Which U.S. Gulf Coast refinery units (cokers, hydrocrackers) are currently operational and what are their names/capacities?
Executive summary
A definitive, unit-by-unit inventory of operational cokers and hydrocrackers on the U.S. Gulf Coast cannot be produced from the supplied reporting because the sources give refinery-level capacities and configuration notes but do not publish a contemporary, comprehensive roster of individual cokers/hydrocrackers and their standalone capacities [1] [2] [3]. What the reporting does show is which Gulf Coast refineries are large, configured for heavy sour crude (the configuration that typically implies cokers/hydrocrackers), and the headline processing capacities of several major plants from which one can infer likely locations of such units [4] [5] [6] [7].
1. Gulf Coast capacity context — why plant-level unit lists matter but are missing
The Energy Information Administration locates a large share of U.S. refining capacity on the Gulf Coast and publishes operable refinery capacities and utilization statistics at the refinery level, not a contemporaneous database of each secondary unit (coker, hydrocracker) and its individual rated throughput in public snapshots provided here [1] [2] [3]. That means the authoritative public figures available in these sources are facility nameplate capacities and utilization trends rather than discrete, named coker or hydrocracker units with separate rated capacities [1] [2].
2. Which large Gulf Coast refineries are identified as configured for heavy crude (and thus likely to host cokers/hydrocrackers)
Multiple outlets note that refineries from Corpus Christi to Pascagoula are configured to run heavy sour Venezuelan grades — a configuration that in practice commonly includes cokers and hydrocrackers to upgrade heavy molecules — with Phillips 66 explicitly naming Lake Charles and Sweeny as able to take “a couple of hundred thousand barrels per day” of Venezuelan crude and Reuters listing a set of Gulf Coast plants so configured [4] [5]. Local reporting and Reuters single out Pascagoula (Chevron) as a high‑capacity Gulf Coast plant capable of processing heavy crude, with a cited nameplate near 369,000 barrels per day at that complex [6].
3. Headline capacities for Gulf Coast complexes cited in the reporting
ExxonMobil’s Baytown complex is reported processing about 564,000 barrels per day alongside petrochemical operations [7]; ExxonMobil’s Beaumont has large crude units described in IIR reporting (e.g., a 180,000 b/d Crude Unit A at Beaumont and a 108,000 b/d still at Baytown are singled out as key crude units) but those references are to crude distillation trains rather than to individual cokers/hydrocrackers [8]. TotalEnergies’ Port Arthur is cited with roughly 151,000 b/d associated with a maintenance window in Q4 2025 reporting [9]. Reuters and regional coverage list many Gulf Coast refineries capable of heavy grades without enumerating their individual secondary-unit throughputs [4] [6].
4. Which specific units (coker/hydrocracker) and their capacities can be confirmed from these sources — none
The assembled reporting does not supply a contemporaneous list naming individual cokers or hydrocrackers and giving each unit’s rated capacity; instead the sources provide refinery-level throughput/capacity and statements about configuration and readiness to run heavy crude [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]. Thus, no source among those provided directly supports a claimed roster such as “Coker X at Refinery Y — Z b/d, operational,” so such granular unit-level assertions cannot be made from the material at hand.
5. Reasonable inferences and where to verify unit-level data
From the reporting one can infer that the region’s largest, heavy-crude‑capable complexes — e.g., ExxonMobil (Baytown, Beaumont), Chevron (Pascagoula), Phillips 66 (Lake Charles, Sweeny), and other large Gulf Coast refineries discussed in EIA and trade reporting — are the likely hosts of cokers and hydrocrackers because they advertise heavy-crude capability and high overall throughput [7] [5] [6] [3]. However, confirmation of a unit’s operational status and its standalone capacity requires plant-level equipment inventories or the EIA Refinery Capacity Report/plant fact sheets and company disclosures not included in the supplied sources [1] [2].
6. Bottom line
The reporting documents which Gulf Coast refineries are large and configured for heavy sour crude — pointing to the plants most likely to have operational cokers and hydrocrackers — and provides refinery-level capacities for many complexes (Baytown ~564,000 b/d; Pascagoula ~369,000 b/d; Port Arthur ~151,000 b/d; Phillips 66’s Lake Charles and Sweeny “a couple hundred thousand b/d” of Venezuelan grades), but it does not provide a verifiable, itemized list of individual cokers and hydrocrackers with their specific operational status and nameplate capacities [7] [6] [9] [5] [1].