Comments on: Chevron Ordered to Halt Richmond Refinery Expansion

By: Now for World War Three…

Now for World War Three… — Sat, 22 Jan 2011 06:07:54 +0000

[...] “Tar Sands, Fort McMurray” The Understory [...]

By: Andy

Andy — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:59:32 +0000

Instead of trying to close down chevron why dont they try to make it better. The environmentalist could work with chevron lets go green try to create jobs not end jobs. Im sure all the protestors rode there bikes to go protest. Protestors back up what you believe in dont drive youre cars start there.

By: Tauni

Tauni — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 17:09:01 +0000

THE REAL STORY! RAN shutdown a Hydrogen plant. The plant has nothing to do with processing Heavy Crude Oils like RAN claims. A Hydrogen Plant produces hydrogen (go figure – da!) Hydrogen is needed to run the refinery. Hydrogen is used to run the furnaces that produce the 2000+ crude products that we use. If you drive, eat food, use cosmetics, etc, you need a refinery. Let’s do it smart and do it safe. Shutting down a upgrade on a Hydrogen plant is foolish. Yes, foolish. RAN is spending it’s efforts foolishly. RAN needs to refocus and spend it’s effort on pushing Chevron and oil companies to build safe and smart. An upgrade to a Hydrogen plant is safer, smarter and more environmentally friendly. RAN you are foolish on this one. I respect RAN and the need to push companies to be environmentally friendly, but wisely.

By: Jim

Jim — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 18:57:02 +0000

Do you guys drive cars? Where are you going to get your gasoline from if you shut down all the refineries. Crude oil is vanishing. Heavy, dirtier crudes will have to be refined. Would you rather ship gasoline in from Pascagoula and New Orleans. That is costly and risky. The other option is truck it in from LA. How many trucks will it take to feed the Bay Area. Wow – that is even worse. More trucks on the road, costly, dangerous and adding that many trucks would add alot of pollution to the air. This is not a victory. This is a step backwards. We need to push large oil companies to spend money buying new eqiupment to produce more gasoline and keep the air clean. You guys sound like a bunch of self-centered babies that ignore the facts.

By: Chris

Chris — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 14:43:11 +0000

http://www.mercurynews.com/columns/ci_14223496?nclick_check=1

Are you still excited?

With the much-needed projects being halted, Chevron may close the refinery altogether and send thousands more to the unemployment line.

The project, in no way, allowed the refinery to refine heavier crude. During the permit process, independent third party experts verified this. Chevron wanted to replace their old hydrogen plant with a new, modern one. They wanted to replace an old power plant with a new, modern one. It wasn’t expansion at all.

You shouldn’t think the refinery land will be taken by eminent domain (as a certain councilman believes). The refinery would close, but (according to the article) Chevron would still operate their tanks and turn it into a terminal… basically a place that imports already-refined gasoline from somewhere else (India, China?). You need only a few hundred (compared to a few thousand) employees to do this.

Way to go environmentalists. You’ll shut down this refinery, send jobs overseas and to a refinery that operates under very few environmental regulations. You likely did more harm than good… in terms of the economy *and* the environment.

By: Andy

Andy — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 04:05:15 +0000

The protesters should look into the products it takes to make their signs, tents and all the other products they use for protestin on a given day. Look at what polution China creates on any given day the next time you by a “Made in China” product (Thank you Bill Clinton) So don’t cut off your nose spite you face.

By: Kelli

Kelli — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:12:45 +0000

Hi
I am a currently work at a Chevron Refinery. I just want to say a few things. These Refineries our heavily watched for environmental laws. Yes there are loop hole in the laws, but is that the Refineries fault. This country needs to produce something. Or do you want all the jobs to go over seas. Chevron has not only provided a great job market for the U.S, but it has helped maintain and improve its local cities. They have built schools, improved roads, improved the local economy for businesses surrounding the refinery. Do you think Jo blow would be able to provide for his family if the big bad refineries weren’t around. Do you know how many 1,000 of people purchase something in these towns a day to help the citites economy.

As for what happened in other parts of the world, we don’t know the whole truth. You just want to blam it on the BIG Oil Company. Maybe over there they are behind on safty , so it is going to take a lot long to get them up to speed.

As far as the sand, why not? Should we let it just go to waste? If it is there why not try to do something with it.

Yes, they should have put together a better plan for Richmond. But, don’t hate the industry. It has done good for this country. We all drive cars, ride trains, take a bus. I am a third generation in this industry. My father worked for Chevron for 40 yrs. He was able to retire a multi millionaire, with health beifits. Grandfather who had no education retired also a multi millionaire , due to their stock sharing program. Chevron has been a part of my family for years. They have supplied us with a roof over our heads, food on the table, and love in our hearts. I am a proud supporter of the Oil Industry and CHEVRON!

By: Dan

Dan — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 21:41:15 +0000

Hi,

I was just reading the comments to this post and I thought I’d offer a few thoughts.

It seems like there are quite a few people that are upset that the invalidation of the environmental impact report will postpone refinery upgrades and lead to the loss of many union jobs. This is absolutely true and something worth being upset about.

However, it is completely unfair to pin the blame for the loss of jobs on the environmental groups that had the report set aside. It is not RAN’s fault that Chevron had a bad EIR prepared. It is not RAN’s fault that Chevron failed to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act.

You guys should be upset with Chevron for having a poor EIR prepared, not with RAN for having the audacity to point out that they did something illegal.

By: Jesus Garcia

Jesus Garcia — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 16:56:48 +0000

I want my job back soon. i worked at chevron now I have nothing very soon I am going to say good bye to my house too I’dont have money for the mortgage

By: Josh

Josh — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 04:39:40 +0000

We are not addicted to oil. We are dependent on it as the only source of fuel that we can currently use to power our society. If we desire to return to the level of pollution we had during the middle ages,we would have to return to that standard of living.
We can develop cleaner fuels, but it takes time, and resources. It is better to continue modernizing what we have, while pursuing other energy sources, than it is to destroy our current energy infrastructure, and leave only the wealthy few with anything resembling our current standard of living (because it’s nothing more than a pipe dream to say that the rich would actually cut back as well)

By: Tar Sands Fighters to U.S. News Media: WAKE UP! « It’s Getting Hot In Here

Mon, 14 Sep 2009 17:59:32 +0000

[...] This is especially ridiculous, given that U.S. corporations are far more involved in the tar sands than their British (or Norwegian) counterparts. Chevron and ExxonMobil have invested a total of over $10 billion in Alberta tar sands projects - Chevron is the majority owner of the 85,000-acre Ells River tar sands project, while Exxon’s subsidiary, Imperial Oil, owns 465,000 acres of “quality oil sands leases.” Citigroup is the biggest tar sands investor outside Canada, with $5.9 billion invested in Canadian tar sands companies since 2007 alone. And oil companies across the U.S. are building pipelines and retooling refineries to be able to process oil from Canada’s tar sands: a new pipeline from Alberta to Wisconsin, capable of pumping 450,000 barrels per day of Canadian tar sands oil to refineries in the Midwest, was recently approved by the Obama administration. And Chevron has been fighting against community activists for years to be able to “upgrade” its refinery in Richmond, California, so that it can process tar sands oil. [...]

By: The Understory » Tar Sands Fighters to U.S. News Media: WAKE UP!

The Understory » Tar Sands Fighters to U.S. News Media: WAKE UP! — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 07:12:24 +0000

[...] This is especially ridiculous, given that U.S. corporations are far more involved in the tar sands than their British (or Norwegian) counterparts. Chevron and ExxonMobil have invested a total of over $10 billion in Alberta tar sands projects – Chevron is the majority owner of the 85,000-acre Ells River tar sands project, while Exxon’s subsidiary, Imperial Oil, owns 465,000 acres of “quality oil sands leases.” Citigroup is the biggest tar sands investor outside Canada, with $5.9 billion invested in Canadian tar sands companies since 2007 alone. And oil companies across the U.S. are building pipelines and retooling refineries to be able to process oil from Canada’s tar sands: a new pipeline from Alberta to Wisconsin, capable of pumping 450,000 barrels per day of Canadian tar sands oil to refineries in the Midwest, was recently approved by the Obama administration. And Chevron has been fighting against community activists for years to be able to “upgrade” its refinery in Richmond, California, so that it can process tar sands oil. [...]

By: denise

denise — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 17:54:51 +0000

Well it looks like this issue is staring to die down, therefore the work should resume soon! It seems like environmental groups just like stir s–t up!

By: Eli

Eli — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 23:22:32 +0000

Enough said….

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1DTAX0WtWI

By: David

David — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:24:49 +0000

Pardon me. Months of unemployment stress and the anxiety produced by a dwindling unemployment claim have reduced my brain to mush. Please substitute ”Chevron” for ”Shell/R.D.P.” in the prior post. While my point remains the same regarding the clash between corporate versus community and environmental concerns, I realize that this is also a very specific matterregarding Chevron, local politicians and the Richmond community.

By: David

David — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 00:35:30 +0000

Responsible action on the part of Shell could have averted this cacastrophe. Investing record high mult-billion dollar profits in community environmental monitoring, healthcare and disease prevention could have shown a spirit of stewardship for the community. I can’t comprehend why people attack community and environmental activists for standing up for people and our home planet ? Are people really so shortsighted that they don’t understand that the installation of pollution control systems and monitoring them requre job creation ? Shouldn’t doctors and healthcare workers be rioting because fewer children. elderly and others in the community will be sick and/or dying ? If Royal Dutch Petroleum were an ethical company they would be creating jobs by improving their plants and the communities in which they are located. It’s too bad that the law. by requiring corporations to maximize profits, works against this. Posted by a union worker (As if !- I worked for five weeks in March and April) with a brand new $132 T.W.I.C. card. If Shell were honest, we’d be working – for a healthier economy and environment. Why demonize those who are trying to keep them honest ? Do you really value your own integrity (and health, for that matter ) so cheap ?

By: ANDREW PARK

ANDREW PARK — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 05:12:21 +0000

I agree with the environmental aspects of this job, but it has forced myself to lose my house, go on unemployment, not spend money in this horrible economy. I had to pull my daughter out of her private school and relocate. My job loss wil probably cost the State over $ 700,000, and I’m only 1 of 1500 who lost there jobs, and some much more than just there job. My friend/co-worker lost his opportunity to buy his first house. This chevron refinery is one of the safest construction sights I’ve ever worked at. This is going to cost the city, county and State of California at least $ 300,000,000 directley and indirectly… there goes the State budjet cuts again ! What a victory, huh?

By: Rene Mendoza

Rene Mendoza — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 19:15:58 +0000

THIS IS A HORRIBLE OUTCOME. Richmond needs the jobs, the county needs the taxes, and the country needs the gas.

Why doesn’t the activist community stop HURTING everyone and let this new modernization go forward?

Now that CBE has closed the refinery – how do I comfort the families of the 150 union electrians who have no paychecks. CBE’s action to block a badly needed and “clean” upgrade of this facility is SO misguided. When folks in Richmond go hungry and are denied services in the face of this recession, I for one will let them know that CBE is a huge contributing factor.

Don’t be glib RON – be ashamed.

By: Robyn

Robyn — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 06:58:05 +0000

All I know is Chevron has been where it’s at for over a hundred years, when these so called low income families moved in the danger zone what in the hell did they think was going to happen, I guess they can blame Chevron for there stupidity. If your that concerned about the health of your family then you don’t move next to a oil refinery. And on a quick note to the person that said there cheap ass jobs you really need a reality check my husband and both sons had good jobs working for chevron and now because of idiots like you are unemployed in a already screwed up economy. I hope that these tree huggeres are real happy with them selfs, and I cant help wonder how people like that can sleep at night.

By: greg

greg — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 22:36:00 +0000

For the person (sandy sanders) who wants Chevron (& all of the refiners) to move to another planet, who is going to clean up the bay or the bay area? You? Who’s going to build the bridges & roads (asphalt comes form hydrocarbon oil)? You? Are you going to pay for all of this work? Is “the govt” going to pay for it? Where are they going to get the money to do what you want done? Your paycheck won’t cover the costs, so you’d better get at least 2 full time jobs to do your part…and you’d better start making the “clean technologies” that you want everyone to use. Since you want to live with out “consumerism”. You’d better start making everything that you use on a daily basis. No more going to the grocery store. You can make your own pots & pans and you can build your own firepit to cook. You can shape your own utensils to cook and eat with. I hope you can sew fabrics so that you can wear clothes. You can also fashion a mattress so that you can sleep. You shouldn’t have to ask for help building a mud hut or dragging stones for a wall, or fashioning an axe to fell logs for your log cabin.
Good luck.