The Silent Majority have Spoken! USVI Poll Results are in on ABR!

I got the automated poll call the other night, and I answered the poll questions.
So, OT, I did my part.

Interesting discussion on the radio 1000 this morning with Barshinger.
He likened ABR' s deal to someone buying a used car from you and having someone pay you for it, IF it's still in great running condition with no new dents or scratches on the paint in 6 years while the person wishing to buy it has full use and control during that term.
If after that term, they decide not to proceed, they walk away.

Doesn't sound like such a good deal to me.

Too bad the VI government can't afford take it by imminent domain and hire a company to manage the fuel storage and sell everything else. They'd have to pay fair market value.

So far ABR has made an investment of $1000.00 according to Barshinger. (That's one thousand dollars only)

http://virginislandsdailynews.com/news/the-deal-to-sell-hovensa-1.1803098

This sounds like an investment of far more than $1000.

It says they have "plans" to raise the money, not that they actually have it plus "There is no guarantee in the agreement that ABR would refine oil. The decision on whether to refine oil depends on the findings of an engineering study."

*Moore said the company is "99 percent positive" that the engineering study will determine that reconfiguring and restarting the refinery is economically feasible.

*ABR plans to raise the estimated $1.25 billion restart cost for the refinery with project financing arranged through a combination of debt-financing and equity-financing.

Forster said there are a variety of ways to do that, and different options. But in simple terms, the company plans to borrow more than half of it, and the rest would come from investors.

"plans to"
I have "plans to" win the lottery too....

So you bought your house with cash or did you 'plan to' get a loan when you found one?

The gist of what Barshinger was saying was the contract was worded so that should the engineering team find, after a 2 year period, the plant was not financially feasible to operate, they did not have to go thru with the deal.

Hovensa would be off the hook for the $700 MILLION DOLLARS it was fined by EPA for polluting St. Croix.

No Alana, HOVENSA was never fined $700 million for anything.

You are perpetuating a fallacy.

Here's a quote from another Daily News article:

At this point, the financing for the restart of the refinery is not yet in place."

BTW CruzanIron, when I "planned on purchasing a home, I went to get prequalified for a loan, prior to house hunting.

No Alana, HOVENSA was never fined $700 million for anything.

You are perpetuating a fallacy.

QUOTE:
http://m.virginislandsdailynews.com/news/the-deal-to-sell-hovensa-1.1803098

"EPA consent decree

If the Senate should ratify the operating agreement, Atlantic Basin Refining also would seek to renegotiate HOVENSA's consent degree with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

In January 2011, HOVENSA agreed to pay civil penalties and spend more than $700 million implementing new pollution controls over the next 10 years as part of a consent decree that settled a case the U.S. Government brought, alleging violations of the Clean Air Act requirements covering emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds and benzene."

They are on the hook for this.

AM 1000 is notorious for spreading misinformation, IMO.

CruzanIron, do you know how this fallacy started spreading? Is it based on some factual information that is misunderstood?

St Lucia sold their refinery after Hess (not Hovensa) left, and the buyer was a name I am familiar with. Why were they able to sell and we're still desperate?

I have no opinion on this, because I don't have enough information that I trust.

AM 1000 is notorious for spreading misinformation, IMO.

CruzanIron, do you know how this fallacy started spreading? Is it based on some factual information that is misunderstood?

St Lucia sold their refinery after Hess (not Hovensa) left, and the buyer was a name I am familiar with. Why were they able to sell and we're still desperate?

I have no opinion on this, because I don't have enough information that I trust.

1) No, I do not know how the fallacy started. But spreading misinformation is a tool often used by opponents.

2) There is not and never was a refinery on St. Lucia.

No Alana, HOVENSA was never fined $700 million for anything.

You are perpetuating a fallacy.

QUOTE:
http://m.virginislandsdailynews.com/news/the-deal-to-sell-hovensa-1.1803098

"EPA consent decree

If the Senate should ratify the operating agreement, Atlantic Basin Refining also would seek to renegotiate HOVENSA's consent degree with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

In January 2011, HOVENSA agreed to pay civil penalties and spend more than $700 million implementing new pollution controls over the next 10 years as part of a consent decree that settled a case the U.S. Government brought, alleging violations of the Clean Air Act requirements covering emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds and benzene."

They are on the hook for this.

No, they are not on the hook for anything. They don't have to spend a cent if the refinery is not operating. ABR does not plan to operate the FCC unit or Coker, so there will be no cost to be spent to bring them up to EPA consent requirements. The reconfiguring of the other units will bring them into EPA consent requirements.

Usually is the loud minority that ruins it for the silent majority...

No Alana, HOVENSA was never fined $700 million for anything.

You are perpetuating a fallacy.

QUOTE:
http://m.virginislandsdailynews.com/news/the-deal-to-sell-hovensa-1.1803098

"EPA consent decree

If the Senate should ratify the operating agreement, Atlantic Basin Refining also would seek to renegotiate HOVENSA's consent degree with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

In January 2011, HOVENSA agreed to pay civil penalties and spend more than $700 million implementing new pollution controls over the next 10 years as part of a consent decree that settled a case the U.S. Government brought, alleging violations of the Clean Air Act requirements covering emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds and benzene."

They are on the hook for this.

No, they are not on the hook for anything. They don't have to spend a cent if the refinery is not operating. ABR does not plan to operate the FCC unit or Coker, so there will be no cost to be spent to bring them up to EPA consent requirements. The reconfiguring of the other units will bring them into EPA consent requirements.

Good way to get out of coughing up that amount of money by closing the refinery, to begin with.

Good way to get out of coughing up that amount of money by closing the refinery, to begin with.

Yes, a business decision. There was no point in spending almost a billion dollars when you are losing money.

The Finance Committee hearing is this morning.
You can look at the agreement on www.legvi.org
I think it might be broadcast on radio but missed that part.

The Finance Committee hearing is this morning.
You can look at the agreement on www.legvi.org
I think it might be broadcast on radio but missed that part.

There are other items on the agenda for the morning session.
The ABR proposal is scheduled for 1:00 PM

The Finance Committee hearing is this morning.
You can look at the agreement on www.legvi.org
I think it might be broadcast on radio but missed that part.

Senate Finance Committee hearing via LEGIT TV, radiopapilove.com,(91.9 FM) or WIUJ (102.9 FM).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1) Anyone noticed "the company plans to use the futures markets to help protect its profit margins".

Worked well for Enron.

2) ABR says in response to the EPA waiver: "Most likely the expenditures we will be making in our revamp and refinery reconfiguration will incorporate the stuff we need to do to meet the goals". and "[...] processing light sweet crude will not yield anywhere near the level of emissions historically seen in connection with high sulfur crude.

Ecotourism at its best.