be hilarious if it weren't so sad.

Alberta will be the first place on the planet to employ nuclear power exclusively to produce oil. And at they same time they will put the green wash all over it.

Meanwhile i'll have two new refineries along the north Saskatchewan poisoning my drinking water.

Andrew

[Lasher]

OED definition three for rape:

"The act of taking something by force; esp. the seizure of property by violent means; robbery, plundering. Also as a count noun: an instance of this, a robbery, a raid. Now rare (chiefly arch. and literary)."

Sorry I can't link that - university library proxy users only. Nonetheless, I do indeed equate the forceful taking of oil from the earth with rape as the definition supplies. Make no mistake, I would never believe that a nation should run on no source of energy. Be that my nation or yours. However, I also believe that the using up of sources of energy that cannot be replaced within the lifetime of the users is irresponsible management of a planet that none of us has the right to do. With great power comes great responsibility. We have so many sources of power that can be used that we ignore or classify as too cumbersome or not powerful enough. Amazing that we got this far for the last 90,000 years without a source of power like oil or coal until the last 500 years. You are quite right, you will cease to exist without oil. I won't.
Why won't you cease to exist without oil if Lasher does?

What are we to do with the billions of barrels of oil that lie in the ground if not use it up? Just keep it around for a keepsake? Your premise is akin to a starving family keeping what cash they have and not spending it on food because it's all the money they have. Foolish.

[Lasher]

I suggest you educate yourself on those subjects rather than using emotion and blind patriotism as talking points.



It doesn't sound like you're at all familiar with oil recovery operations.
You are correct, but is that a requisite for taking part in this discussion? If so, Lasher will stop commenting, but He does know for a fact that there are people in this world who like to make others think they are well-versed experts on arcane subjects that they really don't know all that much about. It is certain that Lasher isn't going to the trouble of investigating all the things you profess to know so much about, because His time is much more valuable than that, but as He stated before, He has a keen insight into the ways some folks use a little knowledge of something to try and impress others.

Lasher stands by His belief that all the silly furor over depleting petroleum deposits and the rest of "the sky is falling," "global warming," and other things that are used by liberals to frighten people into accepting their changes, are only figments of their collective imagination.

There is probably enough oil in America alone to furnish us with all we will need until other sources of energy are developed, even if it takes a century or more, but as long as liberals keep whining about the dreaded danger of nuclear power, and using the government to prevent exploration and production of the oil we have plenty of, we will certainly become a third-world nation and a shell of the once-greatest country on earth.

[Michael]

There is probably enough oil in America alone to furnish us with all we will need until other sources of energy are developed, even if it takes a century or more, but as long as liberals keep whining about the dreaded danger of nuclear power, and using the government to prevent exploration and production of the oil we have plenty of, we will certainly become a third-world nation and a shell of the once-greatest country on earth.
US was the first nation to experience "peak oil" (back in the early 1980s). Everything known about "peak oil" comes from study of US oil production.

Btw, present US oil production makes up only a fraction of US domestic oil consumption. US oil production levels have been falling fairly steadily for decades (as predicted by peak oil theory).

USA would have a hard time just supplying California at present production levels.

Using all of the potential off-shore sources and AWR lands wouldn't actually change these facts at all.

[Lasher]

US was the first nation to experience "peak oil" (back in the early 1980s). Everything known about "peak oil" comes from study of US oil production.

Btw, present US oil production makes up only a fraction of US domestic oil consumption. US oil production levels have been falling fairly steadily for decades (as predicted by peak oil theory).

USA would have a hard time just supplying California at present production levels.

Using all of the potential off-shore sources and AWR lands wouldn't actually change these facts at all.

You shouldn't mention things like "peak oil" to Lasher without giving Him the definition of the term, because even though Lash is the brainiest one in here, He still doesn't possess all the world's knowledge. Lash is very aware that we don't supply all our oil needs, with Canada being one of our biggest suppliers, but that is due to the activities of the liberals who constantly work at preventing oil exploration and production of the vast supplies that we do have. Government regulation will be the death of us yet!

[Michael]

You shouldn't mention things like "peak oil" to Lasher without giving Him the definition of the term, because even though Lash is the brainiest one in here, He still doesn't possess all the world's knowledge. Lash is very aware that we don't supply all our oil needs, with Canada being one of our biggest suppliers, but that is due to the activities of the liberals who constantly work at preventing oil exploration and production of the vast supplies that we do have. Government regulation will be the death of us yet!

If you don't know what peak oil theory is, you have no business commenting on issues pertaining to the oil production business.

And I discuss topics, I don't teach them. Try Google.

[Lasher]

If you don't know what peak oil theory is, you have no business commenting on issues pertaining to the oil production business.

And I discuss topics, I don't teach them. Try Google.
Well, excuse me!!! Why all the hatred, contempt and harsh words for Lasher? Has He done something to you that justifies all this childish enmity???

[Michael]

Well, excuse me!!! Why all the hatred, contempt and harsh words for Lasher? Has He done something to you that justifies all this childish enmity???
No enmity at all on my part.

I think I've been quite reasonable given your multiple provocations and insults to the membership.

And I repeat, if you want to discuss oil production, you really ought to know what peak oil theory is.

[Americano]

Talk is cheap.

The return on investment for building an oil refinery is based on a fifty year lifespan of the plant.

That's why no one's building refineries. They may be profitable for the next ten or twenty years, but how does one earn profits 45 years from now with an oil refinery and no oil?

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that no one in their right mind is going to invest in any new oil refineries right now.

China is. And they're concentrating on heavy crude refineries.

[Michael]

China is. And they're concentrating on heavy crude refineries.
1. With state authority doing the capital allocation game, there is no consideration for return on investment. That's why USSR ended up with so many excess steel mills back in the 1960s. They just don't pay attention to that economic metric.

2. From China's perspective, oil refining would be a medium term strategic interest that is entirely controled by (potentially hostile) foreigners.

On this basis, it makes perfect sense that the Chinese would build such refineries.

At the same time, it makes no sense for anyone else to do so.