Notifications
Clear all

Hovensa / oil

 
terry
(@terry)
Expert

With Venezuela's' president threatening to cut off oil to the US, Mobile - Exxon in particular, how will that effect Hovensa, or will it. Don't they sell all of their fuel to Hess oil, who is half owner in Hovensa?

Quote
Topic starter Posted : February 13, 2008 12:38 pm
Alexandra
(@Alexandra)
Trusted Member

the Venezuelan government is a 49% owner of Hovensa and Chavez desperately needs a place to refine his oil and have some of it shipped back to his country for a cheap gas/diesel supply to placate his citizens plus all the cash he gets from the crude oil. He may play games with Exxon, but cutting off the supply to Hovensa would cut his own throat. It would also make it necessary for the US to step into the situation in Venezuela. Hovensa is the primary producer of jet fuel in the western hemisphere and the USA can't afford to let aviation come to a crashing halt for lack of fuel.

ReplyQuote
Posted : February 13, 2008 5:54 pm
no0ne
(@no0ne)
Advanced Member

So Alexandra, it is perfectly OK for the US of A to "step into" (I assume you mean military force) a situation when it suits us?

Is installing a puppet dictator OK for you, when we need THEIR oil?

Why don't you take a look at the mess we have made of most of the Middle East before you say such things?

Currently Venezuela supplies 11% of the crude the US uses, if anyone cares...

ReplyQuote
Posted : February 13, 2008 7:05 pm
jasonmonty
(@jasonmonty)
Advanced Member

ya know i think we all need to take a big look at the world and realize thats its not a candy store. The USA does have its problems with trying to control governments but as well as i know there are a lot of problems it overlooks in order to accomplish this goal. You know if I had a let say million iphones and everyone wanted them but this one person was being an a$$hole to me would I sell him those iphones probably not. but if i wanted the money pretty bad i would. Now Mr. Chavez has a problem with the us funding guerrillas otherwise known as "terrorists" to over throw his government from Columbia which is the largest exporter of illegal drugs to America but we sorta over look that part apparently. I think "noOne" would have to realize the affect of the USA not getting what it wants I know that sounds really sad but the whole world would not function very well if the US goes into a depression which i believe has already happened. The world markets would crumble and wars would be immanent in all parts of the world. not just in Venezuela or however you spell it. so my point is lets think of the big picture instead of one person trying to jack up the price of iphones to make a profit so he can fuel his male ego. sometimes you have to think about everyone else before yourself. I never said it made sense its just the way it is.

ReplyQuote
Posted : February 13, 2008 7:28 pm
trw
 trw
(@trw)
Expert

the u.s. would get rid of puerto rico,st.thomas and st.john before it ever let anything happen to st.croix and the oil refinery,jeez i remember all the federal fuss down here after 911 when someone at the defense department put us at number 8 on a list of possible terrorist targets

ReplyQuote
Posted : February 14, 2008 1:49 am
Alexandra
(@Alexandra)
Trusted Member

NoOne - I did not at any point say it was "OK" for the US to do whatever it wishes. It's still pretty obvious to me that there will be steps the USA will undoubtedly take if the national security of the USA is threatened by the aviation industry being shut down. Recognizing that something is likely to occur isn't the same as saying whatever anyone wants to do is OK. At the same time, I don't think that a dictator like Chavez is entirely in the right in the things he does, either.

ReplyQuote
Posted : February 14, 2008 2:40 am
no0ne
(@no0ne)
Advanced Member

trw said: "...remember all the federal fuss down here after 911 when someone at the defense department put us at number 8 on a list of possible terrorist targets"

Thats because AT&T has a major confluence of communications in STT. I would target it, if I was a terrorist.

Alexandra said: "...steps the USA will undoubtedly take if the national security of the USA is threatened by the aviation industry being shut down. "

So taking a country is OK if we cannot fly? Surprisingly, according to the TFA we are not allowed the right to fly under the constitution.

So how is this a "national security" issue of the USA?

ReplyQuote
Posted : February 14, 2008 3:39 am
no0ne
(@no0ne)
Advanced Member

TSA FTW

ReplyQuote
Posted : February 14, 2008 3:46 am
Alexandra
(@Alexandra)
Trusted Member

NoOne - if the Air Force is grounded, then yes we have a serious National Security Issue. I wouldn't expect our government to let any other country do that to us without a response. I still haven't said it's OK as you keep saying, but apparently you can't comprehend that stating what I expect is likely would happen isn't the same thing as encouraging or condoning it.

I'm pretty sure our constitutional rights as individuals as to whether we have a right to fly or not isn't what would be the topmost concern to the government of our country if our country's military airlift and defense capability was being ruled by the whims of a dictator of another country. I don't remember ever seeing anything about how national security is relative to our constitutional rights as citizens within our own country. One is a matter of foreign policy and the other is a domestic issue.

ReplyQuote
Posted : February 14, 2008 3:54 am
no0ne
(@no0ne)
Advanced Member

Actually it is interesting that Alexandra does not believe that the age old habeas corpus does not apply to anyone outside of the USA.

ReplyQuote
Posted : February 14, 2008 4:13 am
aschultz
(@aschultz)
Advanced Member

No-one, I did not see anywhere in Alexandra's posts that said anything about her belief's. I think your barking up the wrong tree.

ReplyQuote
Posted : February 14, 2008 5:25 am
trw
 trw
(@trw)
Expert

LOL, noOne the only communication on STT is "back to the ship?" "back to the ship?" and now that we know you're a terrorist targeting phone lines and not oil refineries i guess we here on STX can sigh a huge sigh of relief.

ReplyQuote
Posted : February 14, 2008 7:06 am
LG
 LG
(@LG)
Advanced Member

LOL, noOne the only communication on STT is "back to the ship?" "back to the ship?" and now that we know you're a terrorist targeting phone lines and not oil refineries i guess we here on STX can sigh a huge sigh of relief.

LOL!!!!

ReplyQuote
Posted : February 14, 2008 11:32 am
Linda J
(@Linda_J)
Expert

Expressing an opinion about what might happen is very different that saying what you would like to see happen.

Noone, why the personal attack during a legitimate discussion about Hovensa?.

ReplyQuote
Posted : February 14, 2008 11:37 am
MosquitoBaitt
(@MosquitoBaitt)
Advanced Member

PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH .

ReplyQuote
Posted : February 14, 2008 12:01 pm
Alexandra
(@Alexandra)
Trusted Member

NoOne - My husband's company is in the aircraft refueling business and we have a government contract to supply jet fuel as well as refueling private, corporate and commercial carrier aircraft. The statistics on jet fuel production and consumption are known within the industry, but no I don't have a website handy to send you to that graphs it out. The knowledge is from information gleaned over time from multiple sources, both government and private sector. Some of the main government websites are password protected and you couldn't get to them anyway.

Different refineries tend to specialize in the products they produce since mass production of a few products is more economical than making a little of each of a lot of varieties. Kind of like KFC focusing on making chicken and McDonald's focusing on making burgers. Sure McDonalds puts out a few wings, but it's not their mainstay. Mainland refineries produce mostly automotive gasoline and diesel to feed the consumer market. Some focus on heating oil or kerosene, etc. Hovensa's niche is a larger production of Jet A1 than other refineries. And of course there are assorted byproducts of refining that are also captured by some refineries but not others, such as the natural gas that burns off the tops of the Hovensa stacks at some points in the refining process.

ReplyQuote
Posted : February 14, 2008 12:37 pm
no0ne
(@no0ne)
Advanced Member

trw you are dead wrong. The AT&T building on Picara Point (Magens Point to some of you) has major fiber optic lines going to Florida, Texas, Central and South America and Southern Europe.

It is funny that you sit right on a backbone, yet AT&T still charges you an arm and a leg for Internet service, which is trickled down to you through various providers on the islands.

http://www.isoc.org/HMP/PAPER/043/abst.html

From the article, circe 1995:

"Magen's Bay, St. Thomas, is the hub for the largest confluence of submarine cables in the region. Fiber service extends from this hub to North America, Puerto Rico, South America, and Europe. More cables come on line each year."

ReplyQuote
Posted : February 14, 2008 9:59 pm
trw
 trw
(@trw)
Expert

oh well someone does'nt understand humour and 60 bucks a month for broadband is not an arm and a leg,it might be a finger and a toe but not an arm and a leg,so anyway chavez is a tinpot dictator who's own people slapped him around in the last election which is what will happen here to our poor senators in november,even the poor in venezuela are irritated with him and so i doubt very much hess will be affected by his hot air.

ReplyQuote
Posted : February 15, 2008 2:40 am
Neil
 Neil
(@Neil)
Trusted Member

Chevez regularly rattles his saber to scare up votes for his teetering government. Iran does the same thing. It's old schtick.

But they keep pumping oil. Oil tankers can come from other locations to STX/Hovensa. The only big change would be in the price. And you know who would end up paying for that.

ReplyQuote
Posted : February 15, 2008 3:54 am
jay
 jay
(@jay)
Advanced Member

Right now the world is using about 84 million barrels a day. Producing between 84 and 86 million a day. It all goes to market, and if Chavez refuses to sell to one, another broker buys it and sells it. The only way to keep the United States from accessing that oil is not to bring it to the market at all.....Its obvious he couldn't do that and stay in power. He has stated in the past that oil will go to $200 a barrel, thats what this seems to be all about, bumping up the price.

ReplyQuote
Posted : February 15, 2008 11:10 am
terry
(@terry)
Expert

Where else does the oil come from??

ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : February 15, 2008 2:07 pm
jasonmonty
(@jasonmonty)
Advanced Member

they are teetering with the oil fields in Canada and somehow I think this all works in Bush's favor considering can resume his duties and shares of the Texas based oil companies he owns dont you think he would love to see 200 dollars a barrel that would make his pocket quite large. besides when oil got to 15 to 20 dollars a barrel in the early nineties they quit drilling in Arkansas and Oklahoma cause they said it wasn't profitable enough to keep working. but guess what the oil is still there and the pumps are too. someone just has to turn them on I guess

ReplyQuote
Posted : February 16, 2008 3:09 am
aschultz
(@aschultz)
Advanced Member

We will pay $500 a barrel before we use are oil in Tennessee, Arkansas, Oklahoma. That will be the last oil on earth. That is why we deal with these people like Chavez. It goes way over Bush's head. We started it decades ago, to protect the oil reserves. Obama will have to do it to. I did not say if I think it is right or wrong.

ReplyQuote
Posted : February 16, 2008 7:24 am
Search this website
Close Menu