Chevron Richmond Refinery - Over 1000 Jobs Lost

[Over1000JobsLost]

Groups opposed to the project want to restrict — or cap— the type of oil we process at the refinery. They are concerned that without a cap, we will use heavier oil and air quality will suffer. We cannot agree to this cap because its bad for the refinery, Richmond and California motorists. (continued)

[ace4jsu]

Fundamentally I don't believe the city has a right to interfere in the operation and maintenance operations of a private company. Practically, I know that both sides are blind to the opposing viewpoint. In my opinion the Mayor is a nut and to a true blue Chevron employee there is no existence outside of Chevron.

Personally Im concerned about existing pollution, incidents and injuries, why the H2SO4 plant supplying alky was renamed and why the Hydrogen plant is to be run by a contractor.

[Over1000JobsLost]

The proposed cap could limit our ability to continue to process the same types of light and medium oil we already process today. This would hurt the refinerys competitiveness in a highly competitive global industry. We would be the only refinery in the world with this kind of needless restriction — one which has no basis in either improving air quality or in law. Reliable future supplies of fuel for the people of the Bay Area and California could be put in jeopardy. (continued)

[Over1000JobsLost]

As for air quality, the cap does nothing. The new equipment and technology we want to install at the refinery will further reduce emissions — a fact verified by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (the government regulator charged with protecting our air).

This demonstrates an important point — its not what goes into the refinery that matters — its what comes out.

Justin H w/ Chevron

[quiznos]

I think its important to clarify that it wasnt the lawsuit and an unfair judge and evil greenies that stopped the project.

It was Chevron.

Chevron didnt make it clear in its EIR that it would not expand to process dirtier crude (which would be illegal, not to mention increase pollution by 2-3x) so they were forced to stop.

Chevron has all the power to keep this project going if they formally agree to not expand, only update.

Chevron has no one to blame but itself for the loss of these jobs.

[HailCostanza]

Hard to believe either side, everyone's corrupt, even these so called "environmentalists". Just look at the lawsuit in Ecuador. Video evidence of a $3M bribe to rule against Chevron, going all the way up into the Ecuadoran presidential office.

[reedestockton]

All Chevron has to do is put in writing it's promise to not process dirtier crude at Richmond and the whole thing is over. Maybe the video maker ought to ask the folks at Chevron why they won't put their promise in writing.

[JPK7777777]

The California State Assembly just voted "NO" on drilling off the Santa Barbara Channel.

In the March 23rd, 2009 edition of the Oil & Gas Journal > one drilling platform alone that several of our companies wanted to build would have netted California 1/5 of their current debt

Shrinking GNP and our states & country being bankrupt?

If we can't re-pay China / the Middle East, will they come after our Natural Resources?

China is already drilling 90 miles off our Florida Coast.

Wake Up America!

[RayZersedge]

A head on crash between the Richmond workers and California Envionmentalists? No wonder CA is on the verge of bankruptcy - we keep driving business out of the state, we are heading for a localized 3rd world economy! No income = no money for the very environmental programs that are critical in this state! While we are at it - get offshore drilling back online .. sorry forgot that we had certain political candidates that get boatloads of votes for keeping that off the table!