Queries in support of Decision Rule 2

(No overall economic justification for a Guyana state-owned refinery)

Introduction In last week’s column I sought to recall, for the benefit of readers, several key observations and conclusions that were drawn from my earlier review of refinery economics in order to support Decision Rule 2.

Decision rule for a local oil refinery with no state support

Introduction: Proviso It is worth repeating: my two previous columns had sought to make it abundantly clear that if a local oil refinery is established, which is wholly owned, managed and operationalized, either separately, or through a partnership (or some other joint arrangement), involving only 1) foreign investors (whether private, state, or some combination thereof), or 2) domestic private investors, this would be acceptable in my judgement, subject to one important proviso or caveat.

Guyana: Learning from small refineries in big oil markets

As repeatedly urged, readers need to be familiar with the basic structure/features of global oil refining, if they wish to make informed contributions towards Guyana’s first oil, particularly in view of the fact that a local refinery would likely contribute marginally (0.1 per cent) to global refining capacity.

‘A local oil refinery would make a marginal (less than 0.1 %) addition to global oil refining capacity’

Introduction If one began with the standard industry description of an oil refinery that was earlier introduced, which is: “an industrial plant or complex that manages hydrocarbon molecules extracted from crude oil, natural gas liquids and national gas” (in the case of Guyana, at the Stabroek bloc Liza wells), that complex could produce an assemblage of different petroleum based products that can potentially reach several thousand.