The U.S. refining industry is the most competitive in the world, which is a benefit to American households. Our complex facilities are uniquely suited to handle difficult-to-refine crude oil and other petroleum feedstocks that refineries elsewhere cannot process. This creates competitive advantage. At the same time, the United States is able to sell some of our higher-quality crude to countries that need it. This combination is powerful.
Oil markets are famously sensitive to uncertainty. Global conflict can send prices higher on concerns that crude oil supplies could be disrupted. This is playing out in response to Russia’s unprovoked acts of war against Ukraine. Russia is a major supplier of crude oil and other energy products globally, though less so in the United States. In recent days, many market participants have committed to stop purchasing Russian oil. Shipping companies are concerned about loading cargoes from Russia and some shippers are finding the cost associated with such cargoes too high. These moves are tightening an already tight market.
The American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) President and CEO Chet Thompson and American Petroleum Institute (API) President and CEO Mike Sommers today sent a letter to U.S. Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm raising significant concerns that the administration could pursue a ban or limits on refined petroleum products. “Banning or limiting the export of refined products would likely decrease inventory levels, reduce domestic refining capacity, put upward pressure on consumer fuel prices, and alienate U.S. allies during a time of war,” Thompson and Sommers wrote.
AFPM opposes the Inflation Reduction Act as written. We evaluated the bill against our core principles, specifically whether the legislation would support strong U.S. refining and petrochemical industries and whether it pursued emissions reductions in a market-based and cost-effective manner. Unfortunately, the IRA falls short of these goals.
AFPM director of transportation and infrastructure, Rob Benedict, discusses the potential impacts proposed steel tariffs would have on the fuels and petrochemical industries.
SPR releases cannot be the center of this Administration’s strategy to confront inflation and high energy prices. At best, SPR releases are a short-term fix, they are not a solution. Stability and certainty is what global crude oil markets crave.
Publicly owned companies, like many U.S. refineries, have a fiduciary responsibility (which is a legal obligation) to act in the best interest of their shareholders, and that extends to how companies spend their earnings. Often, earnings are spent on a combination of the following: direct dividends, stock buy back programs, paying down debt and capital investment projects.
AFPM President and CEO Chet Thompson issued the following statement in response to President Biden’s State of the Union address: "Using the State of the Union to politicize market fundamentals and single out stock “buy back” programs—while overlooking the fact that the Biden administration’s own policies discourage the reinvestment of earnings back into the U.S. liquid fuel supply chain—cheapens the dialog for everyone."
Governor Gavin Newsom continues to blame fuel refiners for California’s highest-in-the-nation fuel prices. He couldn't be more wrong. The problem and solution to much of California’s fuel price challenge can be found in Sacramento policy. Take a look to better understand the role of policy in regional price differences, why it’s inaccurate to equate “margins” or “refinery cracks” with “profits,” and why windfall profit taxes are a known policy failure.
Restricting exports would be a major unforced error for the President, tightening global fuel supplies, throttling U.S. fuel production and increasing costs for American consumers. Likewise, imposing product inventory requirements boils down to siphoning gasoline and diesel into storage, and away from consumers.
