RPG Forums

Go Back   RPG Forums > Role Playing Game Section > Twilight 2000 Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #61  
Old 09-19-2017, 07:31 PM
The Dark The Dark is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 194
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RN7 View Post
That's a valid point. Soviet nuclear missiles seem to have missed an awful lot of important industrial facilities in America and also in other countries.
Sure, but that's where the Soviet nuclear strikes make sense. Rather than widely dispersed industrial sites, focus on the (relatively) centralized fuel production. Harvey knocked out around 25% of the US's refining capacity. Hitting the Baton Rouge area and the two refining centers in California in addition to Houston/Galveston would knock out close to 60% of US refining capacity.

Most refineries are also near port facilities, so striking them will also damage shipping capacity and limit imports of fuel. That will force the use of ground transportation to move supplies, which requires more fuel, further exacerbating the shortage. Striking at the refineries is a logistical attack.
__________________
Writer at The Vespers War - World War I equipment for v2.2
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 09-19-2017, 07:33 PM
RN7 RN7 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,060
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by unkated View Post
This was my favorite part: "Pending an anachronistic World War II-style armor clash on the European plains....."

... since that's exactly what we're talking about.

Uncle Ted
If you look up Sierra Army Depot on Wikipedia and then click on the coordinates link it will take you to Google Maps were you can see a satellite map of the whole base. Its amazing there are thousands of military vehicles just lined up in rows for miles including M1 tanks that you can make out and hundreds of bunkers.

Was this base a target in T2K? I'm sure U.S. forces would have taken many of these vehicles back into service during the course of the war, but many older ones and maybe a few new ones would still be there. Whoever controls this base would have a major advantage on the West coast.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 09-19-2017, 07:55 PM
RN7 RN7 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,060
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark View Post
Sure, but that's where the Soviet nuclear strikes make sense. Rather than widely dispersed industrial sites, focus on the (relatively) centralized fuel production. Harvey knocked out around 25% of the US's refining capacity. Hitting the Baton Rouge area and the two refining centers in California in addition to Houston/Galveston would knock out close to 60% of US refining capacity.
That's true but what happens if the nuclear missile doesn't hit the target and you still have a functional or even partially functional oil refinery, and also have a fully functional tank factory?

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark View Post
Harvey knocked out around 25% of the US's refining capacity. Hitting the Baton Rouge area and the two refining centers in California in addition to Houston/Galveston would knock out close to 60% of US refining capacity.
Are we talking 1997 or now?

Sure Texas, Louisiana and California have a big chunk of America's oil refining capacity but there are plenty more today. There are 6 refineries in Alaska, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Wyoming, 5 in Washington state and Utah, 4 in Illinois, Mississippi, Montana, Ohio and Oklahoma, 3 in Alabama, Kansas and New Mexico, 2 in Arkansas, Hawaii, Indiana, Kentucky, Minnesota and North Dakota, and I in Colorado, Delaware, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark View Post
Most refineries are also near port facilities, so striking them will also damage shipping capacity and limit imports of fuel. That will force the use of ground transportation to move supplies, which requires more fuel, further exacerbating the shortage. Striking at the refineries is a logistical attack.
BY 2000 there is basically no functional air or shipping capacity, so in the main it will all be by ground transportation.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 09-19-2017, 09:51 PM
The Dark The Dark is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 194
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RN7 View Post
Are we talking 1997 or now?

Sure Texas, Louisiana and California have a big chunk of America's oil refining capacity but there are plenty more today. There are 6 refineries in Alaska, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Wyoming, 5 in Washington state and Utah, 4 in Illinois, Mississippi, Montana, Ohio and Oklahoma, 3 in Alabama, Kansas and New Mexico, 2 in Arkansas, Hawaii, Indiana, Kentucky, Minnesota and North Dakota, and I in Colorado, Delaware, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia.
By capacity (bbl/day), 59% of the United States' current refining capacity is in 3 states - California, Texas, and Louisiana. To pick some examples out:
Louisiana's five largest refineries (Garyville, Baton Rouge, Lake Charles Citgo, St. Charles, and Convent) combine for 1,967,800 barrels per day. There are 11 more refineries in Louisiana that range from 8,300 to 247,000 barrels each. Total capacity of all 16 refineries is 3,310,100 barrels per day. Texas has at least 5,252,000 barrels per day capacity (I don't know the capacity for Calumet Penreco or Double Punch), and California has 3,331,000 barrels of refining capacity.


Pennsylvania is (I think) the largest of the non-Big Three states, with a total refining capacity of 775,000 barrels per day. Of that, 10k barrels are in Bradford (near the PA/NY border south of Buffalo), 70k are in Warren (on the other side of the Allegheny National Forest from Bradford), and the other 695k are in Philadelphia and likely to be glowing for a few years.

New Jersey technically has six refineries, but Perth Amboy closed in 2006, Eagle Point in 2010, and Port Reading in 2013, so only Bayway, Paulsboro Asphalt, and Paulsboro are still running, with a total capacity of 461,000 barrels per day.


Picking from some of the other states listed:
Alaska's six refineries combined can do 302,000 barrels per day.
Wyoming's six refineries combined can do 158,000 barrels per day.
Utah's five refineries combined can do 179,200 barrels per day.
Hawaii's two refineries can do 148,000 barrels per day
Virginia's one refinery shut down in 2010.
West Virginia's one refinery can do 19,400 barrels per day.

That's 20 refineries (not counting the closed one in VA) that can do a total of 806,600 barrels per day, or about 2/5 of what the 5 biggest refineries in Louisiana can do.

For the entire southeast (and being somewhat generous by including trans-Appalachia) excluding Louisiana, you have:
Alabama - 3 refineries, 156,100 bbl/day
Georgia - 1 refinery, 28,000 bbl/day
Kentucky - 3 refineries, 439,000 bbl/day
Mississippi - 4 refineries, 409,800 bbl/day (370k of which is 1 refinery, Pascagoula)
Tennessee - 1 refinery, 180,000 bbl/day

There are no refineries in Florida or the Carolinas or Virginia, so that entire 9 state region has about 1.2 million barrels per day maximum refining capacity, slightly more than 1/3 of what Louisiana has, and about 1/3 of that capacity could be eliminated by hitting Pascagoula (which is where Ingalls is, so it'd be a target anyway).

The other problem is crude oil production. That same 9 state region produces only 83,000 barrels of crude oil per day (5k from Florida, 22k from Alabama, 56k from Mississippi). Unless they can import oil from somewhere, even the small capacity they have will grossly exceed the inputs they receive.

Interestingly, West Virginia might be able to be close to self-sufficient; they produce 20,000 barrels of crude per day, and can refine 19,400 barrels per day at their one refinery.
__________________
Writer at The Vespers War - World War I equipment for v2.2
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 09-20-2017, 12:51 AM
RN7 RN7 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,060
Default

That's a very detailed analysis of American oil refining capacity there Dark, I presume your figures are from the present and not 1997.

But let's have another look at them, and to be clear these are my figures are 2016/2017.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark View Post
By capacity (bbl/day), 59% of the United States' current refining capacity is in 3 states - California, Texas, and Louisiana. To pick some examples out:
Louisiana's five largest refineries (Garyville, Baton Rouge, Lake Charles Citgo, St. Charles, and Convent) combine for 1,967,800 barrels per day. There are 11 more refineries in Louisiana that range from 8,300 to 247,000 barrels each. Total capacity of all 16 refineries is 3,310,100 barrels per day. Texas has at least 5,252,000 barrels per day capacity (I don't know the capacity for Calumet Penreco or Double Punch), and California has 3,331,000 barrels of refining capacity.
Louisiana has 18 oil refineries, produces 3,343,206 barrels per day and accounts for 18% of US capacity.
Texas has 29 oil refineries, produces 5,671,490 barrels per day and accounts for 30.5% of US capacity.
California has 18 oil refineries, produces 1,990,671 barrels per day and accounts for 10.7% of US capacity.

So yes your figure is correct as all three states account for 59.2% of US capacity. But these are peacetime figures and all three states expect for Texas are crude oil importers.

Louisiana produces 1.5% of US crude oil production
Texas produces 37.4% of US crude oil production
California produces 5.2% of US crude oil production

The big three US oil producing states are Texas (37.4%), North Dakota (11.2%) and Alaska (5.5%), although to be fair California is in 4th place. However Federal Offshore oil production also accounts for about 19% of US oil production.

So only the refineries in Texas will be refining oil at anywhere near peacetime levels unless the threat to shipping is totally eliminated.


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark View Post
Pennsylvania is (I think) the largest of the non-Big Three states, with a total refining capacity of 775,000 barrels per day. Of that, 10k barrels are in Bradford (near the PA/NY border south of Buffalo), 70k are in Warren (on the other side of the Allegheny National Forest from Bradford), and the other 695k are in Philadelphia and likely to be glowing for a few years.
Pennsylvania's refining capacity is 576,000 barrels per day, which is behind Illinois, Washington and Ohio. And if Philadelphia is likely to be glowing for years so would the big cities and oil refineries in California, Louisiana and Texas.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark View Post
New Jersey technically has six refineries, but Perth Amboy closed in 2006, Eagle Point in 2010, and Port Reading in 2013, so only Bayway, Paulsboro Asphalt, and Paulsboro are still running, with a total capacity of 461,000 barrels per day.
True and I think Perth Amboy and Eagle Point have been converted into oil terminals. New Jersey has a total capacity of 475,000 barrels per day.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark View Post
Picking from some of the other states listed:
Alaska's six refineries combined can do 302,000 barrels per day.
Wyoming's six refineries combined can do 158,000 barrels per day.
Utah's five refineries combined can do 179,200 barrels per day.
Hawaii's two refineries can do 148,000 barrels per day
Virginia's one refinery shut down in 2010.
West Virginia's one refinery can do 19,400 barrels per day.

That's 20 refineries (not counting the closed one in VA) that can do a total of 806,600 barrels per day, or about 2/5 of what the 5 biggest refineries in Louisiana can do.
Alaska actually has now only 5 oil refineries producing 158,900 barrels per day
Wyoming has 6 oil refineries producing 177,500 barrels per day
Utah has now only 5 oil refineries producing 196,830 barrels per day
Hawaii is exactly right
Virginia is exactly right, its former refinery has been converted into and oil terminal
West Virginia has 1 refinery produces 22,300 barrels per day.

That's 19 refineries that can do a total of 703,500 barrels per day, about 1/5 of what all the refineries in Louisiana can do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark View Post
For the entire southeast (and being somewhat generous by including trans-Appalachia) excluding Louisiana, you have:
Alabama - 3 refineries, 156,100 bbl/day
Georgia - 1 refinery, 28,000 bbl/day
Kentucky - 3 refineries, 439,000 bbl/day
Mississippi - 4 refineries, 409,800 bbl/day (370k of which is 1 refinery, Pascagoula)
Tennessee - 1 refinery, 180,000 bbl/day

There are no refineries in Florida or the Carolinas or Virginia, so that entire 9 state region has about 1.2 million barrels per day maximum refining capacity, slightly more than 1/3 of what Louisiana has, and about 1/3 of that capacity could be eliminated by hitting Pascagoula (which is where Ingalls is, so it'd be a target anyway).
Alabama has 3 refineries producing 131,675 barrels per day.
Georgia has no refinery any more.
Kentucky has 2 refineries producing 278,500 barrels per day.
Mississippi has 3 refineries producing 377,500 barrels per day.
Tennessee has 1 refinery producing 190,000 barrels per day.

So the entire 9 state region has a capacity of less than 1 million barrels per day maximum refining capacity, slightly less than 1/3 of Louisiana

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark View Post
The other problem is crude oil production. That same 9 state region produces only 83,000 barrels of crude oil per day (5k from Florida, 22k from Alabama, 56k from Mississippi). Unless they can import oil from somewhere, even the small capacity they have will grossly exceed the inputs they receive.
Louisiana only produces 1.5% of U.S. crude oil, the rest is imported. Alabama produces 0.2%, Florida produces 0.1%, Kentucky produces 0.1% and Mississippi produces 0.5% of U.S. crude oil, and it's not imported.

Also you missed the refineries in rest of the country.

Colorado has 2 refineries producing 103,000 barrels per day
Delaware has 1 refinery producing 182,200 barrels per day
Illinois has 4 refineries producing 981,500 barrels per day
Indiana has 2 refineries producing 441,700 barrels per day
Kansas has 3 refineries producing 361,000 barrels per day
Michigan has 1 refinery producing 132,000 barrels per day
Minnesota has 2 refineries producing 388,515 barrels per day
Montana has 4 refineries producing 214,700 barrels per day
Nevada has 1 refinery producing 2,000 barrels per day
New Mexico has 2 refineries producing 123,500 barrels per day
North Dakota has 2 refineries producing 93,300 barrels per day
Ohio has 4 refineries producing 583,000 barrels per day
Oklahoma has 5 refineries producing 511,300 barrels per day
Utah has 5 refineries producing 196,830 barrels per day
Washington has 5 refineries producing 633,700 barrels per day
Wisconsin has 1 refinery producing 38,000 barrels per day
Wyoming has 6 refineries producing 177,500 barrels per day

That's 5,163,700 barrels of oil per day, nearly equivalent to the whole of Texas!

Last edited by RN7; 09-20-2017 at 08:38 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 09-20-2017, 08:31 PM
pmulcahy11b's Avatar
pmulcahy11b pmulcahy11b is offline
The Stat Guy
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 3,742
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RN7 View Post
What would be your definition of assembler Paul as I really cant figure out what to class JLG as?
They're shipped the manufactured parts sourced from manufacturers able to make the components, but without the means or assembly lines to build the items themselves. (Or maybe it was just a budget thing, or some congressman throwing some business to his district.) A company like JLG would receive all those parts and knock-down kits and put them together into whole vehicles -- assembling them, but not actually involved in the manufacturing process.
__________________
All that stuff we know -- what if we're wrong? --Science Channel

Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 09-20-2017, 09:14 PM
The Dark The Dark is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 194
Default

The numbers I had are probably a few years old - I was doing some interviews in the industry (for one of the Galveston refineries, IIRC - it was definitely Texas, but I'm not 100 percent sure exactly where).

Quote:
So yes your figure is correct as all three states account for 59.2% of US capacity. But these are peacetime figures and all three states expect for Texas are crude oil importers.
Almost every refining state is a net importer. The US produces less crude than it refines. Using the EIA's peak average monthly crude oil production from 2011-2016 and comparing it to your list refinery capacity:
Texas: 5.67 million barrels refining, 3.45 million barrels crude (+1.6 million off-shore)
Louisiana: 3.34 million barrels refining, 0.197 million barrels crude
California: 1.99 million barrels refining, 0.561 million barrels crude
Illinois: 981,500 barrels refining, 27,000 barrels crude
Washington: 633,700 barrels refining, 0 crude
Ohio: 583,000 barrels refining, 73,000 barrels crude
Pennsylvania: 576,000 barrels refining, 19,000 barrels crude
Oklahoma: 511,300 barrels refining, 447,000 barrels crude
Indiana: 441,700 barrels refining, 7,000 barrels crude
Minnesota: 388,515 barrels refining, 0 crude
Mississippi: 377,500 barrels refining, 68,000 barrels crude
Kansas: 361,000 barrels refining, 136,000 barrels crude
Kentucky: 278,500 barrels refining, 9,000 barrels crude
Montana: 214,700 barrels refining, 82,000 barrels crude
Utah: 196,830 barrels refining, 112,000 barrels crude
Tennessee: 190,000 barrels refining, 1,000 barrels crude
Delaware: 182,200 barrels refining, 0 crude
Wyoming: 177,500 barrels refining, 237,000 barrels crude
Michigan: 132,000 barrels refining, 21,000 barrels crude
Alabama: 131,675 barrels refining, 29,000 barrels crude
New Mexico: 123,500 barrels refining, 404,000 barrels crude
Colorado: 103,000 barrels refining, 336,000 barrels crude
North Dakota: 93,300 barrels refining, 1,177,000 barrels crude
Wisconsin: 38,000 barrels refining, 0 crude
West Virginia: 22,300 barrels refining, 23,000 barrels crude
Nevada: 2,000 barrels refining, 1,000 barrels crude
Alaska: 0 refining, 561,000 barrels crude

There are other dribs and drabs of crude oil production (like Florida's 6k or New York and Idaho's 1k), but Alaska's the only major crude producer without refineries. Peak crude production was 9.408 million barrels per day in 2015, slightly more than half the refinery capacity. It's also not necessarily conveniently located, with major crude oil producers having relatively small refining capacities and not necessarily located near states with significant refining capacities (*coughNorthDakotacough*).

Quote:
And if Philadelphia is likely to be glowing for years so would the big cities and oil refineries in California, Louisiana and Texas.
Most likely. The U.S. Nuclear Targets list in v2.2 includes 8 refineries in California, 7 in Louisiana, and 13 in Texas. It also includes the Delaware refinery, 3 refineries in Illinois, 1 in Indiana, 1 in Kentucky, 2 in Kansas, 1 in Mississippi, 1 in Missouri, 4 in New Jersey, 2 in Ohio, 2 in Oklahoma, 2 in Pennsylvania, and 2 in Washington. In total, 50 refineries are on the target list, and some of the strikes may have included multiple refineries located in the same city. Another 18 refineries in Canada are also on the list.

I'm not sure if striking at refining capacity is the best strategy, but it's certainly a plausible strategy, given the tendency to cluster refining capacity and the need to transport crude to refineries. Crude production tends to be more dispersed (and not necessarily near other valuable infrastructure), which makes it a less ideal target. Hitting at fuel supplies limits both civilian and military efficiency. Even if one considers the distillation of ethanol, that reduces the available food for the military and civilians, which is problematic once farm yields decline (due to the loss of modern fertilizers and pesticides, even if one ignores the drought) and the lean times start.
__________________
Writer at The Vespers War - World War I equipment for v2.2
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 09-20-2017, 10:01 PM
RN7 RN7 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,060
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark View Post
Peak crude production was 9.408 million barrels per day in 2015, slightly more than half the refinery capacity.
The U.S. actually produced 10,044 million barrels per day in November 1970. It steadily declined to as low as 3,971 million barrels in September 2008, but has been rising since 2009 and recent peak production was 9,626 million barrels in April 2015.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark View Post
Alaska: 0 refining, 561,000 barrels crude.
?

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark View Post
There are other dribs and drabs of crude oil production (like Florida's 6k or New York and Idaho's 1k), but Alaska's the only major crude producer without refineries. Peak crude production was 9.408 million barrels per day in 2015, slightly more than half the refinery capacity. It's also not necessarily conveniently located, with major crude oil producers having relatively small refining capacities and not necessarily located near states with significant refining capacities (*coughNorthDakotacough*).

Most likely. The U.S. Nuclear Targets list in v2.2 includes 8 refineries in California, 7 in Louisiana, and 13 in Texas. It also includes the Delaware refinery, 3 refineries in Illinois, 1 in Indiana, 1 in Kentucky, 2 in Kansas, 1 in Mississippi, 1 in Missouri, 4 in New Jersey, 2 in Ohio, 2 in Oklahoma, 2 in Pennsylvania, and 2 in Washington. In total, 50 refineries are on the target list, and some of the strikes may have included multiple refineries located in the same city. Another 18 refineries in Canada are also on the list.
There are also pipelines and they cross the whole of the U.S. and Canada.

North Dakota is served by 7 crude oil pipelines (Belle Fourche, Koch, Lakehead, Little Missouri, Madador, Magellan and Portal), and also 4 petroleum products pipelines, 2 natural gas liquid pipelines and 5 interstate natural gas pipelines.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark View Post
I'm not sure if striking at refining capacity is the best strategy, but it's certainly a plausible strategy, given the tendency to cluster refining capacity and the need to transport crude to refineries. Crude production tends to be more dispersed (and not necessarily near other valuable infrastructure), which makes it a less ideal target. Hitting at fuel supplies limits both civilian and military efficiency. Even if one considers the distillation of ethanol, that reduces the available food for the military and civilians, which is problematic once farm yields decline (due to the loss of modern fertilizers and pesticides, even if one ignores the drought) and the lean times start.
It would be impossible to hit every crude oil wellhead, and even more so with offshore oil rigs. But hitting the major refineries and clusters of refineries does make sense.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 09-27-2017, 09:38 PM
Targan's Avatar
Targan Targan is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 3,447
Default

Industrial Base Too ‘Brittle’ For Big War
__________________
"It is better to be feared than loved" - Nicolo Machiavelli
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 09-28-2017, 01:19 AM
RN7 RN7 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,060
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Targan View Post
But as the article states it only applies to America and other Western democracies by default, and not to China or Russia. And the reason why this has happened would be that big corporations have deemed that there is not enough demand (profit) to justify retaining mass production levels in certain industries that would be critical in war. Much easier (and more profitable) to transfer this industrial bulk to China and elsewhere while the corporations make bigger profits through cheap labour and lack of human rights.

According to this article the solution to this is 3D Printing! Absolute nonsense, a 3D printer is too slow and limited to substitute a factory and human craftsmanship no matter what its supporters say. Can you see China building loads of 3D printers to replace its factories and millions of workers.

The problem is that certain Western governments do not take enough interest in its industries. They only listen to big corporations who are only interested in profits and shareholders. If the government took a controlling stake in some industries which are important to the strategic interests of the country this would not happen. Some European countries including Germany, France and Italy protect their key national industries, and the French government would fire any director who suggested a large factory should close because its not making enough of a profit.

A prime example of this is General Motors. When it was bailed out to the tune of US$ 50 billion it was the world's biggest vehicle maker. Today GM is the 3rd or 4th largest and not even the biggest vehicle maker in America. GM repaid the U.S. tax payer by closing down factories in the U.S. and opening new ones in China and Mexico. In China or Russia the entire senior management of GM would be in prison or worse.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.