In a 42 gallon barrel of crude oil, the following volume and kind of products are refined on average. Some products will be more or less depending on the quality of the barrel of crude oil.
Unleaded gasoline, 15 gallons or 35.7% Kerosene or Jet fuel, 10 gallons or 23.8% Fuel oil (diesel fuel and heating/furnace oil) 9 gallons or 21.4% Heavy products (engine oil, gear oil, grease, tar/asphalt, bitumen & plastics) 4 gallons or 9.5% Naphtha, 4 gallons or 9.5%
Heavy crude types will produce less unleaded gasoline, kerosene and diesel fuel but more complex hydrocarbons that are used to make kevlar, resins for glue and fiberglass, and advanced plastics that show up in many everyday US goods and products.
Hey ho. I knew it was a mistake. I've just read each of your references. None are in a science journal, and only one is by a scientist (Fred Singer). He's one of the reasons I'm still only 95% certain of global warming. I hope you're right, I fear you're wrong, and I really AM going silent now.
First off, Newtonian mechanics is very much true at non-relativistic velocities. The special theory of relativity is simply a more refined and general expression of Newton's work; both general and special relativity were proven some time ago. Even before there was physical proof, Einstein's theories were widely accepted due largely to the rigorous mathematical work supporting them. He didn't have to fake the data.
"The research itself was examined minutely after the scandal broke, and as I recall, the science was not found to be flawed, only the PR."
Really, reviewed by whom? We're not talking about the "science", we're talking about the data -- the fake data.
Global warming is based on the premise that a small rapid increase in global CO2 levels will trigger a cascade of events leading a rise in global temperatures sufficient to melt the ice caps, raise sea levels and drown New York and London. Furthermore, an alleged spike in CO2 levels over the past few decades attributed to man-made sources will be the tipping point for environmental disaster.
The basic premise is flawed: global temperatures are regulated largely by solar output and water vapor, CO2 is a very poor "greenhouse" gas compared to water vapor and there's plenty of experimental physics performed on gases over the past century supporting that fact.
Re. your comment on the East Anglia CRU E-mail fiasco: Phil Jones was caught red-handed lying -- plain and simple. And this is not the only case where climate data was falsified to fit the prevailing social narrative.
You have over simplified the subject. Crude oil is either parafinic or aromatic, sweet or sour, with a certain level of light ends (butanes and propane ) You deserve credit for pointing out crude oil isn't so simple. Moreover, what comes from crude oil is greatly dependent on the processes it goes through in a "refinery".
I apologize for the simplicity. I was so angry with our POTUS who continues to hammer the oil companies for higher taxes and less subsidies without mentioning or doing anything about other businesses that have higher profit margins than oil companies, larger subsidies and have much less risk than oil companies. And, oil is used in the manufacturing of a great many products that most folks don't realize.
This country cannot stand another 4 years of the present administration!