2026-04-02T22:48:36-0400 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻（CBS News）
多年来，加州政界领导人一直指责石油公司存在价格欺诈行为。
然而，哥伦比亚广播公司新闻加州分社历时六个月的调查揭露了一个复杂的现实：该州孤立的燃油市场受到州政策、炼油厂关闭和全球供应风险的独特影响。
哥伦比亚广播公司新闻加州调查结果：
- 加州汽油价格为何更高： 更高的税费、劳动力和商业成本，加上环保项目、监管规定以及该州独特的燃油配方，推高了基础油价。
- 政治叙事正在转变： 在未能证明存在价格欺诈——且受两家关闭的炼油厂的影响冲击后——州级领导人如今公开承认，有必要出台激励措施留住石油企业。
- 炼油厂为何纷纷撤离： 成本上升、监管趋严、长期政策不确定性以及回报率不断缩水
- 全球冲突为何会产生影响： 加州对海外炼油业务的依赖日益增强，这加剧了市场波动——也印证了行业长期以来的警告：将炼油业务外包会加剧价格飙升的风险。
每加仑6美元
加州司机支付着全美最高的汽油价格。随着中东冲突推高全球油价，加州汽油继续保持全国最贵，每加仑售价突破6美元。
上一次加州汽油价格触及6美元时，州长加文·纽瑟姆便开始指责石油公司存在价格欺诈。加州占议会多数席位的民主党州议会召开了由纳税人出资的“反价格欺诈”特别会议，最终通过了一项旨在限制石油公司利润、强制其公开账簿的法案。
两年多后，州政府官员表示，他们未发现任何非法价格欺诈的证据。相反，两家炼油厂关闭，带走了该州近20%的炼油产能。
如今，加州正转向亚洲炼油厂，以生产更多该州特配方的汽油。亚洲的环保标准不如加州严格，炼油商还需将汽油跨半个地球运回加州。除了加剧污染外，跨太平洋运输汽油可能需要数周时间，各机构负责人和石油行业高管均认为，这会导致供应延误和波动，在当地炼油厂停产或全球供应短缺时，进一步推高价格飙升的风险。
当前的中东冲突凸显了这一隐患，中国已因本国供应短缺停止出口燃料。与此同时，石油行业辩称，拟议的监管改革可能会提高石油公司继续在加州炼油的成本，最终会促使更多炼油业务外包。
加州汽油本就价格更高的原因
即便在近期炼油厂关闭和全球冲突发生之前，加州司机就已因多重原因支付着全美最高的汽油价格。
每加仑汽油成本中约有45%是全美统一的支出。这包括当前所有人都需承担的全球原油价格，以及各州司机均需缴纳的18美分联邦燃油税。
然而，剩余55%的成本则包含加州特有的支出。
分销和炼油成本在加州更高，约占每加仑油价的28%。
加州特有的燃油配方使炼油成本每加仑增加约10至15美分。此外，还有61美分的州消费税和约2美分的地下储存费。
加州的碳总量管制与交易制度每加仑额外收取约23美分，而低碳燃料标准（LCFS）又增加了14美分的成本。
除此之外，还要缴纳州和地方销售税。
以每加仑6美元计算，给普通尺寸的油箱加满油，就要多花20美元。
以下是加州特有的每加仑成本明细：
销售税（2%）
- 州销售税：平均2.25%
- 地方/特区税：平均1%
州气候项目（10%）
- 碳总量管制与交易制度：23美分
- 低碳燃料标准：14美分
基础税费（15%）
- 州消费税：61美分
- 地下储存费：2美分
炼油成本（13%）
- 加州特有的燃油配方：10-15美分
分销成本（15%）
联邦税（5%）
原油成本（40%）**
加州大学伯克利分校经济学家塞韦林·博伦斯坦表示，还有一种更难解释的现象——持续存在的“神秘附加费”。这一无法解释的差价最早出现在2015年左右，紧随一场重大炼油厂停产事故之后，此后便一直存在。
博伦斯坦指出，尽管监管和税收设定了价格基线，但价格飙升往往由供应中断推动，尤其是在加州这种孤立的燃油市场中。
炼油商指出，加州的运营成本更高——从劳动力到能源成本都不例外，并表示大部分额外成本出现在燃油离开炼油厂后，即分销和零售环节。
博伦斯坦指出，这一情况在2015年神秘附加费出现之前就已存在。
价格欺诈指控
多年来，州级领导人一直将高油价归咎于石油公司，并于2023年召开了由纳税人出资的反价格欺诈特别会议。
此次会议最终催生了两项新的反价格欺诈法案。其中一项法案设立了新的监管机制，要求石油公司公开账簿，让监管机构更清晰地了解炼油厂的利润和运营情况。另一项法案则在价格飙升期间限制炼油厂的利润率，但该法案现已暂停执行。
但两年过去后，州政府官员表示，他们未发现任何非法价格欺诈的证据。
加州自然资源部长韦德·克劳福特表示，州政府已查明价格飙升背后的因素，但并未将责任归咎于石油公司的价格欺诈行为。
“我们已确定了导致价格飙升的某些动态因素，”克劳福特说。
当被问及是否有证据证明存在价格欺诈时，克劳福特补充道，他不会“贸然指责任何人”。
这与多年来将主要责任归咎于石油行业的政治宣传形成了鲜明对比。
哥伦比亚广播公司新闻加州调查团队曾联系州长办公室和负责监管多项石油行业反对政策的加州空气资源委员会，两者均拒绝了采访请求。
该州政府转而请克劳福特出面，他强调，州政府正努力在油价可负担性与长期气候目标之间取得平衡。
炼油商辩称，这些政策可能会适得其反。
雪佛龙里奇蒙炼油厂经理托利·格雷夫斯表示，利润上限法案无视该行业的波动性：
“那些盈利的月份是我们唯一获利的时机……如果你限制盈利月份的利润，却不支持亏损月份，企业就无法生存。”格雷夫斯说。
炼油厂为何纷纷撤离
反价格欺诈会议召开后，两家大型炼油厂——位于旧金山湾区的瓦莱罗炼油厂和洛杉矶地区的威尔明顿菲利普斯66炼油厂——相继关闭，带走了数百个工作岗位，占该州汽油产能的近五分之一。
这一损失加剧了本就被专家称为“能源孤岛”的加州的供应紧张状况——该州没有连接其他州的大型汽油输油管道。
炼油厂越少，本地产能就越低，对油价的压力也就越大，尤其是在停产或需求高涨期间。
在加州仅剩的几家炼油厂之一——里奇蒙雪佛龙炼油厂内，行业领袖们指出了在该州开展业务的高昂成本。
“对炼油商来说，在加州做生意非常艰难，”格雷夫斯说。
这家雪佛龙炼油厂每天生产的汽油足够满足北加州五分之一汽车的需求，同时供应从萨克拉门托到圣何塞地区约60%的航空燃油，而这些燃油在加州的生产成本比其他任何地方都高。
格雷夫斯表示，更高的劳动力、能源和监管成本共同推高了生产成本，最终这些成本都会转嫁到司机身上。
加州清洁环保的特种汽油还需要专门的生产工艺。
“加州以外只有少数几家炼油厂能够生产加州标准的汽油，”雪佛龙政府事务高级经理布莱恩·胡宾格说道。他指出，生产这种特种配方燃油“需要数十亿美元的投资”。
这些要求，加上州政府逐步淘汰化石燃料转型过程中的长期不确定性，使得企业更难证明继续投资的合理性。
“我们每年仅维持运营就要花费数亿美元，”格雷夫斯说。“除非情况有所改变，否则我们不会愿意在加州投资建设炼油厂。”
对外国燃油的依赖日益增强
随着炼油产能下降，加州正越来越多地转向海外炼油商，尤其是亚洲的炼油厂，以生产该州特配方的汽油。
尽管海外炼油商能够生产加州要求的低碳汽油，但他们不必遵守加州炼油厂同样严格的环保标准。除了当地污染问题外，他们生产的汽油需要跨洋运输，各环境机构负责人均承认，这也会加剧对环境的破坏。
“加州本土生产的汽油造成的污染更少，”克劳福特说。
此外，从亚洲驶来的油轮可能需要数周时间才能抵达加州，这带来了新的供应脆弱性。这种延误意味着，任何 disruption——从炼油厂停产到像伊朗战争这样的全球冲突——都可能迅速收紧供应并推高油价。
亚洲目前正努力满足本国市场的供应需求。尤其是中国，已经限制了燃料出口。
不过，能源分析师指出，全球市场往往会随时间调整——尽管短期 disruption可能会导致临时的价格飙升。
“如果炼油厂遇到了意外问题，就会推高油价，伤害加州民众，而我们需要三周时间才能从其他地方获得补给，”雪佛龙总裁安迪·瓦尔茨说。
政治对话的转变
多年来将矛头对准石油公司后，州级领导人如今表示，对话正在演变。
“我多年来一直在谈论这个问题，对吧？直到两家炼油厂关闭，他们才说，‘哦，也许他们并没有在搞价格欺诈’，”瓦尔茨说。
议员们如今正在权衡如何平衡气候目标与维持稳定且可负担的燃料供应以满足当前能源需求的必要性。
“当那份报告出炉，纽瑟姆州长无法证明存在价格欺诈时，或许就是转变的开始，”加州州参议员布莱恩·琼斯（R-圣地亚哥）说道。
加州已暂时暂停了一项新的反价格欺诈法案，该法案本可限制石油公司在价格飙升期间的利润。尽管炼油商表示该法案仍有效，并警告称，拟议的加州碳总量管制与投资计划改革可能会让在海外炼制汽油比在本土更划算。
“我认为，如果选民们意识到问题出在政策上，他们会说，‘嘿，我不该付这么多钱。为什么内华达州的油价便宜一美元？’”瓦尔茨说。“选民可以改变这种局面。”
如今的争论不再仅仅是谁该负责，而是加州如何在短期内不推高油价的前提下推进能源转型。
对于像塞雷娜·洛佩斯这样每天通勤往返两小时上班的人来说，油价上涨的影响立竿见影。
“有一次我加了大约100美元的油……我当时就想，我不知道自己现在在做什么，”她说。
即便油价上涨，汽油需求依然稳定，司机们仍在承受压力。
随着加州向更清洁的能源未来迈进，未来的关键挑战不仅是减少排放，还要在此期间确保燃油供应可靠且价格可负担。
州长负责任命机构负责人，并参与制定加州的能源和环境政策——这些决策直接影响汽油价格。
随着新州长选举的临近，这些政策——以及汽油价格——可能很快就会发生变化。
California gas prices are the highest in the U.S., but there’s no proof of price gouging. Here’s why.
2026-04-02T22:48:36-0400 / CBS News
For years, California leaders accused oil companies of price gouging.
Instead, a six-month-long CBS News California investigation revealed a complicated reality shaped by state policies, refinery closures, and global supply risks that uniquely impact California’s isolated fuel market.
What CBS News California Investigates found:
- Why California gas costs more: Higher taxes, labor and business costs, combined with environmental programs, regulations, and the state’s unique fuel blend, drive up baseline prices.
- The political narrative is shifting: After failing to prove price gouging — and grappling with the impact of two shuttered refineries — state leaders are now publicly acknowledging the need to incentivize oil companies to stay.
- Why refineries are leaving: Rising costs, increasing regulations, long-term policy uncertainty, and shrinking returns
- Why global conflict matters: California’s growing reliance on overseas refining is increasing volatility — and validating long-standing industry warnings that outsourcing refining increases the risk of price spikes.
$6 per gallon
California drivers pay the highest gas prices in the nation. As the conflict in the Middle East increases gas prices globally, California gas continues to be the most expensive in the nation, rising above $6 a gallon.
Last time gas hit $6 a gallon in California, Gov. Gavin Newsom began accusing oil companies of price gouging. California’s supermajority Democratic legislature held a taxpayer-funded “price gouging” special session, culminating with legislation that was intended to cap oil company profits and force them to open their books.
More than two years later, state officials say they found no evidence of illegal price gouging. Instead, two refineries shut down, taking nearly 20% of the state’s refining capacity.
California is now outsourcing to Asian refineries to make more of California’s special gas blend. Environmental standards aren’t as strict in Asia, and the refiners have to ship the gas back to California halfway around the world. In addition to increased pollution, transporting gas across the Pacific can take weeks, which agency heads and oil industry executives agree leads to delays and supply volatility, increasing the risk of price spikes during local refinery outages or global shortages.
The current Middle East conflict is highlighting the concern, as China has already stopped exporting fuel due to shortages in Asia. Meanwhile, the oil industry argues that proposed regulatory changes could make it more expensive for oil companies to continue refining in California, ultimately incentivizing outsourcing more refining.
Why gas already costs more in California
Even before recent refinery closures and the global conflict, California drivers paid the highest gas prices in the nation for several reasons.
Roughly 45% of the cost of every gallon of gas is made up of costs that are consistent across the country. That includes the global price of crude, which is higher for everyone right now, and an 18-cent federal tax that drivers pay in every state.
However, the remaining 55% of each gallon of gas includes California-specific costs.
Distribution and refining costs, which are more expensive in California, account for roughly 28% of every gallon.
California’s special gas blend tacks on roughly 10-15 cents per gallon to refining costs. Then there’s a 61-cent state excise tax and roughly 2 cents attributed to underground storage fees.
California’s cap-and-trade tacks on roughly 23 cents to every gallon, and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) adds another 14 cents.
On top of that, there are state and local sales taxes.
At $6 per gallon, that adds up to an additional $20 every time you fill up an average-sized tank.
Here’s a current breakdown of California-specific costs per gallon:
Sales taxes (2%)
- State sales tax: 2.25% average
- Local/special district taxes: 1% average
State climate programs (10%)
- Cap-and-Trade: 23 cents
- Low Carbon Fuel Standard: 14 cents
Base taxes and fees (15%)
- State excise tax: 61 cents
- Underground storage fee: 2 cents
Refining (13%)
- CA special gas blend 10-15 cents
**Distribution (15%)
Federal tax (5%)
Crude oil costs (40%)**
UC Berkeley economist Severin Borenstein says there’s also something harder to explain — a persistent “mystery surcharge.”That unexplained gap first appeared around 2015, following a major refinery outage, and has remained ever since.
While regulations and taxes set the baseline, Borenstein says price spikes are often driven by supply disruptions, especially in California’s isolated fuel market.
Refiners point to higher operating costs in California — from labor to energy — and say much of the added cost occurs after fuel leaves the refinery, at the distribution and retail level.
Borenstein notes that this was true before the mystery surcharge appeared in 2015.
Price gouging
For years, state leaders blamed oil companies for high gas prices and launched a taxpayer-funded price gouging special session in 2023.
The session culminated in two new price-gouging laws. One law created new oversight, requiring oil companies to open their books and giving regulators more visibility into refinery profits and operations. Another capped refinery profit margins during price spikes, though that law has since been paused.
But after two years, state officials say they found no evidence of illegal price gouging.
California’s Natural Resources Secretary Wade Crowfoot said the state identified factors behind price spikes, but stopped short of blaming oil companies for price gouging.
“We’ve identified certain dynamics that were creating those price spikes,” Crowfoot said.
Pressed on whether there was proof of price gouging, Crowfoot added that he would not “be in a position to point a finger.”
That marks a shift from years of political messaging that placed primary blame on the oil industry.
CBS News California Investigates reached out to the Governor’s Office and the California Air Resources Board, which regulates many of the policies the oil industry opposes. Both declined interview requests.
The administration instead pointed to Crowfoot, who emphasized the state is trying to balance affordability with long-term climate goals.
Refiners argue those policies could backfire.
Tolly Graves, manager of the Chevron Richmond refinery, said profit caps ignore how volatile the business is:
“Those good months are the only way we make a profit… if you cap the good months but don’t support the bad ones, it creates an unviable business,” Graves said.
Why refineries are leaving
Following the price gouging session, two major refineries — Valero in the San Francisco Bay Area and Wilmington Phillips 66 in the Los Angeles area — have shut down, taking hundreds of jobs and nearly one-fifth of the state’s gasoline production with them.
That loss tightens supply in a state that already operates as what experts describe as an “energy island” — with no major pipelines bringing in gasoline from other states.
Fewer refineries mean less in-state production and more pressure on prices, especially during outages or high demand.
Inside the Richmond Chevron, one of California’s remaining refineries, industry leaders pointed to the cost of doing business in the state.
“California is a tough place to do business for refiners,” Graves said.
Every day, the Chevron refinery produces enough gas for one in five cars in Northern California and about 60% of the jet fuel from Sacramento to San Jose, which costs more to make in California than anywhere else.
Graves said higher labor, energy, and regulatory costs all contribute to higher production expenses that are ultimately passed on to drivers.
California’s cleaner-burning, special blend of gasoline also requires specialized production.
“Only a handful of refineries outside of California can actually make California gasoline,” said Brian Hubinger, senior manager of Chevron government affairs. He noted that production of the special blend “took billions of dollars of investment.”
Those requirements, combined with long-term uncertainty about the state’s transition away from fossil fuels, have made it harder for companies to justify continued investment.
“It costs us hundreds of millions a year just to stay in business,” Graves said. “Things have to change for us to be willing to invest in a refinery in California.”
Growing reliance on foreign fuel
As refining capacity declines, California is increasingly turning to overseas refiners, particularly in Asia, to make California’s special blend.
While they can produce California’s low-carbon gas, overseas refiners don’t have to adhere to the same strict environmental standards as California’s refineries. In addition to local pollution, the gasoline they produce is shipped across the ocean, which environmental agency heads acknowledge is also worse for the environment.
“There is less pollution associated with the gasoline that’s produced in California,” Crowfoot said.
Additionally, tankers coming from Asia can take weeks to arrive in California, creating new vulnerabilities. That delay means any disruption — from refinery outages to global conflicts like the war with Iran — can quickly tighten supply and drive up prices.
Asia is currently struggling to supply its own markets. China, in particular, has already restricted exports.
Still, energy analysts note global markets tend to adjust over time — even if short-term disruptions can lead to temporary price spikes.
“If a refinery has a problem they didn’t anticipate, that’s going to spike prices, that’s going to hurt Californians, and it’s going to be three weeks before we can get resupply from somewhere else,” said Andy Walz, president of Chevron.
A shift in the political conversation
After years of focusing on oil companies, state leaders now say the conversation is evolving.
“I’ve been talking about this for years, OK? What it took was two refineries to close, and then they said, ‘Oh, maybe they’re not price gouging,’ ” Walz said.
Lawmakers are now weighing how to balance climate goals with the need to maintain a stable and affordable fuel supply to power the present.
“That was probably the beginning of the shift when that report came back and Gov. Newsom couldn’t prove that there’s price gouging,” state Senator Brian Jones (R-San Diego) said.
California has temporarily suspended a new price gouging law that would have capped how much oil companies can make during price spikes. Though refineries say it’s still on the books, and they warn that proposed changes to California’s Cap-and-Invest program could make it cheaper to refine gas overseas rather than here at home.
“I think if the voters figure out that the problem is policy, they’re going to say, ‘Hey, I shouldn’t be paying this much. Why is Nevada a dollar cheaper?’ Walz said. “Voters can change that outcome.”
The debate now isn’t just about who’s to blame, but how California manages the transition without driving up costs in the short term.
For commuters like Sirena Lopez, who drives two hours each way for work, the impact is immediate.
“There was one time I filled up about $100… and I was like… I don’t know what I’m doing right now,” she said.
Even as prices rise, demand remains steady and drivers continue to feel the strain.
As California pushes toward a cleaner energy future, the key challenge ahead is not just reducing emissions, but ensuring fuel remains reliable and affordable in the meantime.
The governor appoints agency leaders and helps shape California’s energy and environmental policies — decisions that directly impact gas prices.
With a new governor set to be elected, those policies — and the cost of gas — could soon change.
发表回复