... and you don't even get what you pay for

[scott]

Talk amongst yourselves. In a calm and rational manner if possible.


___________________
2008-05-16 05:32:48 EDT
CALIFORNIA'S 'HOT GAS' SURVEY SHOWS HIGH GASOLINE TEMPERATURE AT PUMPS

The California Department of Measurement Standards (DMS) will submit to the California Energy Commission (CEC) the results of a one-year survey on fuel temperature at the pumps on Friday, a state government official told OPIS late on Thursday.

The results are expected to show significantly higher than 60 degrees Fahrenheit temperatures for two gasoline grades and diesel at the pumps, according to OPIS calculation of the survey results.

The West Coast state has been debating for the past year on whether to introduce temperature compensating equipment at the pumps as consumers receive less gasoline when the temperature rises due to fuel expansion. This is particularly so in warm weather states like California.

In the survey, temperature at the pumps for 87 octane unleaded regular gasoline averaged at 71.1 degrees, 91 octane premium gasoline at 71.425 degrees and diesel 71.85 degrees.

The average temperature for all 12 months show temperatures of above 60 degrees. Average temperatures in winter were slightly above 60 degrees.

The industry uses a standard temperature -- 60 degrees -- as part of its definition of a gallon in the supply contracts because of the fuel expansion.

The "hot gas" issue has already initiated lawsuits against some of the country's largest oil and gas companies, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Tesoro and Valero last year.

Temperature compensating equipment is not installed at the pumps in any part of the country yet, but the equipment could be found at the racks or wholesale terminals, the official said.

CEC is expected to hold a workshop on June 5 to discuss the results of the survey, a CEC official said. She added that the energy commission will complete a report to the Legislature by December, and a decision would be made until then.

The official pointed out that the commission does not refer fuel temperature as "hot" or "cold" because it needs to stay objective.

CEC will take into account the survey results from more than 7,000 responses from retailers as well as the availability and cost of new equipment, the official said.

However, availability and cost could be a secondary issue.

"That (availability and cost) has not stopped the state from introducing new technology before," he said.

The DMS collected data from about 20% of the service stations in their respective counties. The participants selected one dispenser for each available product at these locations, took the temperature as it was delivered into the test measure, and also recorded any available information concerning the temperature of the fuel in the product storage tanks.

Besides the data on gasoline temperature at the pump, DMS will also submit temperature data for gasoline in the underground tanks at the pumps.

Copyright, Oil Price Information Service

[Wild Cobra]

Wow... after all these years of selling by the measured amount, we want the measured amount to vary by temperature?

Sell it by the pound, kilogram, or some other measurement then, This is asinine, trying to place "compensating" equipment on.

What is the thermal expansion of gasoline anyway? Anyone know? Cannot be too significant.

Besides, mass would make more sense. Hydrocarbon chains vary in length, and effect power. It would probably be a more true measure of the power you are buying, not counting thermal expansion.

[jochhejaam]

Thanks for the post Scott. I've heard this discussed on radio talk recently.
If true, then gasoline purchasers in colder climates (Canada) may be getting more bang for their buck...?

We don't want to get screwed at the pump, and if we are then it needs to be rectified, but there are many proven methods of optimizing our fuel efficiency, that we have control over;

Top 10 Fuel Saving Tips
By Aaron Gold, About.com

Filed In:Fuel Economy
Whether you drive a two-seat hybrid or a three-ton SUV, chances are you can squeeze a bit more distance out of each gallon of fuel. These ten fuel saving tips have served me well over the years, and they can help you improve your car's fuel economy and take some of the sting out of high fuel prices. Most of these tips will give you a very slight increase in miles per gallon (MPG) -- but use several together and the gas mileage improvements will really add up.

1. Check your air filter
A clean air filter is the key to good fuel economy. A dirty air filter restricts the flow of air into the engine, which harms performance and economy. Air filters are easy to check and change; remove the filter and hold it up to the sun. If you can't see light coming through it, you need a new one. Consider a K&N or similar "permanent" filter which is cleaned rather than changed; they are much less restrictive than throw-away paper filters, plus they're better for the environment.

2. Check your tire pressure
Next to the air fitler, under-inflated tires are one of the most commonly ignored causes of crummy MPG. Buy a reliable tire gauge, check your tires when they are cold (driving the car warms up the tires and the air inside them, increasing the pressure), and keep them properly inflated. Use the inflation pressures shown in the owner's manual or on the data plate in the driver's door jamb.

3. Slow down
As speed increases, fuel economy decreases exponentially. If you one of the "ten-over on the freeway" set, try driving the speed limit for a few days. You'll save a lot of fuel and your journey won't take much longer. Just be sure you keep to the right, so you won't impede the less-enlightened.

4. Hang with the trucks
Ever notice how, in bad traffic jams, cars seem to constantly speed up and slow down, while trucks tend to roll along at the same leisurely pace? A constant speed keeps shifting to a minimum -- important to those who have to wrangle with those ten-speed truck transmissions -- but it also aids economy, as it takes much more fuel to get a vehicle moving than it does to keep it moving. Rolling with the big rigs saves fuel (and aggravation).

5. Accelerate with care
Jack-rabbit starts are an obvious fuel-waster - but that doesn't mean you should crawl away from every light. If you drive an automatic, accelerate moderately so the transmission can shift up into the higher gears. Stick-shifters should shift early to keep the revs down, but don't lug the engine -- downshift if you need to accelerate. Keep an eye well down the road for potential slowdowns. If you accelerate to speed then have to brake right away, that's wasted fuel.

6. Get back to nature
Consider shutting off the air conditioner, opening the windows and enjoying the breeze. It may be a tad warmer, but at lower speeds you'll save fuel. That said, at higher speeds the A/C may be more efficient than the wind resistance from open windows and sunroof. If I'm going someplace where arriving sweaty and smelly could be a problem, I bring an extra shirt and leave early so I'll have time for a quick change.

7. Back off the bling
New wheels and tires may look cool, and they can certainly improve handling. But if they are wider than the stock tires, chances are they'll create more rolling resistance and decrease fuel economy. If you upgrade your wheels and tires, keep the old ones. I have fancy sport rims and aggressive tires on my own car, but I keep the stock wheels with a good narrower-tread performance tire in the garage. For long road trips, the stock wheels give a smoother ride and better economy.

8. Clean out your car
The more weight your car has to haul, the more gas it needs to do the work. If you're the type who takes a leisurely at ude towards car cleanliness -- and I definitely fall into that group -- periodically go through your car and see what can be tossed out or brought into the house. It doesn't take much to acquire an extra 40 or 50 lbs. of stuff.

9. Out with the new, in with the old
Many people keep their old cars around even after they buy a new one. A spare car, especially if it's an econobox, can be good insurance against temporary es in gas prices due to world events. The costs of keeping the car may or may not be less then the fuel saved, but it does allow for more predictability in your budget. My old beater doesn't look like much, but it goes
10 miles further on a gallon of gas than our regular car. For that, I can afford to look bad!

10. Don't drive
Not a popular thing to say on a car site, I know, but the fact is that if you can avoid driving, you'll save gas. Take the train, carpool, and consolidate your shopping trips. Walking or biking is good for your wallet and your health. And before you get in your car, always ask yourself: "Is this trip really necessary?"


Add your own to the list

11. Mythbusters: drafting 10 feet behind a big rig will improve mileage 39 percent (Disclaimer: Don't do it when the cops are around, you will be ticketed, and some semi-drivers get irritated by this, so do it at your own risk)
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/10...-improve-mile/

[jochhejaam]

Oh, regarding low tire pressure, the Feds should require Gas Stations to provide free air at each Station, many don't have air stations, and most are "pay" air stations. The last time I used one it didn't stay on long enough for me to fill all 4 tires.

I've heard that if you talk to the attendants at the Station, you can are required to turn it on at no cost to you, but what a hassle!

Of course, the owners don't want you to get good mileage, that eats into their profit, so they aren't going to do this without being required to do so.

[scott]

My understanding, IIRC, is that a 10 degree increase in temp results in a 1.4% loss in energy as a result of volume expansion, WC, do you not think an artificial 1.4% increase in fuel demand is significant?

Edit: US gasoline and diesel demand is approx 12.4MMBPD. Times 1.4% = 173.6MBPD.

Assume a conservative average price of $3/gal x 365 days = $190 million spent by US consumers per year essentially buying the same energy twice.

[scott]

Here is another fun calculation that Wild Cobra may find insignificant.

Let's operate under the assumption that average cost of gasoline is $3/gal and is unit elastic at that point. So a 1.4% decline in demand will lead to an equal decrease in price (this is supply elasticity we are talking about, not demand elasticity).

That means gasoline is priced 4.2 cents/gal higher than it should be by the artificially high demand.

Doesn't sound like much, right?

12.4 MMPBD demanded = 520.8 million gallons per day x 365 days x 4.2 cpg. = $7.984 billion dollars in extra spending on gasoline per year by US consumers.

Insignificant?

[xrayzebra]

As long as I can remember it was always said fill up early in the AM
and get more gasoline. Maybe there was some truth in the "tip".
Scott I am assuming you are correct. But your stats remind me of
the government. You never hear what is cost each year but over
a period of time, like 10 years. Only yours is for the volume pumped.

WC, I know there is a evaporation factor for all gas tanks, whether
in-ground or above ground.

I think someone is grasping at straws.

[scott]

As long as I can remember it was always said fill up early in the AM
and get more gasoline. Maybe there was some truth in the "tip".
Scott I am assuming you are correct. But your stats remind me of
the government. You never hear what is cost each year but over
a period of time, like 10 years. Only yours is for the volume pumped.

WC, I know there is a evaporation factor for all gas tanks, whether
in-ground or above ground.

I think someone is grasping at straws.

My rough estimations are based on some very conservative assumptions, and are only 1 year... So can you elaborate on the issue you take with them?

I would not put too much stock in the "fill up in the morning" theory... It would help a little, but intraday changes in temp would have only a minor impact on the temp of the gas in an underground tank, which would be primarily driven by geothermal temp. One good tip, however, is to never fill up when you see a tanked unloading new supply to a station... Sediment gets stirred up and can make its way into your fuel tank.

I should also point out the pipeline shipments of gasoline ARE corrected for temp to account for volume. Obviously shippers on pipelines think it is significant enough to account for when it is their dime.

[RandomGuy]

My rough estimations are based on some very conservative assumptions, and are only 1 year... So can you elaborate on the issue you take with them?

I would not put too much stock in the "fill up in the morning" theory... It would help a little, but intraday changes in temp would have only a minor impact on the temp of the gas in an underground tank, which would be primarily driven by geothermal temp. One good tip, however, is to never fill up when you see a tanked unloading new supply to a station... Sediment gets stirred up and can make its way into your fuel tank.

I should also point out the pipeline shipments of gasoline ARE corrected for temp to account for volume. Obviously shippers on pipelines think it is significant enough to account for when it is their dime.

Yup.

My understanding about underground temperatures is that they are remarkably stable, and don't vary much with day/night cycles at all.

It might be interesting to do an experiment here in Texas, though.

Easy enough to do, and heck, I drive enough on a monthly basis (4 to 6 fill-ups) to get a pretty large data set after a few months.

[RandomGuy]

I think someone is grasping at straws.

I wouldn't say it is grasping at straws.

Stuff generally expands when warm, and contracts when cold. Simple physics.

[xrayzebra]

I wouldn't say it is grasping at straws.

Stuff generally expands when warm, and contracts when cold. Simple physics.

Very true about the hot/cold.

Grasping at straws, well, maybe not the exact description I
should have used. But seems like "we" are always looking
at the dark side of life. Like someone is always trying to
screw over "us". Sometimes I think we outsmart "ourselves". You know like the butcher is putting his
thumb on the scale. I really don't see how it is anyone's
fault when the law of physics is what it is. Just my
thought.

It would be interesting for you to conduct your little
experiment and see how it turned out. I really couldn't
since I only fill up my old truck about one a month or less
and my SUV about three times a month. That's cause
the woman of the house does so much running around.
Her and HEB have a social thing going I think....
They have to visit daily, so it seems....

[scott]

Well XRay, I don't think it is a simple matter of it being "physics fault, no need to blame anyone."

This is not a newly discovered phenomenon, and shippers of gas and diesel on pipelines already think it is important enough to account for temp when they transact at the wholesale level... But retailers don't think it is important enough to account for wheb transacting with consumers?

If it were discovered that Pepsi were only filling their cans with 11 ounces of soda, what would be your reaction?

[xrayzebra]

Well XRay, I don't think it is a simple matter of it being "physics fault, no need to blame anyone."

This is not a newly discovered phenomenon, and shippers of gas and diesel on pipelines already think it is important enough to account for temp when they transact at the wholesale level... But retailers don't think it is important enough to account for wheb transacting with consumers?

If it were discovered that Pepsi were only filling their cans with 11 ounces of soda, what would be your reaction?

What ever. The state checks the pumps, maybe not
often enough. But a gallon is a gallon, within government
guidelines....but guess you could take your own
container and check to see if the pump is correct and
act accordingly, but it is your call. Or contact your
state rep or senator. Like I said I don't fill up often
enough to lose too much sleep over it. With all the
crap they put on the nozzel we cant be losing too much
thru evaporation, I don't think.

[RandomGuy]

What ever. The state checks the pumps, maybe not
often enough. But a gallon is a gallon, within government
guidelines....but guess you could take your own
container and check to see if the pump is correct and
act accordingly, but it is your call. Or contact your
state rep or senator. Like I said I don't fill up often
enough to lose too much sleep over it. With all the
crap they put on the nozzel we cant be losing too much
thru evaporation, I don't think.

He isn't talking about evaporation.

Put it another way.

A gallon is a gallon, no matter if you measure something at 100 degrees or zero degrees. It is a description of volume, with a height, a length, and a width.

BUT

What does vary with temperature is the number of molecules in that gallon.

Each molecule represents X amount of chemical energy.

It takes a certain amount of energy, call it Y, to move your vehicle 1 mile down the road.

Divide Y by X and you can find how many molecules it will take to burn and move your vehicle 1 mile. Think of this as a "molecules per mile" measurement.

Now when it is warmer, the number of molecules in a gallon is less, but the cost doesn't change. Make it arbitrary, and say you get 100 molecules for 4 dollars when it is 60 degrees, then you get 99 molecules for 4 dollars when it is 72 degrees.

The amount you pay per unit of energy (molecule) goes UP when it is warmer, because your unit of measurement is not energy, but rather volume.

What Scott is saying is that pumps are set to sell you 100 molecules at 60 degrees, but are, in reality, only selling you 99 molecules because the gas is warmer than what the pump was set for.

This 1% adds up when you are talking about trillions of gallons of fuel per year.

[scott]

RG is correct in his example. We are not talking about evaporation but thermal expansion. Think of a gallon of ice versus a gallon of steam. Both are a gallon of H2O, but when you convert both to water in liquid form you get 2 significantly different amounts.

Evaporation is already seasonally accounted for. Depending on the season, refineries produce gasoline with different Relative Vapor Pressure (RVP) which corrects for the temp (pressure) at which the product will evaporate.

Volumetric density is an entirely different matter.

[xrayzebra]

Okay, Scott and RG. What is the answer? I say there is
no answer, because anything "they" do "we" are going to
pay for in the end price of the product. Right or wrong?

It is like the air bags and environmental controls placed on
cars. It solved or appears to solve a problem but the
consumer paid for it.

But I could be wrong. But you will never convince me....

[scott]

Okay, Scott and RG. What is the answer? I say there is
no answer, because anything "they" do "we" are going to
pay for in the end price of the product. Right or wrong?

It is like the air bags and environmental controls placed on
cars. It solved or appears to solve a problem but the
consumer paid for it.

But I could be wrong. But you will never convince me....

The answer already exists and is implemented across the country at a wholesale level. You take the temperature of the product and correct for volumetric gain/loss. It isn't rocket science, just multiplication.

Will it cost money? Yes. Is it worth it? That has yet to be determined and needs to be evaluated in more detail.

I'd you think it is too much trouble to even worry about, why not just let your filling station heat the fuel up before you buy it so that you fill up with gallons of vapor?

Hawaii has already addressed this matter by measuring gallons at 80 degrees rather than 60. It doesn't matter what temp is used, just so long that temp is consistently accounted for at all levels of the supply chain. But right now, it isn't and someone is benefiting and you are footing the bill. You may not care. But you care when you foot the bill for other people to benefit on other matters (obviously you are against welfare). I wonder where you decide to draw that line.

[RandomGuy]

Okay, Scott and RG. What is the answer? I say there is
no answer, because anything "they" do "we" are going to
pay for in the end price of the product. Right or wrong?

It is like the air bags and environmental controls placed on
cars. It solved or appears to solve a problem but the
consumer paid for it.

But I could be wrong. But you will never convince me....

I will put this in even simpler terms.

This is the equivalent of a butcher placing two 25 cent coins on a scale, then putting your steak on it, adding the two, and charging you for the new weight.

In the case the simple answer is to take the two quarters off the scale, and measuring that way.

In the case of the more complex tempurature/volume problem, there is a cost to putting a thermostat (removing the quarters that are distorting the measurement) in the pump.

Neither scott, nor myself are saying that the cost of fixing the problem is worth the cost though.

Just that it is an interesting problem.

[xrayzebra]

The answer already exists and is implemented across the country at a wholesale level. You take the temperature of the product and correct for volumetric gain/loss. It isn't rocket science, just multiplication.

Will it cost money? Yes. Is it worth it? That has yet to be determined and needs to be evaluated in more detail.

I'd you think it is too much trouble to even worry about, why not just let your filling station heat the fuel up before you buy it so that you fill up with gallons of vapor?

Hawaii has already addressed this matter by measuring gallons at 80 degrees rather than 60. It doesn't matter what temp is used, just so long that temp is consistently accounted for at all levels of the supply chain. But right now, it isn't and someone is benefiting and you are footing the bill. You may not care. But you care when you foot the bill for other people to benefit on other matters (obviously you are against welfare). I wonder where you decide to draw that line.

Okay, I am asking, not arguing. By adjusting the amount
pumped by using a set temp wouldn't each pump have
to be in all reality a computer? What I mean, it would have
to have the capability to take the liquids temp, adjust the
volume, make sure that the amount pumped to the
customer appears as the gallon purchased and display
the price. Can Mom and Pop stores afford those computers? Again I am not arguing a point. I am asking
a question. I read/heard the other day some Mom and
Pop stores are just having a problem with showing the
cost of their product because the pump will not register
the selling price. And in some cases it is unlawful to
show the half price. Some are even covering the pumps
where it shows the price and the customer has to go
into the store and go by a chart. New mechanisms are to
expensive to purchase. Side note, did anyone read the
other day where credit card companies are the only ones
making money on Gas because they charge the merchant
so damn much.

Here is link to an article on those fees.

http://www.law.com/jsp/ihc/PubArticl...=1202421515776

[scott]

I think there are a number of options, not all of them cheap.

For some mom and pop in the middle of nowhere, it wouldn't be cheap to install a computerized system. Theoretically, you could just apply the k-factor (adjustment factor) for the average temp. in the tank year round and that would be the most simple.

The question is, should US consumers get let gas then they are paying for because some mom and pop store can't afford new equipment? Would that excuse fly in any other cir stance. If you went to HEB and they overcharged you and you called them out and their response was "well, it is too expensive to upgrade the computer", would that be acceptable?

With that said, why should the American consumer pay for the inefficiences of some business? They are supposed to be selling me a gallon of gas at 60 degrees. If they can't do it, maybe they shouldn't be in business. I support small business and its merits (it is in fact the backbone of our economy) but that doesn't mean they don't have the same requirements to be efficient at what they do.

As for the credit cards... well, no one requires gas stations to accept credit cards. I think it is a definite stretch to say only credit card companies are making money on gas. But I will admit, mom and pop gas stations are not cash cows - it is a very low margin business and they make most of the money on in-store purchases (chips, soda, beer, etc.). If a store can't make money because they can't afford the credit card fees, then they need to tighten the belt on their business, not cry for help from the government to help bail them out.

[ChumpDumper]

Oh, regarding low tire pressure, the Feds should require Gas Stations to provide free air at each Station, many don't have air stations, and most are "pay" air stations. The last time I used one it didn't stay on long enough for me to fill all 4 tires.

I've heard that if you talk to the attendants at the Station, you can are required to turn it on at no cost to you, but what a hassle!

Of course, the owners don't want you to get good mileage, that eats into their profit, so they aren't going to do this without being required to do so.

Usually if you buy anything at the gas station, they'll turn on the air hose for you.

And gas stations don't make much profit off the gas, relatively speaking. They would probably prefer you spend money on a bottle of soda.

[jochhejaam]

Here is another fun calculation that Wild Cobra may find insignificant.

Let's operate under the assumption that average cost of gasoline is $3/gal and is unit elastic at that point. So a 1.4% decline in demand will lead to an equal decrease in price (this is supply elasticity we are talking about, not demand elasticity).

That means gasoline is priced 4.2 cents/gal higher than it should be by the artificially high demand.

Doesn't sound like much, right?

12.4 MMPBD demanded = 520.8 million gallons per day x 365 days x 4.2 cpg. = $7.984 billion dollars in extra spending on gasoline per year by US consumers.

Insignificant?

If you figure there are 200,000,000 million drivers (I don't know how many there are), that 8 billion comes out to $40.00 a year per driver, $3.25 per month or roughly 10 cents a day. (I believe my math's right)

Not a killer for the consumers on an individual basis (again, we shouldn't be gettin' screwed at all), but my, how that drives up the profits margins for big oil.

Abominable!

[scott]

jochhe,

Definitely small on an individual basis, but it is still $8 billion per year that could be spent somewhere else in our economy. I think the same arguement can be made about a $600 economic stimulus tax rebate. While small on the individual level, extremely significant in the aggregate.

[jochhejaam]

jochhe,

Definitely small on an individual basis, but it is still $8 billion per year that could be spent somewhere else in our economy. I think the same arguement can be made about a $600 economic stimulus tax rebate. While small on the individual level, extremely significant in the aggregate.

I agree.

[scott]

Update... today I read a blurb that a large retailer is offering their customers a discount if they pay with cash or with the retailer's proprietary gas card. To do this, they update the software in the Point of Sale system. So apparently it is not that big of a deal to make these kind of upgrades.