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.
McKinsey released a new report outlining the emissions profiles of plastic vs. non-plastic alternatives in multiple use cases. They found that in nearly every case examined, plastics are responsible for less greenhouse gas emissions throughout their lifecycle than alternative materials.
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.
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.
AFPM Senior Director of Fuels and Vehicle Policy, Patrick Kelly, testified during the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) public hearing on the proposed Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) “Set” Rule. EPA’s proposal will stifle advanced biofuels, promote first generation biofuels beyond the market’s ability to absorb them and shift overall RFS growth away from liquid biofuels and into the power electricity sector. This is completely contrary to how congress envisioned EPA’s handling of the program.
AFPM's Geoff Moody issued the following statement responding to the EPA's 2023-2025 proposal for RFS blending obligations: “Congress provided EPA the ability to modernize the RFS and set it on a more sustainable course for all stakeholders. Sadly, EPA’s proposal is a missed opportunity..."
