Here's a story from the Kansas City Star that, sensationalism aside, seems to make sense. At least the physics behind the the concept do: http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/15370193.htm I hadn't ever thought about it before. The petroleum industry's decision to correct fuel for temperature in Canada, where they were losing money because of cold fuel, sure seems like a strong argument in favor of correcting for warm fuel further south. It seems fuel is a lot hotter at the pumps than the petroleum industry figured 40 years ago. But they're not real anxious to cut consumers their money back on the loss. Surprising thing to me is that some in the trucking industry seems reluctant to call for a cost correction for being shorted BTU when fuel is hot. Check out the comment by the Technology & Maintenance Council of the American Trucking Association in this story on TTNews.com, an electronic newsletter by truking-industry magazine, Transport Topics. (You will probably have to go through the free registration process to get access to the story.) http://www.ttnews.com/members/topNews/0016169.html Of those of you who buy fuel in bulk, do you you get a cost or volume correction for temperature? Have you ever checked fuel's temperature as it comes out of the retail pump or off the transport? L
BS IMO for the most part I have installed several tanks at gas stations and I have never seen any sort of heater with the tanks. And I have never herd of a ground temp of 90* unless your sitting on a volcano.
I don't think the Star is suggesting that anybody's heating fuel. The story explained how faster turnover of large underground tanks prevented hot fuel coming out of a transport from ever cooling down to ground temperature. It seemed incredible to me, too, but I think this passage near the bottom of the story established pretty clearly that fuel is in fact being sold hotter than the petroleum-industry standards suggest that it should be for buyers to get full value for their money: "The National Institute of Standards and Technology is the federal agency in charge of advancing measurement science, standards and technology. One of its 2,900 employees is Richard Suiter, a weights and measures coordinator with 37 years of experience. "Suiter had long believed that fuel needed to be adjusted for temperature simply to ensure fairness in the marketplace. But he wasn’t convinced that it would make a large net difference for the industry or consumers. After all, he reckoned, fuel is largely stored in underground tanks with a ground temperature close to 60 degrees. "But he began to have doubts after hearing anecdotal reports of fuel temperatures well above 60 degrees. The chance to find out more came during a training visit to the back room at an Illinois gas station. "The room contained monitoring equipment required by the Environmental Protection Agency to help detect fuel leaks in storage tanks. Among other things, the equipment tracked temperature to calculate changes in fuel volume. "The discovery led to a study in which Suiter retrieved average monthly fuel temperatures from 1,000 stations in 48 states and the District of Columbia from 2002 to 2004. "The results, which offer the most thorough analysis ever of fuel temperatures nationwide, were stunning. "The nation’s average fuel temperature was almost 5 degrees hotter than the standard — amounting to a multibillion-dollar shift from consumers to the industry every year. The API studies that had held sway since the 1970s didn’t reflect reality." And the American Petroleum Institute rep acknowledges that Suiter’s temperature data appears “accurate.†"The open question, say advocates for temperature compensation for fuel, is whether anyone will notice — or care enough to do anything about it. Consider the story of Howard Estes. Estes once spoke before an annual meeting of the National Conference of Weights and Measures. It was high time, he said, to deal with temperature compensation. The Flint, Mich., weights and measures official told the gathering that the principle of volume change and temperature was as 'old as the hills.' Moreover, he warned, the impact was going to be noticed more as the United States used more fuel and it became more expensive." So the question remains: Do you care that you're getting fewer BTU for your $?
Could fuel stations justify raising the price of fuel to compensate for the cost of upgrading to fuel temperature equipment?
Back in the 50's my dad delivered fuel to the Standard stations and he was required to take the temp of the fuel and adjust for the differance back then. Sence then I think people have gotten lazy and others are not informed or don't care if they pay more for less. I was taught to fill my tanks from stations with underground tanks because the fuel is cooler. I was also taught to paint my above ground tanks white or silver because you can loose as much as 10% due to evaporation over 1 month.
Seems like everyone all along the petroleum industry distribution chain is correcting for temperature variation. Everyone except the consumer. Since the fuel retailer is required to monitor fuel temperature to satisfy underground storage tank regulations, the only investment they would have to make could be to the software controlling computerized pumps. Not sure if this is what the groups advocating temperature correction are suggesting, but it seems like this is how it could work: When fuel is hot, the cost per gallon goes down slightly to reflect the lower energy density per gallon. I wonder if that's how they do it in Canada? In a general sense, fuel buyers pay for whatever cost the retailers incur, unless they get government grants to finance the infrastructure . . . which means we pay for it through taxes. But I guess the idea is that we get a lot more benefit over a lifetime of buying fuel than the initial cost of changing the way fuel is sold. Probably a non-issue for Joe Consumer, who just fills up the SUV once a week. Seems like it'll take businesses that include the cost of fuel in their products/services to drive this change. L
I know here in Georgia there are many "mom and pop" stores that still have the old non digital pumps. How would they compensate for it I wonder. Im not familar with design of the fuel pumps so I might be missing something. Luckily I work for a big company that pays the fuel bills but I still gotta fill up my personal truck. If it only saves me 20$ a year thats still $20 dollars. I might be young but I'm still tight with a penny.
Oh I guess I should of read it all, I saw a report that was telling people to only fill up at night since the temps drop at night I though it was the same BS. I think I might check the temps next time I get fuel and see.