Yes, refinery mismatch vulnerability something that can be built around, ~10-15 year horizon. US can also bring down oil as % of energy mix and distribute renewables. If US smart they would do this.

But at same time, extend IRBM range by 1000km, and replace refineries with hyperscalers, or whatever targets that worth deterrent value (energy at top of list). Refineries just most immediately very high value targets that happens to be closest to missile range.

But the assumption is less about US adaptability/smartness, as the way commodity conventional strikes is trending, CONUS _ will _ be vulnerable eventually. Fortress America is as much function of geography as technology. Just like how 20 years ago Iran couldn't hit Israel or many GCC companies even if it wanted to... now it can. The natural outcome of longer and longer range strikes is at some point US becomes in range of Monroe neighbours who doesnt want to be Monroed.

> This is making a pretty big assumption that the long-term US energy mix is going to stay the way it is.

It's the stated goal of one of the parties to keep or increase fossil fuel usage, isn't it?

> Meanwhile the US administration flips parties every four to eight years

Magic 8 Ball says "yeah, in the past, 2028 isn't looking good though"

> next time they're Democrats they'll be trying to hasten that result

Which will be blocked and/or immediately overturned by the current/next Republic Congress/Senate/SCOTUS/President.