Why aren't more refineries built near or around affluent conservative neighborhoods?

Question

Wouldn't it be great for the economy? Their Children? And wouldn't the residents slumber ever so peacefully knowing massive amounts of deafly caustic chemicals were merely yards away that could be vented at any moment?

The Dark Side of Texas: Pete Maiden Reports on Corpus Christi's Koch Industries
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/13751944/the_dark_side_of_texas_pete_maiden_reports_on_corpus_christis_koch_industries

The Bhopal Disaster took place in the early hours of the morning of December 3, 1984,[1] in the heart of the city of Bhopal, India, in the state of Madhya Pradesh. It was caused by the release of 27 tonnes of methyl isocyanate (MIC) gas from a Union Carbide India Limited, pesticide plant owned by Union Carbide. The International Medical Commission on Bhopal was established in 1993 to respond to the disaster. The Dow Chemical Company purchased Union Carbide in 2001 for $10.3 bi

Answer 1

I like this. He states facts, not just blind arguments. No one can deny the health and environmental effects caused by polluting the air. It is time we all focused on this, rather then some damn political agenda.

Answer 2

The land acquisition costs are much higher in affluent areas. They'll buy land where it's cheapest. Refineries are not usually built in populated areas for this reason, but over time, the population may migrate towards it, because it creates jobs and generates money.
Also, the refineries need to be in close proximity to where the oil is.. Think about it, it makes sense. Even California, with some of the most expensive real estate in the country, has refineries, because it has access to oil.

FYI: The Union Carbide plant in Bhopal was not an oil refinery, so what's the point of mentioning it, or how much it sold for? Are you jealous or just confused?

Answer 3

I recognize sarcasm when I see it.

Good one.

How about, why aren't ANY refineries being built? Anywhere? That's easier to answer. Because the oil kings can now create demand by limiting the supply.

As to why they aren't being built in affluent areas, come on, really. Get a grip. Money STILL talks and you know what walks. Nancy Pelosi isn't conservative, but IS affluent. So is Ted K, and John Edwards and Theresa's current husband, JFK. There aren't any being built in THEIR back yards, side yards or front yards. So don't bash JUST the conservatives. ALL rich people are too good to have them in their town. Look at what Kennedy did about the wind generators in the ocean NEAR one of his compounds. KILLED.

With refineries NIMBY is still the king. Not In My Back Yard.

Not even POOR people want them. Even CONSERVATIVE poor people, if there is such a thing.

Answer 4

Not wanting to sound even more sarcastic, but the reason is the same as why no freeways go through affluent neighborhoods. I'm sure city planners will tell you it's because property values are lower in low-income areas, so easier on the city's budget. There are a lot of reasons (excuses) but it all boils down to power and the ever loving dollar. I'm sure you already knew this, but thank you for putting in the forum.

Answer 5

because the environmental rules handed with the help of liberals make it non-worthwhile to construct or often times even run a refinery. The very last refinery outfitted contained in the US become in 1976, so the most suitable 6 years are meaningless to the arguement. In 1985 there have been 254 operating refineries contained in the US, at present there are in basic terms 142. notwithstanding, those exixting refineries have extremely been more advantageous and are generating at list ranges. They producew 17 million barrels an afternoon and human beings devour 22 million barrels an afternoon. the version is imported. Any proposed new refinery might want to fee 2-3 billion funds to construct , and may want to even might want to stumble on a area no longer deemed invironmentally tender with the help of the statues and constraints liberals have positioned on them. it really is in basic terms no longer fairly worth it to the Oil organizations to strive against those battles and expendatures. What you need to truly be asking is why the liberals gained't enable us get on the oil off the gulf coast and in Alaska. different international places are already starting off to drill contained in the gulf off our coasts in international waters, notwithstanding the libertards imagine that their derricks might want to be invisible and easily our derricks might want to be considered off shore. the very reality of the matter is, to even see one from the shore you may want to might want to be on the forty fifth floor of a intense upward thrust progression . The curvature of the Earth motives that, or do you nevertheless have self assurance the Earth is flat? Or that interupting the mating conduct of a caribou with the help of occupying decrease than a million% of the off limits section in Alaska and leaving virtuallty no footprint is reason to stop us from drilling contained in the 2d best untapped oil field contained in the international. next question?

Answer 6

Well since there have been no new refineries built since, of 1974 or so, I would say that the area around them has been used by those who can afford it. And just for your information it is not just the conservatives that are affluent. So that makes your question moot on that point.

Answer 7

Refineries are built where it is convenient to get the petroleum in and out via the ocean or rail car. Communities usually pop us around big factories, not the other way around. Plus, you are talking about an impoverished 3rd world country. There's a big difference.

Answer 8

fires at refineries can rage for days at a time, spills and leaks occur much more often than the media reports, they emit particulate matter that settles over a several mile radius. Chevron was at one point giving away vouchers for free car washes for people who lived near refineries because of the layers of 'crap' that would settle on their property on a daily basis. I think more affluent neighborhoods wouldn't be that easily bought off.

Answer 9

What's wrong with building refineries away from the general population? It's not like we don't have the land to do it.

Answer 10

It wouldn't matter if they were... the affluent conservatives would just move away because they have the money to afford to do so.