CDUB98 said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

CDUB98 said:

---

I'm just glad we're finally talking about a subject I actually have some knowledge on.

---

Can you, then, provide insight as to why gas prices haven't shot up, at least in the LBK area when in the past if so much as a bird dropping hit a refinery prices would jump.

Thanks in advance.

---

Which refinery? Where does Lubbutt get its fuel?

HF Sinclair Artesia
HF Sinclair El Dorado
Phillips 66 Borger

Just to name three.

Gasoline prices are a global commodity, with wholesale prices set there. Regional prices going up or down can be dependent on a multiple of factors.

Also, your question structure throws me off a bit. Prices level with an unplanned shutdown? Doesn't sound right or likely.......so maybe you're just yanking my chain. Well played, if so.

---

Not yanking the chain, but it's good to see my non caffeinated brain can bring someone some joy this Friday morning.

Appreciate the edumication as well. I didn't know there were so many refineries that served this area. No wonder prices here are lower than what my buddy says they are in the RGV right now.

fullback44 said:

---

You can do all the math, and that would be a ton of trucks, Im very familiar with the two big Helena terminals in the Eagle ford that can unload 500 plus trucks a day, its definitely possible. but whoever has those fuel contracts with LAX has to have contingencies in place already and probably are required to have them to even get the contract. I dont think there is any way they will not meet their contractual obligations. By the time they exit those contracts (which is a big if) other logistics / supply agreements will be in place. I would suspect if LAX uses 150,000 +/- bbls per day of fuel then that refinery probably has 10-15 days of product available, thats not that much product in the big scheme of things. Trucks could possibly handle a large portion but Im sure sea going vessels / barges local to that region would fill the need and are probably already part of the contingencies in place. Just dont see this ever being a problem.. anyway, just my opinion, I could be wrong

---

I think it's an issue because of the unintended logistical consequences if they actually had to act on this. Our supply chain can't handle much deviation at all from its current JIT structure and processes. And add in the idiocy of California regulations and idiots that run things there and this is a recipe for catastrophic failure at LAX.

The Dem elites there actually know this which is why they are furiously backpedaling on green energy dumbassery. They've pushed reality as far as it can go to placate the mis-educated masses in California. Green energy is a total myth at scale and they've finally acknowledged it.

This should help!

https://www.breitbart.com/local/2025/10/03/photo-massive-fire-at-chevron-refinery-in-los-angeles/

IIIHorn said:

---

Most people are unaware that a significant portion of the price of a gallon of gasoline is local, state and federal taxes.

---

It's even more in California.

California pays 90 cents tax on a $4.85 gallon of gas = 18.5%
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=65184

Texas is 38.5 cents tax against a $2.77 gallon of gas = 13.9%
https://www.dot.state.tx.us/ttf2011/Presentations/GasTaxPlacemat.pdf

YouBet said:

---

fullback44 said:

---

You can do all the math, and that would be a ton of trucks, Im very familiar with the two big Helena terminals in the Eagle ford that can unload 500 plus trucks a day, its definitely possible. but whoever has those fuel contracts with LAX has to have contingencies in place already and probably are required to have them to even get the contract. I dont think there is any way they will not meet their contractual obligations. By the time they exit those contracts (which is a big if) other logistics / supply agreements will be in place. I would suspect if LAX uses 150,000 +/- bbls per day of fuel then that refinery probably has 10-15 days of product available, thats not that much product in the big scheme of things. Trucks could possibly handle a large portion but Im sure sea going vessels / barges local to that region would fill the need and are probably already part of the contingencies in place. Just dont see this ever being a problem.. anyway, just my opinion, I could be wrong

---

I think it's an issue because of the unintended logistical consequences if they actually had to act on this. Our supply chain can't handle much deviation at all from its current JIT structure and processes. And add in the idiocy of California regulations and idiots that run things there and this is a recipe for catastrophic failure at LAX.

The Dem elites there actually know this which is why they are furiously backpedaling on green energy dumbassery. They've pushed reality as far as it can go to placate the mis-educated masses in California. Green energy is a total myth at scale and they've finally acknowledged it.

---

I posted a thread the past couple of weeks about the main oil pipelines in Cali shutting down because of utilization minimums. It's >=30% or it's 0. They are at 30% right now and in danger of falling below it.

The question about trucking the oil to the refineries came up. One of the experts said that I-5 would literally be bumper to bumper tank trucks in both directions. It's not possible.

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

Couple of things...
This refinery first opened in 1911. Now I have no way of knowing if ANY part of that plant is original (very likely nothing there is that old) but it certainly points to the notion that the facility is likely a mix-and-match of additions, expansions, and upgrades over the decades.

Was Chevron already looking for a buyer for this facility? I know Philips was, so I might be getting these confused. I know Chevron was looking to move their corporate HQ to Houston, can't recall if this refinery was part of that.

Either way, especially given California's extraordinarily stringent regulatory environment, my guess is there is a near ZERO chance this facility is repaired/rebuilt and returns to service.

---

Every single refinery.

Nevada gets 88 percent of our gas from California refineries.

The El Segundo Refinery represents around 16.5% of total production. If it goes offline, it will cause a major increase in Nevada gas prices.

Oh, and Phillips 66's LA Refinery (end of 2025) and Valero's Benicia… https://t.co/YXBWdFS6I6 pic.twitter.com/bafauDynYj

— Victor Joecks (@VictorJoecks) October 3, 2025

Fullback, Logo stick, CDUB and others...

Thank you for sharing your knowledge; I am awed by you guys!

I went a very different direction - necessitated by my faking my way to my undergrad, including most of the code on my senior plant design project - (4 HP41CVs daisy chained together).

Very gratifying to see A&M turns out real professionals, too.

HollywoodBQ said:

---

IIIHorn said:

---

Most people are unaware that a significant portion of the price of a gallon of gasoline is local, state and federal taxes.

---

It's even more in California.

California pays 90 cents tax on a $4.85 gallon of gas = 18.5%
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=65184

Texas is 38.5 cents tax against a $2.77 gallon of gas = 13.9%
https://www.dot.state.tx.us/ttf2011/Presentations/GasTaxPlacemat.pdf

---

Unless I misinterpreted the info in the link, it does not include income or ad valorem taxes paid by each component of the well to gasoline pump supply chain: Producer, Oil Hauler, Refiner, Gasoline Tanker & Gasoline Retailer.

IIIHorn said:

---

HollywoodBQ said:

---

IIIHorn said:

---

Most people are unaware that a significant portion of the price of a gallon of gasoline is local, state and federal taxes.

---

It's even more in California.

California pays 90 cents tax on a $4.85 gallon of gas = 18.5%
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=65184

Texas is 38.5 cents tax against a $2.77 gallon of gas = 13.9%
https://www.dot.state.tx.us/ttf2011/Presentations/GasTaxPlacemat.pdf

---

Unless I misinterpreted the info in the link, it does not income or ad valorem taxes paid by each component of the well to gasoline pump supply chain: Producer, Oil Hauler, Refiner, Gasoline Tanker & Gasoline Retailer.

---

You're right.

The other taxes that contribute to the price weren't included in that 90 cents for California. The total real taxes are even more.

Logos Stick said:

---

YouBet said:

---

fullback44 said:

---

You can do all the math, and that would be a ton of trucks, Im very familiar with the two big Helena terminals in the Eagle ford that can unload 500 plus trucks a day, its definitely possible. but whoever has those fuel contracts with LAX has to have contingencies in place already and probably are required to have them to even get the contract. I dont think there is any way they will not meet their contractual obligations. By the time they exit those contracts (which is a big if) other logistics / supply agreements will be in place. I would suspect if LAX uses 150,000 +/- bbls per day of fuel then that refinery probably has 10-15 days of product available, thats not that much product in the big scheme of things. Trucks could possibly handle a large portion but Im sure sea going vessels / barges local to that region would fill the need and are probably already part of the contingencies in place. Just dont see this ever being a problem.. anyway, just my opinion, I could be wrong

---

I think it's an issue because of the unintended logistical consequences if they actually had to act on this. Our supply chain can't handle much deviation at all from its current JIT structure and processes. And add in the idiocy of California regulations and idiots that run things there and this is a recipe for catastrophic failure at LAX.

The Dem elites there actually know this which is why they are furiously backpedaling on green energy dumbassery. They've pushed reality as far as it can go to placate the mis-educated masses in California. Green energy is a total myth at scale and they've finally acknowledged it.

---

I posted a thread the past couple of weeks about the main oil pipelines in Cali shutting down because of utilization minimums. It's >=30% or it's 0. They are at 30% right now and in danger of falling below it.

The question about trucking the oil to the refineries came up. One of the experts said that I-5 would literally be bumper to bumper tank trucks in both directions. It's not possible.

---

Reminds me of the Business Dev gal that asked me to truck out our NGLs from the Frac and cryo plant I managed when the PL had to get worked on after a nasty ILI run. I was like, um yeah, sweetheart, bless you. We have two truck racks for outbound deliveries and we make ~50,000bls/d. It aint happening.

Quote:

---

Very gratifying to see A&M turns out real professionals, too.

---

Wweeelllll, let's not be hasty.

And StandUpforAmerica's post goes back to my comment about the logistical unintended consequences and collateral damage of California failing.

It's not just California - Nevada and AZ get impacted and then whoever is tied to them gets impacted. It's a domino effect that will get felt throughout the West at a minimum.

California has f'ed the Western USA with their far left-wing idiocy.

We get most of our gasoline in Arizona from California. I'm nervous because we're already paying $3.80 or so.

YouBet said:

---

And StandUpforAmerica's post goes back to my comment about the logistical unintended consequences and collateral damage of California failing.

It's not just California - Nevada and AZ get impacted and then whoever is tied to them gets impacted. It's a domino effect that will get felt throughout the West at a minimum.

California has f'ed the Western USA with their far left-wing idiocy.

---

Then the ******s that live in those states should stop voting for the suicidal policies that are creating the situation.

As my boy Barry said, "elections have consequences." Don't like them, change how you vote.

HumbleAg04 said:

---

Chevron had no plans to cease operations of the El Segundo refinery. Depending on the amount of damage and capital required to repair it, this might change.

I'd be shocked if it impacts the planned P66 or Valero closures. When the real estate is more valuable than a decade+ of operating profits, staying open doesn't make sense.

---

Good luck redeveloping the site of an old refinery anywhere, much less in California! I was born in a town with an old Shell refinery that predates WWII and the site and groundwater are so freaking contaminated that they just have to keep operating to avoid a giant cleanup. Its been sold a couple times now to different operators. Most of my extended family who stayed in the area ended up with some form of cancer.

normalhorn said:

---

Dr. Mephisto said:

---

normalhorn said:

---

fullback44 said:

---

HumbleAg04 said:

---

BigOil said:

---

That refinery supplies most of the jet fuel to LAX. Could be much worse ramification depending on the damage.

---

Yep. Short term LAX will be in a fuel crisis. Wonder what their inventory situation looks like.

---

I really dont see an LAX av gas fuel problem just because if you really absolutely had too, you could truck it in from other places until you lined up ships/barges/rail from other refineries. There is simply too many sources for that type of product, although it may cost them ALOT more money to truck in that much fuel, but its something even a small logistics company could put together fairly easily. sure it could possibly cause a mess on the freeway bringing in that many trucks, however most likely, trucks would go to an off-site terminal to off-load and then the av gas would get pipelined in the way it probably gets there now... hell most likely av gas fuel would be brought to the tanks at the refinery that is currently down and sent to LAX the way it goes now.

---

Technically, you're right. Getting a logistical setup to long-haul the jet fuel can be done.

Napkin math doesn't make it sound quite as simple -

LAX averages about 1,200 domestic commercial flights. Say that each plane is just a 737, you're going to need about 6,800 gallons of jet fuel for each flight. Convert 6,800 GALLONS to BARRELS, and you end up with appx 160 BBLS needed per flight.
The average crude/gas tanker can haul 180 bbls on a highway, but they typically carry a bit less, so assume that an 18-wheeler is needed for each flight.
Just my guess is that it's not as simple as picking up a phone and finding 1,200 rigs, tanks and Hazmat certified drivers that aren't already contracted to haul other product.
For reference, between the Permian and Delaware Basins, there are anywhere between 1,000-1,500 crude trucks moving product each day.

TLDR: Kalifornia needs to prepare their bungholes to get puckered up if they can't easily and readily source more jet fuel, and I'm loving every minute of it.

---

When I joined Texags, I was told there would be no math.

---

Fair enough.....

Insert Doc Holiday "Let's Have a Spelling Bee" .gif

---

Contest.

It's "Let's have a spelling contest."

Some things are sacred.

Dr. Mephisto said:

---

normalhorn said:

---

Dr. Mephisto said:

---

normalhorn said:

---

fullback44 said:

---

HumbleAg04 said:

---

BigOil said:

---

That refinery supplies most of the jet fuel to LAX. Could be much worse ramification depending on the damage.

---

Yep. Short term LAX will be in a fuel crisis. Wonder what their inventory situation looks like.

---

I really dont see an LAX av gas fuel problem just because if you really absolutely had too, you could truck it in from other places until you lined up ships/barges/rail from other refineries. There is simply too many sources for that type of product, although it may cost them ALOT more money to truck in that much fuel, but its something even a small logistics company could put together fairly easily. sure it could possibly cause a mess on the freeway bringing in that many trucks, however most likely, trucks would go to an off-site terminal to off-load and then the av gas would get pipelined in the way it probably gets there now... hell most likely av gas fuel would be brought to the tanks at the refinery that is currently down and sent to LAX the way it goes now.

---

Technically, you're right. Getting a logistical setup to long-haul the jet fuel can be done.

Napkin math doesn't make it sound quite as simple -

LAX averages about 1,200 domestic commercial flights. Say that each plane is just a 737, you're going to need about 6,800 gallons of jet fuel for each flight. Convert 6,800 GALLONS to BARRELS, and you end up with appx 160 BBLS needed per flight.
The average crude/gas tanker can haul 180 bbls on a highway, but they typically carry a bit less, so assume that an 18-wheeler is needed for each flight.
Just my guess is that it's not as simple as picking up a phone and finding 1,200 rigs, tanks and Hazmat certified drivers that aren't already contracted to haul other product.
For reference, between the Permian and Delaware Basins, there are anywhere between 1,000-1,500 crude trucks moving product each day.

TLDR: Kalifornia needs to prepare their bungholes to get puckered up if they can't easily and readily source more jet fuel, and I'm loving every minute of it.

---

When I joined Texags, I was told there would be no math.

---

Fair enough.....

Insert Doc Holiday "Let's Have a Spelling Bee" .gif

---

Contest.

It's "Let's have a spelling contest."

Some things are sacred.

---

Great catch:

Ike Clanton:
What is that Holiday? Twelve hands in a row? Ain't nobody that lucky.

Doc Holliday:
Why Ike, whatever do you mean? Maybe poker's just not your game. I know! Let's have a spelling contest!

HumbleAg04 said:

---

There currently isn't enough import infrastructure to offset the volume of the upcoming closures. Most likely scenario is offshore lightering operations to smaller vessels due to dock limitations and draft restrictions which create a whole different set of problems.

California is screwed. There are some major investment projects to increase pipeline capacity into AZ and then truck fuel into California. The $8/gal projection is likely real and short term potentially higher.

---

Lightering won't do anything in this scenario if they don't have anywhere to refine it.

Sea Speed said:

---

HumbleAg04 said:

---

There currently isn't enough import infrastructure to offset the volume of the upcoming closures. Most likely scenario is offshore lightering operations to smaller vessels due to dock limitations and draft restrictions which create a whole different set of problems.

California is screwed. There are some major investment projects to increase pipeline capacity into AZ and then truck fuel into California. The $8/gal projection is likely real and short term potentially higher.

---

Lightering won't do anything in this scenario if they don't have anywhere to refine it.

---

Finished products not crude.

I actually had a big post written about finished products and lightering but then deleted because for some reason I was like "he wasn't talking about finished products, why did I type out this post?"

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

Couple of things...
This refinery first opened in 1911. Now I have no way of knowing if ANY part of that plant is original (very likely nothing there is that old) but it certainly points to the notion that the facility is likely a mix-and-match of additions, expansions, and upgrades over the decades.

Was Chevron already looking for a buyer for this facility? I know Philips was, so I might be getting these confused. I know Chevron was looking to move their corporate HQ to Houston, can't recall if this refinery was part of that.

Either way, especially given California's extraordinarily stringent regulatory environment, my guess is there is a near ZERO chance this facility is repaired/rebuilt and returns to service.

---

I can guarantee you there is 100% chance this particular unit will be rebuilt. As discussed on the thread, the unit in question makes jet fuel to supply LAX. As odious as the permitting process is in California, it won't prevent the repairs being done. I don't remember how many bbls per day the refinery processes, but this is one unit, not the whole refinery.

Since 2017, Chevron has sold off their refineries in Hawaii, Burnaby BC, and South Africa. It left them with four refineries, all in the lower 48; El Segundo and Richmond in CA, Salt Lake City, and Pascagoula, MS. I don't think there are plans to sell any of the remaining refineries, but I retired in 2020 and don't keep up with the business as much as I did.

i think the permitting in Richmond is even worse than El Segundo. The storage tanks on the hills have to be painted light brown/tan to blend in. Any permit request is held up until some civic project in the city gets funded. The city extorts the refinery at every opportunity. They were once required to plant a grove of trees in an open area in the middle of the refinery to get another idled unit demolished. When I rode through the refinery on a survey in 2016, I asked about the trees and was told the story about the permit. After the trees were planted, the refinery spent zero money or time maintaining the. You can imagine what they looked like. I doubt they did any soil remediation before they were planted.

As one poster already responded to you, every processing facility is a mix and match of additions, expansions and upgrades, but I'm sure there isn't anything in that refinery in operation that was built in 1911.

Sea Speed said:

---

I actually had a big post written about finished products and lightering but then deleted because for some reason I was like "he wasn't talking about finished products, why did I type out this post?"

---

So, you didn't want come off as crude or not?

Over_ed said:

---

Fullback, Logo stick, CDUB and others...

Thank you for sharing your knowledge; I am awed by you guys!

I went a very different direction - necessitated by my faking my way to my undergrad, including most of the code on my senior plant design project - (4 HP41CVs daisy chained together).

Very gratifying to see A&M turns out real professionals, too.

---

I would be very interested to see this expanded on.

I loved my HP41CV!!!!!

Buck Turgidson said:

---

HumbleAg04 said:

---

Chevron had no plans to cease operations of the El Segundo refinery. Depending on the amount of damage and capital required to repair it, this might change.

I'd be shocked if it impacts the planned P66 or Valero closures. When the real estate is more valuable than a decade+ of operating profits, staying open doesn't make sense.

---

Good luck redeveloping the site of an old refinery anywhere, much less in California! I was born in a town with an old Shell refinery that predates WWII and the site and groundwater are so freaking contaminated that they just have to keep operating to avoid a giant cleanup. Its been sold a couple times now to different operators. Most of my extended family who stayed in the area ended up with some form of cancer.

---

Was about to post this. Refinery grounds are contaminated and a developer would need to truck out the dirt probably down to 10-12 ft and replace with clean dirt before it could be developed. Most shut down refineries keep operating as a terminal or are re- utilized as some other industrial production (such as renewable diesel or SAF) instead of selling off the land.

I suspect that the damage will not require a long term shutdown of the primary units. If jet fuel needs to be imported, I suspect it will be from Asia by tanker, not trucked across USA.

Ag with kids said:

---

Over_ed said:

---

Fullback, Logo stick, CDUB and others...

Thank you for sharing your knowledge; I am awed by you guys!

I went a very different direction - necessitated by my faking my way to my undergrad, including most of the code on my senior plant design project - (4 HP41CVs daisy chained together).

Very gratifying to see A&M turns out real professionals, too.

---

I would be very interested to see this expanded on.

I loved my HP41CV!!!!!

---

RPN rocks the world!

Out of curiousity, I just googled "Reddit HP41cv" and there are posts from 3 weeks ago. Got mine 45 or more years ago. Yes, folks loved the feel of those calculators.

I took programming classes (Fortran, COBOL, PL1) for electives and got pretty good setting up equations from numerical analysis etc on my HP. I think I had to get some exception to take those instead of my directed electives, been a long time.

ETA - and if I remember correcty out of ~145 hours, we had 3 hours of free electives and 6 hours of directed electives in ChE.

Take care-

Chevron has two big refineries in California: El Segundo and Richmond. To my knowledge, given Chevron's long history in California, they do not intend to take all of their business out of the state. The refineries were likely not for sale and I doubt would be anytime in the near future. Depending on the repair tab on ES, that may expedite a decision that was only conceptual not long ago.

Moving the HQ to Texas isn't as big a deal as it sounds. There were always more employees in TX than in CA.

Reading articles. Prices may go up 10-20 to 60-90cents a gallon. This is from the refinery that exploded. Then you have to add the impacts of the other 2 refineries shutting down.

I'll be out there in March so be interesting to see what it's like after 2 refineries are down.

Quote:

---

Prices may go up 10-20 to 60-90cents a gallon.

---

Wat?

agent-maroon said:

---

Quote:

---

Prices may go up 10-20 to 60-90cents a gallon.

---

Wat?

---

Different analysis are reporting that due to the fire, it may cause a 10-20 cent increase per gallon (analysis 1) or 60-90 cents a gallon (analysis 2).

Basically they have no idea what's about to happen. This is before the planned shutdown of a refinery i think starting this month..and the 2nd reminder is closing down early next year.

They could lose 36% of refinery output in 6 months.

News in Phoenix (take that for what it's worth) says we might see 50 cents bump. I paid $4 this morning up from $3.50-$3.80 most recently.

I find it deeply satisfying to watch when liberals are compelled to face and experience the real-world consequences that arise directly from the very policies they advocate for.

I do tend to agree with what someone else said earlier. This will just accelerate the "mandate" to move to EVs in the state, and the dumb sheep will celebrate it as some kind of monumental green achievement. Meanwhile, any large business that depends on moving product via truck or rail will just pack up and leave.

jja79 said:

---

We get most of our gasoline in Arizona from California. I'm nervous because we're already paying $3.80 or so.

---

Arizona is more balanced than you think. A decent portion of gas comes from the east.