Argus Group Three RBOB
Argus recently launched a calculated assessment for reformulated gasoline in Group Three. This move comes following recent changes that were made in gasoline specifications for the Denver, Colorado, area in 2024.
Summertime conventional gasoline sales in Denver, Colorado ended on 7 November 2023 when the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) mandated reformulated gasoline for the metropolitan area during the summer season. The shift in specifications was first announced by the EPA ruling in November 2022 when it found the region was not meeting federal ozone standards. Reformulated gasoline burns cleaner than its conventional counterpart but is also a more expensive fuel to produce.
For the winter months, Denver gasoline prices will likely change little from years past. The Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) levels for reformulated gasoline will likely closely mimic those seen in Group Three’s conventional gasoline market for the southern portion of the midcontinent.
But come summer – which is defined as 1 June through 15 September – Denver area retailers will be required to sell 7.4 RVP reformulated gasoline, as opposed to a prior requirement of 7.8 RVP conventional fuel. This is expected to widen Denver's premium to conventional prices in nearby regions.
Denver reformulated gasoline's premium to sub-octane gasoline prices in adjacent states such as Oklahoma and Kansas should be similar to spreads between Gulf coast CBOB and Gulf coast RBOB. Denver's reformulated gasoline supply will come from a combination of shipments from the midcontinent and Gulf coast markets, as well as from Suncor's 103,000 b/d refinery in nearby Commerce City, Colorado.
Group Three RBOB Methodology
Prices for Regular RBOB are published year-round for 10,000 bl on a fob Tulsa, Oklahoma basis.
Prices are calculated by applying the spread between the prompt Argus Regular Texas Destination RBOB and Regular Colonial CBOB from the US Gulf coast markets to the respective prompt Magellan suboctane V grade price. The use of the spread value mitigates the end-of-summer shift in Colonial RVP specifications.
Your Go-To Source for Reliable Road Fuel Prices
As a trusted source in the industry, Argus delivers accurate, timely pricing for gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, RINs, ethanol, and more. Our data equips buyers, sellers, and refiners with the precision necessary to operate confidently in the dynamic market.
Explore our services and discover how we can support your business in mastering market dynamics.
Author: Paul Dahlgren, Editor, Refined Products Americas – Gasoline Markets
Spotlight content
Related news
US investigates Brazil barriers to US ethanol
US investigates Brazil barriers to US ethanol
Houston, 16 July (Argus) — The US Trade Representative (USTR) has launched an investigation into Brazilian trade practices that include import barriers against US ethanol. The USTR investigation will look at Brazilian trade barriers that US ambassador Jamieson Greer claims "restrict the ability of US exporters to access its market." "Brazil's tariff and non-tariff barriers merit a thorough investigation, and potentially, responsive action," he said. The notice for the investigation said US ethanol producers are unfairly affected by an 18pc tariff that Brazil imposes on US ethanol exports. The US and Brazil are the two largest ethanol-producing countries, combining for 52pc and 28pc of global production, respectively, according to data from the Renewable Fuels Association, an ethanol trade group. US exports to Brazil averaged 3,800 b/d, or just 2.7pc of overall US exports from January to May, according to US Department of Agriculture data. Exports to Brazil in 2024 were valued at $53mn, down from a peak of $761mn in 2018, according to the investigation notice. The US imported just 491 b/d from Brazil during the first five months of the year, equivalent to 81pc of total ethanol imports. The US imposes a combined 12.5pc tariff on Brazilian ethanol, which includes the blanket 10pc tariff announced in April and the existing 2.5pc duty. Growth Energy, another US ethanol trade organization, applauded the investigation. "Today's action by USTR is a sign that the old days of Brazil enjoying unfettered access to the US ethanol market while unfairly putting a tariff on American ethanol imports could soon come to an end," chief executive Emily Skor said. US President Donald Trump's administration earlier this year specifically noted Brazilian trade barriers against US ethanol as unfair and worth addressing. Trump has recently threatened to impose a 50pc tariff on Brazilian imports starting 1 August, but tied those threats to the country's prosecution of former president Jair Bolsonaro for trying to overthrow elections in 2022. The Trump administration has discouraged Brazilian ethanol imports in other ways, including by proposing to revamp a long-running biofuel blend mandate by reducing lucrative credits for fuels made abroad. Last year, the Renewable Fuels Association and Growth Energy threatened to not cooperate with Brazil on ethanol or sustainable aviation fuel partnerships if the country did not eliminate the tariff. Reducing trade barriers in Brazil has been a longtime priority for the US ethanol lobby, which sees the potential to compete more in Brazil's Renovabio biofuel program. USTR will accept comments through 18 August with a hearing for the investigation scheduled for 3 September. By Payne Williams Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
US refiners lobby to revive expired biofuel credits
US refiners lobby to revive expired biofuel credits
New York, 16 July (Argus) — A group of small oil refiners asked US officials at a recent meeting to not just grant exemptions from years-old biofuel blend mandates but to also provide lucrative program credits they can sell to other companies. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed record-high biofuel blend mandates for the next two years, but farm groups fear that a backlog of exemption requests threaten those targets. There are more than 180 unresolved exemption requests stretching over 10 years after courts struck down various denials during former-president Joe Biden's term. Under the Renewable Fuel Standard, oil refiners and importers must annually blend biofuels or buy Renewable Identification Number (RIN) credits from those that do. But refiners that process 75,000 b/d or less of crude and can prove "disproportionate economic hardship" are able to request full exemptions which can mean tens of millions of dollars in reduced compliance costs. In a 20 May meeting with EPA officials, a coalition of small refiners made the case that President Donald Trump's administration should not just grant broad relief from 2019-2022 mandates but also issue "replacement RINs" for any refiners that already complied. EPA should issue these RINs "with adequate lead time" before compliance deadlines and ensure they have "adequate shelf life", according to a proposal shared with EPA by a coalition lawyer and obtained by Argus through a Freedom of Information Act request. The agency should even consider giving companies more credits than they submitted if RINs are cheaper now, the group argued. RINs from those years are otherwise expired and would be useless if returned as is. "Hardship relief is more critical now than ever", the group of 14 companies argues, given rising biofuel quotas. The issue is politically tricky for EPA, since widespread waivers threaten biofuel and crop demand, and has been the subject of numerous court fights over the years. The first Trump administration handed out exemptions generously , but current officials have not yet staked out a clear position. EPA told Argus it is taking steps "to reduce the backlog as soon as possible". Living RIN the past EPA could potentially return credits on a staggered timeline or impose conditions on their use to avert market turmoil, according to lawyers and lobbyists experienced in waiver issues. The proposal alludes to this, noting however that "any conditions on RIN return that are intended to address potential market reactions must strike the appropriate balance to ensure flexibility to small refineries". Biofuel groups have lobbied against retroactive waivers but said that EPA could minimize the damage by making other oil companies blend more biofuels. The agency should ensure that any exemptions "will be made up in the market", said Emily Skor, president of ethanol lobby Growth Energy, at a hearing last week. But the refiners' proposal argues that EPA is not required to do so if it grants exemptions retroactively. The agency has estimated future exemptions when calculating the percentage of biofuels individual refiners must blend — frustrating large producers that then shoulder more of the burden of meeting high-level targets — but doing the same with past-year waivers is more legally risky. The small refiners float a less aggressive approach for other compliance years. The proposal notably makes no reference to petitions for relief from 2016-2018 quotas. EPA under Biden rejected 31 petitions for those years but did not require companies to surrender additional RINs, potentially making any push for extra relief a tougher sell despite courts' skepticism of the underlying denials. And for 2023 and beyond, the refiners say that EPA should rely on "merit-driven scoring". EPA already consults with the Department of Energy, which scores hardship for individual applicants, though the importance of this feedback has varied over the program's history. The coalition also wants EPA to rescind three 2023 compliance year denials issued during the final days of Biden's term, which affected two Calumet refineries and one CVR Energy refinery. RINto the future The coalition's proposal is notable since small refiners — apart from a handful recently calling for a "seat at the table" — have largely not publicized their asks of the Trump administration, leading traders to speculate wildly on policy shifts. RIN prices have been volatile as a result. The coalition includes 14 companies that submitted 41 petitions that courts have told EPA to reconsider as well as 37 requests for more recent years, the proposal says. They are represented by independent attorney Claudia O'Brien, who did not respond to a request for comment. The documents obtained by Argus do not list all companies involved in the effort, but lawyers for Calumet, Par Pacific and Placid Refining were scheduled to attend the May meeting in person with top EPA appointees Aaron Szabo and Alexander Dominguez, while others attended virtually. O'Brien said in a separate email that Hunt Refining, REH Company, and Ergon were part of the coalition. The policy requests represent the position of one group and not necessarily all 34 refineries EPA estimates are eligible for future waivers. It is not clear how officials responded at the meeting or what options they are weighing now. EPA wants to finalize new blend mandates before November and has said it plans to communicate its approach to exemptions beforehand. By Cole Martin Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Q&A: Ships to use bioblends to comply with new IMO rule
Q&A: Ships to use bioblends to comply with new IMO rule
Sao Paulo, 15 July (Argus) — Bioblends are the best short-term option for ships to comply with International Maritime Organization (IMO) regulations set to be approved in October, according to Andrea Lucchesi , professor at the University of Sao Paulo and an expert on the impact of maritime regulations. Lucchesi, who presented research on the potential economic impacts of the IMO-approved carbon pricing mechanism at the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) 83 in April, spoke to Argus about the recent IMO agreement and the future of decarbonization in shipping. Edited highlights follow. Under the current IMO carbon pricing mechanism, which fuel emerges as the main solution for decarbonization? New studies are being conducted in this regard. As the details of the mechanism will still be defined in October, there is no clarity regarding the next bunker fuels, especially because we cannot just consider the decarbonization potential, but also the cost of port infrastructure and vessel adaptation. Also, the ports will adapt very slowly. What I can say is that the first fuel to be adopted in the transition phase will be the marine biofuel blends, because of their economic viability, emissions reduction potential and supply availability. Is the agreement, as it progressed in MEPC 83, economically and environmentally successful? The agreement approved on 11 April is historic. It is the result of more than seven years of negotiation and is the first to regulate an entire sector of the economy at the international level. Therefore, we consider the agreement a success, even though it has been modified from its initial design, and it is sufficient to achieve the goal of decarbonizing the maritime sector by 2050. Have the GHG reduction targets been made too flexible over the many years of debate? The study I conducted for the IMO aimed to measure the impact of this pricing mechanism, because if we try to accelerate decarbonization beyond market capacity, we will see very strong consequences, especially in developing countries. A more rigid goal is not appropriate. Do you believe the agreement will be approved in October as it was designed, despite the US opposing the measure? Yes. The US will try to influence the matter, but there is considerable support for the measures. They have already been widely debated in recent years. Is the mechanism, as it progressed in the April meetings, economically viable for the entire maritime chain to adapt? The agreement will impact countries very differently. We were careful to assess the impacts on food inflation and the potential impact on malnutrition in developing countries. There will be socioeconomic impacts, so the measures needed to be gradual, as they will be. For example, there needs to be time for ships to be retrofitted, investment in technical measures to increase efficiency, and fuel replacement. Another point is that port technology needs to be adapted. Therefore, the mechanism should begin pricing in 2028, with reduction targets ranging from a modest 4-17pc for the first year. In any case, the sector will have to adapt, because the agreement will be effective in punishing those who do not comply. This agreement will work. The IMO is an institution with the capacity to effectively monitor and punish, and there are mechanisms in place to do so. How much is expected to be raised from the carbon pricing? The revenue generation potential, as it stands today, is $1bn/yr in the initial years, with a growth trend in subsequent years. This revenue is intended to mitigate the socioeconomic impacts of the mechanism on small island nations and developing countries. By Gabriel Tassi Lara and Natalia Coelho Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
US claims energy-focused Indonesia trade deal
US claims energy-focused Indonesia trade deal
Washington, 15 July (Argus) — President Donald Trump said today he has secured a trade deal with Indonesia that would involve additional sales of US energy and agricultural commodities and Boeing aircraft. The deal, which Jakarta has yet to confirm, would commit Indonesia to buying $15bn worth of US energy commodities, $4.5bn of agricultural products and 50 Boeing aircraft, Trump said via his social media platform. Speaking to reporters earlier on Tuesday, Trump said the US, under the deal, would impose a 19pc tariff on all imports from Indonesia while that country would impose no tariffs on US products. Trump said he finalized the trade deal after speaking with Indonesia's "Highly Respected President" Prabowo Subianto Tuesday morning. Prabowo has just concluded a trade deal with the EU, which would result in mutual lowering of tariffs on trade. No other details on the US-Indonesia deal were immediately available from the White House and US trade agencies. Trump last week threatened to impose a 32pc tariff on all imports from Indonesia, beginning on 1 August. Indonesia's government has already directed state-owned Pertamina to assess the potential for importing refined products from the US. That directive coincided with a parallel push by Pertamina to shift away from importing oil products from Singapore and import more fuel from the Middle East and the US. The Trump administration since 5 April has been charging a 10pc extra "Liberation Day" tariff on most imports — energy commodities and critical minerals are exceptions — from Indonesia and nearly every foreign trade partner. Trump last week publicized letters sent to leaders of 24 countries, including Indonesia, dictating new, higher tariff rates he said would apply beginning on 1 August. The Trump White House said in April it expected to sign "90 deals in 90 days" following his "Liberation Day" tariffs. The US has clinched only one limited trade deal, which keeps in place a 10pc tariff on US imports from the UK while granting a lower-tariff import quota for UK-made cars. Trump has announced a deal with Vietnam, setting tariffs at 20pc, but other terms remain unknown. A preliminary trade deal with China, agreed in early May, established a separate 10 August deadline for reaching an agreement on tariffs. The US administration is engaged in talks with the EU, Canada and Mexico despite Trump's threats to raise tariffs on imports from those destinations to 30-35pc. Brazil, on the other hand, said it would reciprocate with higher tariffs on US products after Trump threatened to impose a 50pc tariff on imports from Brazil. Trump has justified imposing his "Liberation Day" tariffs by citing an economic emergency caused by allegedly unfair trade practices in foreign countries. His emergency-based tariff authority is facing challenges in US courts, with two lower-level courts ruling already in May that the White House could not impose such tariffs. The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit will hold a hearing on 31 July in a case pitting the administration against a group of plaintiffs, including many US states. The US Court of International Trade, in an initial ruling on 28 May, found that Trump's emergency tariffs were unlawful and ordered the administration to rescind the import taxes and to refund already collected duties. The appeals court has suspended that decision until at least the 31 July hearing. By Haik Gugarats Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.