[kyrra]

California also needs a special blend that is only required in California (CARBOB). A lot of that is refined outside of the US, because there is not the capacity domestically. Cali could immediately have more fuel and cheaper prices by dropping their special requirements.

[0cf8612b2e1e]

Presumably that might get an emergency resolution in the coming weeks.

[at-fates-hands]

Last year there was some rumbling that Newsom would start to increase production because two refineries were closing sooner than later with the prospect of much higher gas prices. Since CA is really pushing renewables hard and transitioning off of fossil fuels, all the front runners for CA governor have indicated they are steadfastly against increasing production.

Gavin Newsom warms to Big Oil in climate reversal: https://calmatters.org/politics/2025/08/oil-compromise-calif...

I think your idea is a great solution to the problem and would give politicians cover with their environmental base and a win for their constituents.

[dmitrygr]

> Newsom would start to increase production

Newsom is not a refinery nor does he own any refineries. He cannot increase any production by definition.

[AnimalMuppet]

He can allow non-California-special-blend gasoline to be sold in California, as a temporary emergency measure. This does not increase any production, but it massively increases the production of gasoline that can legally be sold in California.

(As a side benefit, he can also blame the need on Trump, if the environmentalists get on his case...)

[colechristensen]

Does this have anything to do with the extensive and happening now or very recent shutdowns of several california refineries?

[flumpmaster]

Yes. Between 2020 and present The refining capacity in California declined by 35% from 1.9 MM BPD to 1.2 MM BPD with the closure of 4 refineries:

Marathon Martinez (2020) converted to renewables. Crude capacity 157 MBD, Renewables capacity 48 MBD

P66 Rodeo (2022) converted to renewables. Crude capacity 120 MBD, Renewables capacity 50 MBD

P66 LA (2025) shutdown. Crude capacity 139 MBD

Valero Bencia (2026) shutdown. Crude capacity 145 MBD

The California Air Resource Board (CARB) has promulgated a revised Cap and Invest rule that threatens the viability of the remaining refineries. All the remaining California refineries have sent CARB, the Governor and the CA legislature letters pointing this out.

California is now a net importer of gasoline following these refinery closures.

[throw03172019]

Is this an emissions reducing based blend?

[shadow28]

Yep, it's a low sulfur, lower volatility gasoline blend (https://thebreakthrough.org/issues/energy/how-california-reg...) which apparently cuts harmful exhaust emissions like carbon monoxide and NOx.

[jsbisviewtiful]

Sounds great for people and the environment. Too bad its production is now in danger thanks to horrible, ignorant decisions by this administration.

[xtiansimon]

And no MTBE, IIRC

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MTBE_controversy

[keane]

Correct, since 2002: https://arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/gasoline

[flumpmaster]

Yes.

[wilg]

Nice of Donald Trump to force us into a choice between poisoning the air and financial hardship! But at least it was for a good reason: ???

[tharmas]

He's trying to control the oil that goes to China. First, take Maduro then close the Straight of Hormuz (to prevent oil going to China). The rest is just collateral damage as far as he's concerned.

This is all about keeping China down, and preserving American Hegemony. That's his definition of "making America great again". He doesn't care that you're paying more for food, gasoline, etc. and that the rest of the third world will soon be starving.

Gulf States get a swap line (can't let Wall St crash), but you get no bail out because the elites don't care that you are hurting. They care about the Gulf States hurting because that ultimately means Wall St will crash which would hurt the Billionaire elites.

So to sum up, the reason is maintain America's Hegemony and protect the Billionaire class.

[CamperBob2]

Dogs and cats were being eaten, you see. And did you hear her laugh?

[ChoGGi]

Not sure why you're being down voted, I've sadly heard those exact arguments.

[CamperBob2]

Nowadays, this place is basically where Trumpers go to mingle with neo-Luddites.

I don't get it either, but that's the audience that has been cultivated.

[annoyingnoob]

We could die chocking on the air that produces too. Understand the history in CA and the reasons we have special gas. Would you really want to hurt children for cheaper gas? Really?

https://today.usc.edu/las-environmental-success-story-cleane...

[GenerWork]

Those rules around special gasoline were made when both federal and California car exhaust regulations were much looser than today, and electric cars were a complete pipe dream. I've seen estimates ranging for savings from $.25 to $1 per gallon if California dropped the requirements.

>Would you really want to hurt children for cheaper gas?

Nice appeal to emotion.

[jshen]

You didn't really address his main point. Will this lead to higher levels of pollution that will have real health consequences? Oddly you suggest it's not valid to raise concerns around health consequences.

[annoyingnoob]

How does ignoring real harm help? Because it cost you less?

https://www.clarity.io/blog/how-air-pollution-affects-childr...

https://www.clarity.io/blog/a-closer-look-at-los-angeles-inf...

"Poor air quality does not affect all parts of LA equally. Communities of color and low-income residents are disproportionately impacted by polluted air. In certain areas, traffic-related emissions, including nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), and benzene concentrations, are up to 60% higher.

A study led by UCLA found that the air in disadvantaged neighborhoods contained not only more fine particulate matter, but also more toxic particulates as well. Places facing the most socioeconomic disadvantages “experience about 65% higher toxicity than people in the most advantaged group,” according to Suzanne Paulson, UCLA professor of atmospheric and oceanic sciences and the senior author of the study.

These same groups often have less access to health care and good nutrition, putting them at an even greater health risk. Everyone deserves to breathe clean air, and communities of color and low-income residents are unfortunately facing the worst of LA’s notorious smog."

Saving a buck at the expense of someone with no control of their situation is a choice.

https://ifunny.co/picture/yes-the-planet-got-destroyed-but-f...

[hparadiz]

It's more emotional to drop an important regulation over a dollar. I was already paying $5 for premium before all this and now it's $5.75. Big deal.

I'd rather have clearer skies.

[annoyingnoob]

You obviously never loved through LA Smog. You never had to stay inside or skip school because the air was too dirty to breathe. Take a look at how it was: https://www.ccair.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/LA-smog.jpg

Cars may burn cleaner but they still burn, and there are more of them than ever.

Easing economic pain in exchange for health pain is nonsensical. Breathe from your own tailpipe if its no big deal.

[oceanplexian]

Texas has plenty of refineries and the children there aren’t dying or choking on the air.

[0cf8612b2e1e]

It has to do with LA geography. The surrounding landscape traps the pollution so it cannot dissipate away from the city.

[annoyingnoob]

Different geography/topology. https://www.clarity.io/blog/a-closer-look-at-los-angeles-inf...

[wat10000]

I'm certain the number of children suffering illness or even dying due to air pollution from Texas refineries is more than zero. Not very high, I imagine, but not zero. There is a very real human cost to these things which we really like to ignore.

[JumpCrisscross]

> Would you really want to hurt children for cheaper gas? Really?

Yes. Most voters would, too. "Cheaper gas" understates how serious even a $20/week increase in living costs can be for a household on the margin.

[annoyingnoob]

I'm not sure that most voters that have lived through smog in SoCal would vote for that. It is easy to decide that its okay to pollute a place where you don't live.

[throwaway-11-1]

Love living in the country with the highest GDP per capita than hearing stuff like this.

[JumpCrisscross]

> Love living in the country with the highest GDP per capita than hearing stuff like this

It's reality. It doesn't go away if you ignore it. Aversion to higher gas prices isn't a luxury problem for a lot of people. Any realistic strategy for an energy transition has to acknowledge and accomodate that.

[wat10000]

Not sure what living in Monaco has to do with gas prices in California.