I saw the Bush/Blair press conference last night and one reporter asked about the concerns over high fuel prices. Bush's response was that this was a great motivator to get away from oil for security, economy and environment and then rattled off all the initiatives he's got going like hydrogen. Then he said another thing would be for Congress to drop obstructions to new refining capacity, which is desperately needed.

I could see people jumping all over this apparent contradiction. First he says we need to get away from oil, then he says we need to increase ability to utilise oil.

But it's not a contradiction provided you don't accept the typical all-or-nothing, black-and-white rhetoric that gets espoused on this subject. Over the longer term, moving away from oil is the idea. But that's a 20-30 year target. It isn't going to happen tomorrow or even in the few years it takes to get new refineries in place. The refinery dealy is the short term strategy to alleviate the problem. Getting away from oil is the long term strategy.

It's not a contradiction. It's a realistic assessment.

__________________
2 good 2 need 4 engines

why is congrees putting up obstructions for new refining capacity?

As I said, it's the all-or-nothing rhetoric. They want to get away from oil, so doing anything to support its continued use is a bad thing as far as they're concerned. They don't understand that you can't have it all. You have to make compromises for the greater good in the short term, in order to help an even greater good in the long term (who will fund hydrogen research without a strong economy providing tax revenue).

__________________
2 good 2 need 4 engines

They'll understand when the lights go out

__________________
N6MAA10816
Faber '62 ΔTX
Are you a Bright?

NIMBY is a lot of it. It isn't just nuclear that doesn't get built due to the "Not In My Back Yard" syndrome. Many refineries have been upgraded over the years, but we (U.S.) haven't built new refineries for decades. From here:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6019739/


There hasn’t been a new refinery built in the U.S. since 1976, the result of extremely tight environmental restrictions, not-in-my-back-yard community opposition, and the high cost of new construction.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

It is hard for me not to get political here, but I'll try. I am not against adding refinery capacity and I would have guessed that the obstructions were environmental regulations (as Van Rijn's post confirms). But I am not convinced that those regulations are unimportant and I fear that current gasoline prices are being used as an excuse to undermine and remove such regulations. NIMBY as the beginning and end of not siting something is not a good reason, but there may also be things that should not be in anyone's backyard. I used to live about 5 miles from Exxon's big refinery in New Jersey, so I have some personal experience.

But I also personally think that we do need to get ourselves off of an oil and fossil fuel based economy and would like to see more effort to head in that direction. I don't think there is a single magic answer, but there needs to be a multi-pronged approach using a variety of different technologies, including alternative hydrocarbons (coal-to-gas, for example), solar, nuclear, fusion, etc., etc. I think hydrogen can be part of that, but as I have said multiple times, I think the research push needs to be on how to generate it cheaply and not from fossil fuels, rather than on fuel cell and car design.

__________________
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

One Earth, One Sky - IYA 2009

NIMBYs will destroy the planet.

__________________
"Bessie Braddock to Churchill "Winston, your drunk!"
Churchill: "Bessie, you're ugly, and tomorrow morning I shall be sober""
the solar system

Linden, right? That whole Bayway area is easily one of the most ominous spectacles of runaway industrial excess. At night, it's simultaneously beautiful and terrifying. Unfortunately for commuters simply blowing through the state on the pike, that's all they see of northern New Jersey, leaving them completely ignorant of the other gorgeous 99% of the region.

I thought I read somewhere that Isaac Asimov once referred to it as literally "Mordor".

Yep, I'm actually a lot more sympathetic to people who don't want a refinery built nearby than a nuclear power plant. On the other hand, it does look like we need some additional capacity, and we had better do it before it becomes an emergency. And surely there are places one can be built that isn't right next to existing housing?

(BTW, I don't have a lot of sympathy for somebody that moves in to an area after something they don't like has been built, then tries to get rid of it.)

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

While I do think that this discussion probably needs to happen, I believe it is too political for this forum. No warnings, but I'm closing the thread. Please find a more political forum to take this conversation to.

__________________
Forming opinions as we speak