Scuse Me While I Kiss The Sky

[FOTD]

Refinery project good for Tulsa
Tulsa may no longer be the "Oil Capital of America," as it once claimed, but the energy industry continues to be a big part of the local economy.

Last week Sinclair Tulsa Refinery Co. broke ground on a $1 billion expansion of its west Tulsa refinery that promises to be a major economic boon for the area.

The expansion means that Sinclair, a name that goes back to the halcyon days of Tulsa's oil and gas industry, will be able to increase refinery output by 60 percent, most of that in diesel fuel production. Gasoline production will increase by 22 percent.

New clean-air technology, meanwhile, will significantly reduce emissions, even with the increased production. The company also will plant 190 trees and triple the area that it leases to the River Parks for public use on the west bank of the Arkansas River.

The project will require 4 million man-hours of labor, and employ 2,500 workers, a great many of them from the Tulsa area. Sinclair already has placed or expects to place $150 million in orders from Tulsa-area businesses. After the expansion is completed in 2010, Sinclair will add 200 long-term, permanent jobs.

From every perspective, the Sinclair expansion is a good deal for Tulsa.


What a crock of bs. One, they're not spending a Beellion, IMHO. Two, if you got allergies, they just got worse. And three, the air we breathe is our future. Our air sucks. Not good for economic development over the long term. But good for construction companies over the short term. Short term gain for long term pain...Don't tell the World Editors, they blow.

[Renaissance]

I'm not sure I understand your objections.

How are allergies going to get worse?

And won't the air quality be measurable?  There are specific pollution metrics, right?  It will either be cleaner or it won't.  Everyone seems to think the metrics from this site will decrease because of the new technology--so how is this bad for Tulsa air quality?

[FOTD]

quote:Originally posted by Floyd

I'm not sure I understand your objections.

How are allergies going to get worse?

And won't the air quality be measurable?  There are specific pollution metrics, right?  It will either be cleaner or it won't.  Everyone seems to think the metrics from this site will decrease because of the new technology--so how is this bad for Tulsa air quality?

If you don't understand the connection between diesel emissions and pollen increases, do your own research.

Let's see, have these refiners in our area adversely affected our environment? Don't believe a thing you read or hear from these lying beatches.

[Renaissance]

Just asking questions.  

Note to self: for future reference, don't attempt to engage Deadheads in intelligent conversation.

[Gaspar]

quote:Originally posted by Floyd

Just asking questions.  

Note to self: for future reference, don't attempt to engage Deadheads in intelligent conversation.

Learned that a long time ago!

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

quote:Originally posted by Floyd

I'm not sure I understand your objections.

How are allergies going to get worse?

And won't the air quality be measurable?  There are specific pollution metrics, right?  It will either be cleaner or it won't.  Everyone seems to think the metrics from this site will decrease because of the new technology--so how is this bad for Tulsa air quality?

If you don't understand the connection between diesel emissions and pollen increases, do your own research.

Let's see, have these refiners in our area adversely affected our environment? Don't believe a thing you read or hear from these lying beatches.

Reading comprehension please.  They are going to be producing 60% more diesel, not burning it.  I would imagine a lot of that will be pipelined out to various areas.  That's hopefully good news in lowering diesel prices which will help lower the costs of all the items the suffering poor folk you claim to know use.

[cannon_fodder]

1. Emissions & Odor will go down.

As mandated by the EPA emissions at the facility will drop by more than 10%, odor emissions more significantly than that.  Plants are grandfathered in, this one operates under 1970's guidelines... UNLESS they do a certain level of work.  At which point they have to come into full compliance.

quote:The expansion will reduce harmful emissions about 1,000 tons a day.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4182/is_20070907/ai_n19513332

So we are improving environmental technology by about 20 or 30 years... and that's bad?

2. How is they are not spending a billion?

All the information released to the FERC, shareholders, and the media uses the $1 Billion figure.  Spending $1 Billion to increase production at a refinery by 60% sounds about right.  4 million man hours + infrastructure and equipment rental expense.  

I've contracted work on turnarounds and expansion projects much smaller than this that went $100 million mighty fast.

3. The effects of diesel on allergies has been nearly brought in line with gasoline since everyone must use Low Sulfur diesel now. Furthermore, the production of more diesel in Tulsa does not equal the use of more diesel in Tulsa.

Coupled with the reduction of emissions from the refinery itself, I can only assume the increase in green space is what will cause worse allergies.  You're against more green space? (I have allergies)

4. Not good for economic development?

$150mil in orders from manufacturing venture in TULSA already or soon.  Certainly more to come.  200 more jobs.  This will probably lead to more pipeline work, maintenance, and other utilization of Tulsa's oil infrastructure.

How is this bad in the long run given the industrial orders, the new jobs, and the reduced emissions?

5. Good for construction companies over the short run.  Yep.   So what?  This isn't a tax payer funded venture to keep FlintoCo busy after the BOk, this is a major oil company spending major money in Tulsa.  

Why is that bad?
- - -

Seriously, explain yourself on this one.  Every one of your points was totally off base.  This is good for Tulsa's economy in the long run as well as an immediate boost int he short run, it is good for the environment, and good for the US economy as a whole as refined product continues to be in short supply.

Don't just post some crap-o-article, address my points please.
- - - - -

[edit]Ps. can anyone read the thread title without singing it and playing the guitar riff after the vocal in their head?[/edit]

[FOTD]

Proof please that this will lead to lower prices.

[cannon_fodder]

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

Proof please that this will lead to lower prices.

Here is a proof showing prices may go down:
- Price is inverse to the ratio of supply/demand.
- More production of fuel will increase the supply while having no effect on demand.
- Therefor price will do down.
Quod Erat Demonstrandum

Now address the primary points instead of an ancillary bennefit which was raised.

[FOTD]

quote:Originally posted by Floyd

Just asking questions.  

Note to self: for future reference, don't attempt to engage Deadheads in intelligent conversation.

Your juvenile response indicates your incapacity to search on your own, but these are well known trends among the medical community of one of many dangers evolving in the environment as the result of refining fosil fuels at these new levels not only burning them.

Global Warming May Compound Allergies
http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=62385

Toxins, Allergies and Your Pet
http://www.cyberpet.com/cats/articles/health/toxiweb.htm

Toxic Tulsa? Has a nice sting to it.

[FOTD]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

Proof please that this will lead to lower prices.

Here is a proof showing prices may go down:
- Price is inverse to the ratio of supply/demand.
- More production of fuel will increase the supply while having no effect on demand.
- Therefor price will do down.
Quod Erat Demonstrandum

Now address the primary points instead of an ancillary bennefit which was raised.

In a perfect world, yes the price would go down.
But the ability to release fuel to the open market is controlled and therefore supply can be manipulated to score a higher price. Hence, more profit for the refiner.

[Gaspar]

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

quote:Originally posted by Floyd

Just asking questions.  

Note to self: for future reference, don't attempt to engage Deadheads in intelligent conversation.

Your juvenile response indicates your incapacity to search on your own, but these are well known trends among the medical community of one of many dangers evolving in the environment as the result of refining fosil fuels at these new levels not only burning them.

Global Warming May Compound Allergies
http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=62385

Toxins, Allergies and Your Pet
http://www.cyberpet.com/cats/articles/health/toxiweb.htm

Toxic Tulsa? Has a nice sting to it.

We could just run our cars off of hemp oil and smoke the rest.  I hear pot cures allergies.  That's my Juvenile response. []

What's yours CF?

[cannon_fodder]

quote:Originally posted by FOTD
But the ability to release fuel to the open market is controlled and therefore supply can be manipulated to score a higher price. Hence, more profit for the refiner.

If you have evidence of overt market manipulation please release it.  Because I have worked with refiners in the past and they hold minimal inventories.  There are no vast fields of diesel tanks holding months worth of fuel to inflate prices.  Nice conspiracy theory, but it's not true.

Furthermore, refineries operate on slim margins.  Pointing a finger at refiners for gross profits is pure ignorance.

And finally, ADDRESS MY POINTS.

You are again skirting the issue while blasting others for refusal to discuss with you.

[FOTD]

Facts About Diesel Exhaust
http://www.alaw.org/air_quality/outdoor_air_quality/facts_about_diesel_exhaust.html

Diesel exhaust is a major source of air pollution, which contributes to lung and other types of cancer, respiratory tract infections and lung diseases such as asthma, emphysema and chronic bronchitis.
Diesel exhaust is a major source of air toxics. More than 40 substances are listed as hazardous pollutants. Because of their size, when these particles are inhaled, they can become trapped in the small airways of the lungs. These particles can be coated with potent mutagens and carcinogens.

Since 1990, diesel exhaust has been listed as a known carcinogen under California's Proposition 65, and in 1998, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) formally listed diesel particulate as a toxic air contaminant. The extensive scientific literature demonstrates that exposure to diesel exhaust increases the risk of developing lung cancer and other non-cancer health problems.

Numerous studies have found that fine particles impair lung function, aggravate respiratory illnesses such as asthma, bronchitis and emphysema, and are associated with premature deaths. Dozens of studies link airborne fine particle concentrations to increased hospital admissions for respiratory diseases, chronic obstructive lung disease, pneumonia and heart disease. In April 2003, the <%$alatitle%> released a report called Closing the Diesel Divide, Protecting Public Health From Diesel Air Pollution to spotlight the magnitude of the impact of diesel air pollution and to show policy makers and the public that there are life-saving solutions at hand.

Recent studies on the relationship between asthmatic responses and proximity to major roadways add to concerns about diesel's contribution to asthma. Studies have shown that the proximity of a child's school or home to major roads may be linked to asthma, and the severity of children's asthmatic symptoms increases with proximity to truck traffic. Studies are ongoing in this area of research.

In Washington, asthma is now an epidemic where one in ten adults and one in nine children has this chronic lung disease.

Protecting Yourself From Diesel is Nearly Impossible
It is impossible for most people to avoid exposure to diesel exhaust. Trucks and buses are everywhere. To make matters worse, the most vulnerable among us are being exposed to the most diesel exhaust.
Children are among those most vulnerable to the health risks of diesel exhaust exposure, yet they ride on some of the oldest and most polluting diesel buses on the road today, sometimes for hours at a time. Constant, significant exposure to diesel exhaust, coupled with a child's heightened vulnerability to pollution, is widely recognized as a potential cause of severe health problems in children. It is well known, for example, that children raised in heavily polluted areas face the prospect of reduced lung capacity and prematurely aged lungs. In addition, childhood asthma is on the rise and is, among chronic conditions, the leading cause of absenteeism from school.

Another vulnerable population is low-income communities where large numbers of people of color and the elderly live. These communities are often located near freeways, shipping yards, and other areas with heavy diesel truck traffic.

Diesel emissions are also released throughout the process of fuel production, refining, distribution and dispensing. Diesel refining, distribution and storage facilities are predominantly located in these communities, which are already burdened by major air pollution and toxic risks. Continued use of diesel fuel increases toxic air pollution and raises the risk of lung cancer and other lung diseases in these communities.

To totally avoid diesel exhaust exposure, Washingtonians would have to stay indoors with the windows and doors tightly sealed. There are ways to reduce the risk, such as limiting exercise and activity to areas far from freeways or industrial complexes. But for most Washingtonians, avoiding diesel exhaust is nearly impossible.

Reducing Fine Particles and Toxic Emissions
Reducing fine particles and toxic emissions from diesel engines will reduce:
The incidence and severity of asthma attacks, chronic bronchitis, emphysema, coughing, wheezing and phlegm formation.
Lost school days for children and workdays for parents and adult asthmatics. A recent study by the Washington State Department of Health indicated that one in six households have someone who suffers from asthma.
Hospital visits due to asthma and other respiratory ailments. Exposures to diesel exhaust have been linked to increased hospital admissions for respiratory and heart diseases and up to 60,000 premature deaths annually.
Cancer risk from diesel exhaust, which is estimated to be as high as 1,400 in a million in southern California studies. The risk of cancer from diesel exhaust is not only for occupational levels of exposure. Breathing outdoor air, which contains diesel exhaust, also puts ordinary people at risk, especially school children. (For comparison, we spend millions of dollars every year on toxic waste cleanups to reduce risk to levels of one in a million.)
Reduce chronic health effects on children's lungs. Fine particles and toxic emissions have been shown to reduce lung function growth in the developing lungs of children. Children with decreased lung function may be more susceptible to respiratory disease and more likely to have chronic respiratory problems as adults.
Susceptibility to allergens. Reactions to allergens such as pollen can be more severe when there is also exposure to diesel exhaust.
Exposure to priority pollutants. The Environmental protection Agency has established maximum concentrations for six priority pollutants, above which adverse health effects may occur. The Puget Sound area is close to exceeding limits for particulate matter and ozone. Diesel exhaust generates large amounts of particulates and one of the precursors of ozone.
Eliminating Diesel Exhaust Without Eliminating Buses and Trucks
There is a way to transition from diesel and avoid the related health dangers without eliminating buses and trucks. Alternative power sources such as natural gas and fuel cells can eventually replace diesel fuel. Buses and trucks run on natural gas today, and fuel cells are being developed that could be capable of powering them in the future.
To significantly reduce the amount of pollutants and cancer-causing toxic air contaminants, Washington must promote cleaner alternatives where possible and substantially reduce diesel emissions through the use of retrofit devices and lower-emitting diesel fuel. The <%$alawtitle%>® is advocating for restrictions on diesel emissions and promotion of alternative fuels. We will also work with school districts to encourage them to switch over to buses powered by natural gas. Until we make a concerted effort to rid our state of dirty diesel fuel and transition to lower-emission fuels and cleaner alternative fuels, diesel exhaust will remain a serious public health threat.

We need to support regulations and voluntary efforts to curb emissions from school buses, as well as trucks and cars. One such voluntary program is the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency.s Diesel Solutions program, a partnership that encourages retrofits of diesel vehicles and the use of low sulfur diesel fuel in public and private diesel fleets. This voluntary initiative will leverage ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel into western Washington and enable a wide range of public and private fleets to join a consortium to retrofit diesel vehicles. To learn more go to the Diesel Solutions page on the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency website: Puget Sound Clean Air Agency - Diesel Solutions



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Health Studies:
EPA, the World Health Organization, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences have listed diesel exhaust as a likely carcinogen. Recent studies indicate lung cancer risk can be significantly increased by exposure to diesel exhaust. A 100-cities epidemiological study indicates an 87 percent increase in lung cancer rates for each 10 micrograms increase in fine particle (PM2.5) levels.
Fine particles and toxic emissions have been shown to reduce lung function growth in the developing lungs of children. Children with decreased lung function may be more susceptible to respiratory disease and more likely to have chronic respiratory problems as adults.

Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study in the South Coast Air Basin: MATESII, Draft Final Report. South Coast Air Quality Management District, November 1999.
Lung Cancer, Cardiopulmonary Mortality, and Long-term Exposure to Fine Particulate Air Pollution. Journal of the American Medical Association, 2002; 287:1132-1141.
US Department of Health and Human Services, 9th Report on Carcinogens (PDF file). Revised January 2001.
Proposed Identification of Diesel Exhaust as a Toxic Air Contaminant. Part B: Health Risk Assessment for Diesel Exhaust. California EPA, May 1998.
Health Assessment Document for Diesel Exhaust. Office of Research and Development, US EPA/600/8-90/057E, July 2000.
Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter on health effects associated with PM2.5. US EPA/EPA 600/P-99/002aB, bB, March 2001. <%doc>
Children's Exposure to Diesel Exhaust on School Buses. Environment and Human Health, Inc., February 2002.
School Bus Studies:
This February 2001 study from NRDC and the Coalition for Clean Air shows that children who ride a diesel school bus may be exposed to up to four times more toxic diesel exhaust than someone traveling in a car directly in front of it. The study found that excess exhaust levels on school buses were 23 to 46 times higher than levels considered to be a significant cancer risk according to the U.S Environmental Protection Agency and federal guidelines.
http://www.nrdc.org/air/transportation/schoolbus/sbusinx.asp
Environment and Human Health, Inc. cites the particular risk to children from regular exposure to exhaust from diesel school buses.
http://www.ehhi.org/pubs/children_diesel.html
Seattle Air Toxicity Study 2001:
The report confirms early results from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment (NATA), which show the Puget Sound region in the top five percent in the nation for air toxics. EPA plans to release its final NATA data soon.
The Clean Air Agency's report is based on actual air monitoring conducted by the state Department of Ecology and on agency staff analysis of the sources of toxic air pollutants uncovered by the monitoring. The staff analysis includes review of monitoring data and NATA modeling, emission inventories, source apportionment and application of best available risk factors.

This is the first time a relatively large group of toxic air pollutants has been studied, analyzed for cumulative health effects and then ranked by their effect on people's health. The data indicate the cancer risk from outdoor air toxics could be as high as about 700 in a million.

http://www.pscleanair.org/news/other_pubs.shtml#.20020516psatedf


You seem to want to make fun of a very serious issue. And Tulsan's should care what their city appears to be..... a major toxic center.

[FOTD]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

quote:Originally posted by FOTD
But the ability to release fuel to the open market is controlled and therefore supply can be manipulated to score a higher price. Hence, more profit for the refiner.

If you have evidence of overt market manipulation please release it.  Because I have worked with refiners in the past and they hold minimal inventories.  There are no vast fields of diesel tanks holding months worth of fuel to inflate prices.  Nice conspiracy theory, but it's not true.

Furthermore, refineries operate on slim margins.  Pointing a finger at refiners for gross profits is pure ignorance.

And finally, ADDRESS MY POINTS.

You are again skirting the issue while blasting others for refusal to discuss with you.

I said you were right in "a perfect world". Who cares the negative impact on health.....

"For lunch I ate fast food, the blood of the wicked." Cannon Fodder