Environmentalist Block Refinery Expansion
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,006
Likes: 0
From: Tyler, TX
Environmentalist Block Refinery Expansion
Well the environmentalists have apparently derailed, at least temporarily, my project with ConocoPhillips (CoP). Everyone wants the oil companies to invest in refineries, right?. ConocoPhillips was spending $4 BILLION to upgrade their Wood River Refinery to use Canadian (non-Middle East) oil. But the National Resource Defense Council can still mess things up. See WSJ report:
Corporate News: Conoco Refinery Expansion Is Set Back --- EPA Appeals Board Rejects Air Permits For Illinois Project
By Jessica Resnick-Ault and Susan Daker
9 June 2008
Plans to expand an Illinois refinery have hit a stumbling block because of rejection of key air permits by a board of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
The Illinois EPA had given the Wood River project a green light, but last Thursday, the federal EPA's Environmental Appeals Board sent the decision back to the Illinois agency. The appeals board was acting on a petition by the American Bottom Conservancy, an environmental group, and the Illinois chapter of the Sierra Club.
The plant expansion in Roxana, Ill., is part of a joint effort by ConocoPhillips and EnCana Corp. to increase the volume of heavy Canadian crude that can be processed in the U.S.
"We're reviewing it and assessing what we need to do next," Bill Graham, a spokesman for ConocoPhillips, said of the appeals board's action. An EnCana spokesman referred questions to ConocoPhillips, the plant's operator.
Jill Watson, a spokeswoman for the Illinois EPA, said her understanding is that the EPA appeals board decided against the permit because ConocoPhillips didn't propose using the best available technology for reducing emissions. Ms. Watson said the Illinois EPA is still reviewing the decision, and it plans to respond.
Mr. Graham, however, said the company was installing "state-of-the-art technology at the refinery that will significantly reduce air emissions, including a 95% reduction in sulfur dioxide and a 25% reduction in nitrogen oxides."
The Wood River expansion efforts have become a target for critics of allegedly lax permitting on refinery expansion in the upper Midwest. One of the critics, the National Resource Defense Council, has been an advocate in requiring more stringent regulation at the plant. The nonprofit group is also leading the effort to require stricter monitoring at a BP PLC refinery in Indiana.
Mr. Graham of ConocoPhillips said it is unclear how far the appeals board's decision will push back the project's completion date.
The two companies formed a joint venture in 2006 in which ConocoPhillips took over a portion of Encana's Canadian production assets and Encana took a 50% stake in two of ConocoPhillips's U.S. refineries.
The venture aimed to increase volumes of Canadian crude at the two refineries from 60,000 barrels a day to more than 500,000 barrels a day by 2015. ConocoPhillips said the Wood River project was valued at more than $4 billion when first announced.
Corporate News: Conoco Refinery Expansion Is Set Back --- EPA Appeals Board Rejects Air Permits For Illinois Project
By Jessica Resnick-Ault and Susan Daker
9 June 2008
Plans to expand an Illinois refinery have hit a stumbling block because of rejection of key air permits by a board of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
The Illinois EPA had given the Wood River project a green light, but last Thursday, the federal EPA's Environmental Appeals Board sent the decision back to the Illinois agency. The appeals board was acting on a petition by the American Bottom Conservancy, an environmental group, and the Illinois chapter of the Sierra Club.
The plant expansion in Roxana, Ill., is part of a joint effort by ConocoPhillips and EnCana Corp. to increase the volume of heavy Canadian crude that can be processed in the U.S.
"We're reviewing it and assessing what we need to do next," Bill Graham, a spokesman for ConocoPhillips, said of the appeals board's action. An EnCana spokesman referred questions to ConocoPhillips, the plant's operator.
Jill Watson, a spokeswoman for the Illinois EPA, said her understanding is that the EPA appeals board decided against the permit because ConocoPhillips didn't propose using the best available technology for reducing emissions. Ms. Watson said the Illinois EPA is still reviewing the decision, and it plans to respond.
Mr. Graham, however, said the company was installing "state-of-the-art technology at the refinery that will significantly reduce air emissions, including a 95% reduction in sulfur dioxide and a 25% reduction in nitrogen oxides."
The Wood River expansion efforts have become a target for critics of allegedly lax permitting on refinery expansion in the upper Midwest. One of the critics, the National Resource Defense Council, has been an advocate in requiring more stringent regulation at the plant. The nonprofit group is also leading the effort to require stricter monitoring at a BP PLC refinery in Indiana.
Mr. Graham of ConocoPhillips said it is unclear how far the appeals board's decision will push back the project's completion date.
The two companies formed a joint venture in 2006 in which ConocoPhillips took over a portion of Encana's Canadian production assets and Encana took a 50% stake in two of ConocoPhillips's U.S. refineries.
The venture aimed to increase volumes of Canadian crude at the two refineries from 60,000 barrels a day to more than 500,000 barrels a day by 2015. ConocoPhillips said the Wood River project was valued at more than $4 billion when first announced.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,006
Likes: 0
From: Tyler, TX
They objected to the permit because ConocoPhillips didn't propose using the "best available technology" for reducing emissions. You should know that "Best Available Technology" is one of those nebulus legal phrases by the EPA that is not defined... intentionally. If you ask them what technology should be used, they will reply that you should propose something and then they will pass judgement. NO ONE offers the nebulus "Best Available" since the EPA could reject anything you propose. CoP did propose using state-of-the art technologies, including the industry leading Sulfur Recovery Unit and Tail Gas Treating Unit technology from my company CBI.
Some people are never satisfied, and some people in the regulatory community are hostile to the refining industry. I was once told directly by a supervisor at the Texas Air Control Board (now part of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality) that their goal was to "run all of the refineries out of Texas"
. I was so shocked, I didn't get mad. This is an ongoing problem.
Al Tees
Sr. Project Manager
CoP Wood River Refinery Sulfur Block Project
part of the CoP CORE Project
Some people are never satisfied, and some people in the regulatory community are hostile to the refining industry. I was once told directly by a supervisor at the Texas Air Control Board (now part of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality) that their goal was to "run all of the refineries out of Texas"
. I was so shocked, I didn't get mad. This is an ongoing problem.Al Tees
Sr. Project Manager
CoP Wood River Refinery Sulfur Block Project
part of the CoP CORE Project
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
lude92_si
Archived Member S2000 Classifieds and For Sale
2
May 22, 2014 07:17 PM