Seeking Alpha

Valero (VLO -6%) says proposed new rules aimed at reducing sulfur content in gasoline would cost...

Valero (VLO -6%) says proposed new rules aimed at reducing sulfur content in gasoline would cost it hundreds of millions of dollars in equipment construction and upgrades alone. In addition to spending $300M-$400M initially to implement the rule, VLO also predicts operating costs would rise by an undetermined amount every year due to the rules proposed Friday by the EPA. (earlier)
Comments (53)
  • dem816
    , contributor
    Comments (16) | Send Message
     
    Back to your caves everyone. Nothing to see here. All part of being regulated back to the stone age.
    2 Apr 2013, 03:17 PM Reply Like
  • nemonemo
    , contributor
    Comments (314) | Send Message
     
    In the end, gasoline would hit $5. Obama already has millions in swiss bank. Wikileaks stated its around $78M. He does not care.
    2 Apr 2013, 03:38 PM Reply Like
  • Pinkrabbit
    , contributor
    Comments (185) | Send Message
     
    Now where would he get 78 million?
    2 Apr 2013, 04:18 PM Reply Like
  • nemonemo
    , contributor
    Comments (314) | Send Message
     
    Don't be so naive. Bill Clinton has 150+M. From where.
    2 Apr 2013, 04:19 PM Reply Like
  • robertmk24
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    Bill Clinton got hundreds of Millions when he pardoned Marc Rich,
    for no solid reason.
    2 Apr 2013, 05:49 PM Reply Like
  • blueice
    , contributor
    Comments (3137) | Send Message
     
    Nem, what he does not trust Kenyan banks?
    3 Apr 2013, 01:09 AM Reply Like
  • nemonemo
    , contributor
    Comments (314) | Send Message
     
    Are there any banks there. I thought his brother in kenya robbed all of them.
    3 Apr 2013, 01:50 AM Reply Like
  • CincinnatiRick
    , contributor
    Comments (389) | Send Message
     
    So just pass the costs on to the customers. Oops...that's us.

     

    Clearly the EPA has now become an arm of the IRS...levying and collecting taxes. More "investments" from the Obama Administration...and they didn't even have to ask Congress!
    2 Apr 2013, 03:24 PM Reply Like
  • Mike Maher
    , contributor
    Comments (2501) | Send Message
     
    Well obviously they arent going to say its a non-event, since the rules are only proposed, and they will attempt to negotiate to less strict rules. Long term the story is still the same, oil prices in the US are lower than the rest of the world, and refined products prices are higher. The refiners that have access to export terminals are a buy, and VLO is a buy if corn prices continue to fall, since they own so many ethanol refineries.
    2 Apr 2013, 03:26 PM Reply Like
  • wgrogers
    , contributor
    Comments (86) | Send Message
     
    "...and refined products prices are higher [than the rest of the world]."

     

    ???
    2 Apr 2013, 05:04 PM Reply Like
  • Mike Maher
    , contributor
    Comments (2501) | Send Message
     
    Whats your question? Refined products, like gas and diesel, go for higher prices overseas than here in the US
    2 Apr 2013, 06:01 PM Reply Like
  • uncledace
    , contributor
    Comments (89) | Send Message
     
    The way you said it makes it seem like refined products cost more in the US.
    2 Apr 2013, 08:03 PM Reply Like
  • Mike Maher
    , contributor
    Comments (2501) | Send Message
     
    Sorry for the confusion.
    2 Apr 2013, 09:55 PM Reply Like
  • jhenn19630
    , contributor
    Comments (40) | Send Message
     
    Has it ever occured to the progressives that they should progress out of the 60s? We fought that war against filth in the 60s and 70s and we won. Our air is cleaner, our waters are cleaner and our environment is markedly cleaner. Instead of declaring victory, the progressive who cannot progress are fighting expensive fights against the laws of diminishing returns. Turn your efforts to China and India. You will find filthy air, burning rivers and polluted grounds. Go there and fight and drop an expensive, unnecessary campaign against sulphur which will not improve much of anything.
    2 Apr 2013, 03:27 PM Reply Like
  • AlbionWood
    , contributor
    Comments (793) | Send Message
     
    How do you propose to fight the polluting industries of China and India? What exactly should progressives be doing?

     

    The war here has not been won; environmental degradation continues, despite the cleaner appearance of the air in LA and the water in Ohio. Acid rain continues, and more than half the nation's waterways are so polluted they cannot support a healthy aquatic ecosystem. Sure, it's worse in China and India than it is here - but that is no reason to allow things here to continue getting worse.
    2 Apr 2013, 04:55 PM Reply Like
  • George Fisher
    , contributor
    Comments (1474) | Send Message
     
    "How do you propose to fight the polluting industries of China and India? What exactly should progressives be doing?"

     

    Pretty simple, really. Just add a 1% import duty on all Chlinese imports for every day Beijing has higher air pollution than LA. I bet after 30 days and 30% tax, they would get the idea. But, wait, that would interfere with the international redistribution of wealth and could cause a rebirth of American manufacturing - and we can't have that now can we?
    2 Apr 2013, 05:25 PM Reply Like
  • nemonemo
    , contributor
    Comments (314) | Send Message
     
    Lol. Typical llibtards. Another tax.
    2 Apr 2013, 05:25 PM Reply Like
  • blueice
    , contributor
    Comments (3137) | Send Message
     
    Wood, acid rain is right out of the 80's and as well the Ozone Crisis...

     

    Do you have any links (please no dot orgs) for us...

     

    If things are so bad, why are people living longer ?
    3 Apr 2013, 01:14 AM Reply Like
  • blueice
    , contributor
    Comments (3137) | Send Message
     
    Libertax...
    3 Apr 2013, 01:15 AM Reply Like
  • George Fisher
    , contributor
    Comments (1474) | Send Message
     
    If nemon and blue's comments are direct at me, I guess they missed the tounge in cheek nature of my comments. Such is life -- time to move on.
    3 Apr 2013, 06:58 AM Reply Like
  • Pinkrabbit
    , contributor
    Comments (185) | Send Message
     
    Drugs perhaps but I thought that I read somewhere that life expectancy has stopped increasing in the US because of overweight problems.
    3 Apr 2013, 09:54 AM Reply Like
  • blueice
    , contributor
    Comments (3137) | Send Message
     
    No Mr Parepoynt, they were not...
    3 Apr 2013, 10:04 AM Reply Like
  • AlbionWood
    , contributor
    Comments (793) | Send Message
     
    Jon, I'm pretty sure at least some of it was aimed at me. An old-style Conservative, or indeed anyone who believes government has any useful function at all, is now castigated as a "libtard" or somesuch, by the extremists who seem to proliferate online.
    3 Apr 2013, 11:59 AM Reply Like
  • blueice
    , contributor
    Comments (3137) | Send Message
     
    Not possible, Dem, as they have cave emission standards in place...
    2 Apr 2013, 03:27 PM Reply Like
  • orangutan
    , contributor
    Comments (216) | Send Message
     
    All of these environmental regulations are onerous. Why can't we have air quality like Beijing?
    2 Apr 2013, 03:29 PM Reply Like
  • auto44
    , contributor
    Comments (3009) | Send Message
     
    This elitist administration is hell bent on making life difficult for middle Americans. Fear not. Everything is relative.
    2 Apr 2013, 03:29 PM Reply Like
  • George Fisher
    , contributor
    Comments (1474) | Send Message
     
    This is just the tip of the iceberg. If you want to build a new coal export facility, you will first have to convince China to stop burning coal, or at least make them adopt clean coal technology. This gasoline ruling is just more of the same, and is being done by executive order - reread the State of the Union Address 2013. It says, "We, the White House, knows what is best and if your elected officials in Congress don't agree, well, that's not our problem."

     

    http://bit.ly/12df8Kn
    2 Apr 2013, 03:36 PM Reply Like
  • HPBunker
    , contributor
    Comments (219) | Send Message
     
    @ orangutan: Right on! Clean air regulations are so unnecessary. I say we go back to the good ol' days, when we were truly free and cheap, wholesome leaded gas dropped our kids' IQ by 10 points or so. Good times!
    2 Apr 2013, 03:37 PM Reply Like
  • jhenn19630
    , contributor
    Comments (40) | Send Message
     
    You just don't get it do you progressives? No one wants to go back to the dirty air and water of the 60s. We won. Go fight your wars in China and India where filthy air is travelling around the world causing more pollution in the US than they might eliminate with onerous and doubtful sulphur regulations. Go fight deforestation in Africa and Latin America. Not needed here. And yes, I was an environmentalist in the 60s.
    2 Apr 2013, 03:43 PM Reply Like
  • HPBunker
    , contributor
    Comments (219) | Send Message
     
    We're winning, sure, but we haven't won yet. After all, the drill, baby, drill brigade still controls the House and half the Senate. Anyway, the argument "the air is worse in India, so why make it cleaner in the US" is ridiculous on its face.
    2 Apr 2013, 05:16 PM Reply Like
  • blueice
    , contributor
    Comments (3137) | Send Message
     
    Jhenn, a liberal's agenda is only done when they die...
    3 Apr 2013, 01:20 AM Reply Like
  • AlbionWood
    , contributor
    Comments (793) | Send Message
     
    bluice, you have any more notes in that song? It's kind of tedious.
    3 Apr 2013, 12:00 PM Reply Like
  • blueice
    , contributor
    Comments (3137) | Send Message
     
    Wood, my singing agent said the same thing...
    3 Apr 2013, 09:31 PM Reply Like
  • jack20
    , contributor
    Comments (294) | Send Message
     
    Passage of The Natural Gas Act which puts 18 wheelers on CNG will take more pollution out of the air than this idiotic sulfur idea ever will, and put thousands of Americans to work, AND kick OPEC square in the ass! If you were President of a refinery and you have the choice of spending hundreds of millions, OR run your refinery 24/7/365 on gas or diesel for export what would you do? $5 gas here we come. The brittle brains win again unintended consequences be dammed!!
    2 Apr 2013, 04:44 PM Reply Like
  • HPBunker
    , contributor
    Comments (219) | Send Message
     
    $5 gas will be the best thing ever to happen to the US. Finally the price of auto fuel will bear some resemblance to its true cost (including externalities like urban smog and global warming). We can't get there fast enough.

     

    And hey, if you want some economic stimulus, tack on a $2 per gallon federal gas tax and distribute 100% of the proceeds as a reduction in marginal income tax rates. Good stuff.
    2 Apr 2013, 05:21 PM Reply Like
  • AlbionWood
    , contributor
    Comments (793) | Send Message
     
    Absolutely, HPB. $5 gas is still too cheap, but it's a start... adding on a gas tax, starting low and increasing it over 5 years at a well-advertised rate, would do a lot to encourage conservation and devlopment of NG and other alternative fuels.
    2 Apr 2013, 05:31 PM Reply Like
  • RoberHD05
    , contributor
    Comments (62) | Send Message
     
    I don't think the oil refiners really care if they have to spend $300-$400 to upgrade their equipment, they will simply pass that cost on the the consumers. The various governmental agencies, however, will applaud higher prices because they usually charge taxes based on the sale price of the product. So if the sale price of the product is higher, the taxes collected will be higher.

     

    They win.
    2 Apr 2013, 05:37 PM Reply Like
  • glanoue
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    This is a pass through industry, if it costs more to make/refine the price will increase at the pump so the net effect to the refiners is zero so the stocks should not be going down but up.
    2 Apr 2013, 05:37 PM Reply Like
  • TruffelPig
    , contributor
    Comments (4069) | Send Message
     
    Question: which oil in US has lowest sulfur content? Bakken? How high is the sulfur content in the tar sands?
    2 Apr 2013, 08:37 PM Reply Like
  • CincinnatiRick
    , contributor
    Comments (389) | Send Message
     
    Ratzz. Tried to catch the falling knife this afternoon with NTI. Failed with both NTI and CLMT due to their dead cat bounces at end of day. My only "priced for perfection" was CVRR at a rock bottom 31.

     

    While I agree with sentiment expressed re a dysfunctional EPA, we have to realize that these are proposed regulations, the technical case contra (as well as the foodstuffs counterargument) re ethanol is compelling and we are talking about 2017 for implementation. Not only is that far off but there is room to hope that this ideologically-based ship gets torpedoed before it ever arrives.

     

    Of course, I am biased: long NTI, CLMT and now doubled up on CVRR. That bias is what makes a market and so I am hoping for another shot at NTI and CLMT tomorrow.
    2 Apr 2013, 09:27 PM Reply Like
  • depsee
    , contributor
    Comments (69) | Send Message
     
    Does anybody find it strange that the IMF just came out saying that the people of the United States should be paying more for fuel and now this B.S. comes out? Is it just me or is there a good case for treason against the current administration? Just wondering. The sad part is this country would vote this way again.
    2 Apr 2013, 10:24 PM Reply Like
  • TruffelPig
    , contributor
    Comments (4069) | Send Message
     
    Given the same choice I agree 100% on the last sentence - but I wouldn't call the result sad. Mit was.....well, I will stay polite.......
    2 Apr 2013, 11:15 PM Reply Like
  • gottgruppiert
    , contributor
    Comments (10) | Send Message
     
    I am guessing this means VLO and PSX will be raising their gas prices. Does the government just expect these companies to eat the cost? They will just pass it along to us. To bad the headline algos don't have a mind to think this through, they just sell, sell sell.
    2 Apr 2013, 11:49 PM Reply Like
  • TruffelPig
    , contributor
    Comments (4069) | Send Message
     
    Headline algos make me money. I read the complete story and there is the word Bakken in it and record us oil production, wti-brent spread,......etcetc
    3 Apr 2013, 12:17 AM Reply Like
  • Pinkrabbit
    , contributor
    Comments (185) | Send Message
     
    Totally agree.
    3 Apr 2013, 10:03 AM Reply Like
  • benitus
    , contributor
    Comments (1911) | Send Message
     
    EPS moves against our very own refiners should make it a public enemy because it seems to be making it more difficult for domestic oil-producers to compete against imported oil (especially from Saudi Arabia and Libya, whose oil has low sulfur content). I smell something fishy here, just when Hussein Obama seems to be folding on the Keystone pipeline, as the admin has found another way to kill it and make life more difficult for domestic producers, to satisy the muslim oil-producers, particularly Saudi, (in view of its falling exports to the U.S.) and I wouldn't be surprised if the dems have been lining their pockets, since they've been trying to raise campaign funds to pay off their loans for their recent re-election.
    3 Apr 2013, 07:22 AM Reply Like
  • AlbionWood
    , contributor
    Comments (793) | Send Message
     
    Go look up the proportion of oil we import from KSA before making stuff up.
    3 Apr 2013, 12:03 PM Reply Like
  • benitus
    , contributor
    Comments (1911) | Send Message
     
    Sorry, everyone, if I had caused confusion. I meant to say EPA and not EPS. A thousand aplogies!!
    5 Apr 2013, 09:58 PM Reply Like
  • Pinkrabbit
    , contributor
    Comments (185) | Send Message
     
    Back to the central subject matter. As others, I believe the refiners will just raise their wholesale prices to maintain their their required margins. In the end, they will be just as profitable as before. Looks to me like a good buying opportunity. They sure as heck are not going to eat the cost of the new EPA requirements. As soon as the knee jerk reaction ends, NTI will go back up especially if we get a solid dividend announcement.
    3 Apr 2013, 10:01 AM Reply Like
  • COBeeMan
    , contributor
    Comments (1277) | Send Message
     
    Agreed! Time to buy more NTI! Their lower cost of production will still be lower than their peers. This is the place to discuss how to take advantage of circumstances to earn more money, not the place to vent political biases.
    3 Apr 2013, 01:45 PM Reply Like
  • blueice
    , contributor
    Comments (3137) | Send Message
     
    Yes, you are correct, Pink Rabbit, however it will marginalize some refineries to the point where they will be closed...

     

    Remember, their nets are not much higher than your standard supermarket...
    3 Apr 2013, 10:10 AM Reply Like
  • skypilot416
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
     
    What is the bottom line regarding VLO sell, buy or hold?
    3 Apr 2013, 05:03 PM Reply Like
  • benitus
    , contributor
    Comments (1911) | Send Message
     
    skypilot...IMHO, Buy and Hold VLO, at least for a year. Of course, you can trade it as it goes up and down, if you wish. It has lots going for it as compared with the rest. I remember MRO used to be worth much more than VLO but it's been left far behind.
    5 Apr 2013, 10:01 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector

Next headline on your portfolio:

|