comments_imageCOMMENTS: 54

Oil Companies Are Using a Simple Trick to Bilk Consumers out of Billions

Oil companies know that gasoline expands at higher temperatures and has less volume at lower ones, but they've refused to upgrade gas stations with a simple tool that would adjust the price of gas according to its temperature.
August 14, 2007  |  
 
 
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.

 
 
Advertisement
 
It's probably intuitive to most people that the gasoline in their fuel tank expands in the heat -- just like doorframes and cookware and everything else on the planet. What's probably less intuitive is that, in the United States, this physical phenomenon pumps a nearly $2 billion annual windfall out of consumers' pockets and into oil company coffers, according to numerous calculations, including a recent House of Representatives study.

The North Carolina-based company Gilbarco Veeder-Root manufactures a device -- a temperature-sensitive chamber for fuel -- that, if affixed to gasoline pumps across the country, would return that money to consumers and help relieve some of our storied gas-price pressures. The device -- and others like it -- is simple, functional and, in fact, already in widespread use at gas stations all across Canada. Last month, Democratic presidential hopeful and Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich, chair of the Domestic Policy Subcommittee, held the second in a series of hearings to investigate why the technology has never made it into the American market.

Temperature is just one of the many variables that determine how much energy one tank of gasoline contains, and therefore how many miles it will pull your car. But the effects of temperature change are easier to calculate than, say, ethanol content or petroleum grade -- and are therefore also easy to correct for. Here's how it works.

A gallon of gasoline contains a certain number of molecules, which combust in your car's engine to provide it with energy. If you heat up that gallon of gasoline it will expand, leaving you with a larger volume of gas than the gallon with which you started. But your new volume will contain the same number of combustible molecules and therefore will provide the same amount of energy as it did prior to the heating. That means a tank full of "hot" gas will provide a car with less energy than will the same tank full of "cool" gas, which is why you've probably been advised (correctly) not to buy gasoline when it's hot outside. Simple, right?

It is if you live in Canada, at least. There, gasoline retailers install metering systems in their pumps to determine how much the fuel they sell has cooled or heated from its standardized refinery temperature, and then adjust the price accordingly. If the fuel has become warmer, it also becomes cheaper. If it has cooled, it becomes more expensive. Which is to say that Canadians -- to a greater extent than Americans -- pay for the energy they get out of the gasoline and not for the volume of liquid fuel they purchase.

Of course, on average, Canada is pretty cold and the United States is pretty hot. So it benefits both retailers and oil companies to correct for temperature in Canada, but to price by volume in the United States But the idea of correcting price for temperature has deep roots in the industry: oil companies have done so for gasoline wholesalers for nearly a century. The only ones in the North American energy chain who pay by volume rather than by energy value are U.S. consumers.

Kucinich's hearings were designed to shed light on this and other double standards. Oil company executives, testifying under threat of subpoena, told the subcommittee that gas retailers in the United States don't use heat meters -- known as "automatic temperature compensation" -- because state regs don't let them. "State weights and measures regulations have not adopted temperature correction," said Hugh Cooley, a Shell Oil Company vice president, in answer to Kucinich's inquiries. Ben Soraci, Director of General Sales for ExxonMobil, echoed Cooley, insisting that "across the U.S. a gallon is still defined as 231 cubic inches by law."

But Kucinich offered evidence to the contrary. His subcommittee asked the National Institutes of Standards and Technology to survey all 50 states and the District of Columbia about their weights and measures rules. "Most states permit the use of temperature compensation at both the wholesale and retail level," Kucinich said the survey found. "In fact, NIST could find that automatic temperature compensation is only expressly prohibited in nine states for retail."

Further, Kucinich found that Gilbarco Veeder-Root sought certification for its automatic temperature compensation equipment in California. Gilbarco was responding to what it has said was the stated interest of California gas retailers, but it found no buyers when the state gave its product the OK.

Cooley and Soraci say that's unsurprising because the cost for implementing devices like Gilbarco's, an investment estimated to be about $2,500 per unit, would be borne by retailers -- the majority of which are affiliated only loosely with big oil companies -- and then ultimately passed on to the consumer. The oil execs' contention is true as far as it goes, but belies the fact that oil companies maintain funds -- called "image" and "development" funds -- meant to help so-called arms-length retailers pay for modifications and improvements to their gas stations. The money is there to extend to consumers the same fair deal wholesalers get, but the companies don't particularly want to spend it.

Kucinich's subcommittee is now also investigating whether that's the reason California retailers balked when given the chance to use Gilbarco Veeder-Root's system, and whether states should be encouraged to mandate pricing by amount of energy bought rather than volume of gas sold.
submit to reddit
Brian Beutler is a reporter for the Media Consortium.
Email
Print
Share
Post on reddit
Post on stumbleupon
Post on facebook
Post on digg
Post on twitter
Post on delicious
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest AlterNet headlines via email
See more stories tagged with: gas prices, kucinich, gas pump, temperature, volume
 

Comments are closed-

Have you ever....
Posted by: Derek Maddox on Aug 14, 2007 2:57 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Have you ever wondered why gas stations bury their tanks underground? It would be much cheaper and more convenient to have them above ground, but they ALWAYS bury them.

IT'S TO KEEP THE GASOLINE AT A CONSTANT TEMPERATURE!!

There might be a slight difference in volume between the extremes of summer and winter in some places, but if that difference were "returned" to the consumers it would amount to a couple of pennies on each tank of gasoline. The costs of retrofitting every gas station in the country with a temperature compensation device would add more to the cost of gasoline than it would save!!!

If this is the best Kucinich can do (and I'm ready to believe that) then it's time for him to hang it up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Have you ever.... Posted by: douglashoyt
» RE: Have you ever.... Posted by: blondesprite
» RE: Have you ever.... Posted by: oregonox
» RE: Have you ever.... Posted by: oregonox
» RE: Have you ever.... Posted by: penn

Comments are closed-

Technical Facts
Posted by: mtnclimber on Aug 14, 2007 4:48 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a PHD in chemical engineering, I can assure you that the density difference of gasoline from 32F to 132F is not significant. As the first comment states, you would save about 4 cents per tankful of gasoline or a couple dollars per year! Big deal. You'll save alot more money by driving less and having an energy efficient car.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Technical Facts Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» RE: Technical Facts Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» RE: Technical Facts Posted by: Joshua Holland
» Chump Change?? Posted by: gellero
» RE: Technical Facts Posted by: bafs102905

Comments are closed-

a small amount considering the soaking we are taking at $3 a gallon gas
Posted by: KaptainSpiffy on Aug 14, 2007 6:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and we subsidize exploration. we don't collect what is owed by oil companies when oil is extracted from public lands. we don't collect when oil spills need to be cleaned up.

i'm sure i've missed something.

oh. the war in iraq. the coming war in iran.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

A better way to immediately return money to consumers, no "assembly" required...
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Aug 14, 2007 6:20 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...other than the consent of the general sort, would be to stop taxing people so much on a gallon of regular. Believe it or not, there are working poor people out there who could actually do a better job putting food on the table if they weren't paving bridges to nowhere, AK...or even worse.

Erm, wait...what was I thinking? Author is probably right--it would be far easier to have private contractors install devices in every last gas pump in the Union--to no significant effect to the consumer--than to install a people-centric give-a-damn attitude amongst our wise and lubberly Congresscritters. Wouldn't it be so much different if we could just hire someone to take a wrench to our Washington problem...instead of just the special interests? Hah! There I go daydreaming about a collaborative, thoughtful, problem-solving government, rather than...well...the ultimate quadrennial political superbowl, with the requisite 51.0001 winners-with-a-firm-mandate and the other 49.0009 of the people. You know, the losers--the minority. Your swifties, your moveons, etc. provide cheerleading duties, but be advised: they might serve to give the base some pep, but they aren't very fun to watch.

Wait...hold on just a sec. I guess I'll support this initiative; I just need a few months to get some family members in the weights, balances and metering industry, though. Now that's personally progressive governance in tune with the current system!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Meh. Whomever you're trolling for... Posted by: ABetterFuture

Comments are closed-

Has anyone noticed the following
Posted by: Indigo_Black on Aug 14, 2007 7:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
about the oil companies doing the following:

1) Changing their gas cards to credit cards and charging 24% or more interest on any outstanding balances and

2) there seems to be a change in pricing in the last month or so charging a different rate as much as a dime difference per gallon to use a credit card rather then paying cash?

Talking about sticking it to the consumer!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» That IS Consumer oriented !! Posted by: gellero
» WHAT I'VE BEEN SAYING Posted by: panama420

Comments are closed-

This is loud noise
Posted by: Obijuan on Aug 14, 2007 9:19 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As the consensus here clearly states, this is nonsense. By driving an economical car (that doesn't fill up with 20 gallons), this is really a couple cents at most. Not an issue but a distraction.

You shouldn't be paying income tax as it's voluntary, and unconstitutional. That's something to write articles about day after day after day after day.....

Just another non-issue to distract and confuse.

obi

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

This is loud noise
Posted by: Obijuan on Aug 14, 2007 9:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As the consensus here clearly states, this is nonsense. By driving an economical car (that doesn't fill up with 20 gallons), this is really a couple cents at most. Not an issue but a distraction.

You shouldn't be paying income tax as it's voluntary, and unconstitutional. That's something to write articles about day after day after day after day.....

Just another non-issue to distract and confuse.

obi

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

General Strike, The Red, White and Blue Flu! 9/11
Posted by: Bladerunner2020 on Aug 14, 2007 9:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't buy gas, don't go to work, or school. Don't buy anything!
http://www.dailygrail.com/node/5137

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Kucinich & Gilbarco
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on Aug 14, 2007 10:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Gilbarco does not appear to be a publicly traded company. Is there some kind of connection between Gilbarco and Kucinich. This wont save the consumer any money. Gilbarco seems to be the only one with something to gain.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

A bigger loss.
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Aug 14, 2007 10:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Much more expensive is the time wasted in filling your tank. I haven't checked with any gas pump manufacturers but I would bet that there is a mechanism in the pumps that slows down the flow as the price is adjusted upward. It seems to me that it takes as long to pump ten dollars worth of gas at 3$ per gallon as it did at 1$ per gallon.
Bob Reichenbach,
Director, The Lincoln Initiative.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A bigger loss. Posted by: Trazom
» RE: A bigger loss. Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: A bigger loss. Posted by: Trazom

Comments are closed-

We Must Nationalize the American Oil Industry..and all Energy..!
Posted by: TJ-stars4peace on Aug 14, 2007 10:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is the only real solution to so many of our problems in the ever more global economy and for our own National Security..!

You name a topic or issue and half of them would be addressed by this action in the interest of our nation and it's people..!

Including the corruption that has infected our governmental leaders at all levels..

We could with this, let's talk oil only first we could Reduce the cost of oil gasoline heating oil you name it by 30-33% and still garner approx. $60 Billion per year every year towards developing alternate energy sources, it's failing infrastructure, as well as re-newables, new engine technology maybe even Fusion..

It would aid the Airlines which are the only other entity that also may be saved by Nationalizing them as well..

This is also a National Security matter and those state run Oil companies are now the strongest world wide..

We also need to integrate and eventually improve and deal with our electric infrastructure so these should also be Nationalized..it makes sense and we would have a huge economic Boom that would benefit every sector of the economy and these companies even if Nationalized could still be trade on the stock market as they are in China ..!

The Oil infrastructure is failing and dire need until we remove the profit motive from this industry and we could also actually create more jobs with this good paying jobs for Americans as many workers have been cut simply to boost profits as in almost every other industry..!

Exxon -Mobil had a $38 Billion dollar yer last year only spent $900 million on infrastructure etc. alternative energy development and exploration they used the other $37 billion to buy back their own stocks what a waste ..the simple accumulation of corporate wealth..for wealth's sake..

We have real problems as a nation and these Oil companies operate at the expense of our nation not in it's service..

Just as with this little petty rip offs, in this article it shows just how greed ridden and predatory these Oil companies have become and they care not how badly any of their plots injuries America and it's people..

The Oil Companies are not in the business of putting themselves out of business..!

So nothing will change or improve until we Nationalize all of our Energy including Oil and Electric energy production..!

This will take us with strength into the 21st Century and also avoid ruinous needless Wars as well I hope..

This and a Single Payer Health Care System are the future we are our leaders dragging their feet in their service of our nation..?

Money that's why..mere dirty green paper...!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Another one of activist follies
Posted by: saml on Aug 14, 2007 11:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Another one of activist follies

Let’s discover a marginal “problem” that no one complained, knew or cared about.
Let’s attribute the problem to conservatives or corporations.
Let’s come up with a convoluted, unrealistic, or prohibitively expensive “solution”
Let’s claim that costs don’t matter when righting wrongs.
Everyone who challenges “solution” on scientific, logical, pragmatic grounds is considered an enemy of the people.

Never mind that:
Temperature underground hardly ever changes
Liquid undergo minimal volume expansion relative to temperature
It would save less then couple of pennies per tank

And on top of it all iv anything it would make gas cheaper, while the entire civilized world is trying to make it more expensive to reduce it’s usage.

… but all that does not matter to brain-dead activists - because they are there to right some wrongs!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Bizarre
Posted by: Joshua Holland on Aug 14, 2007 11:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How everyone on this thread focuses on only the "few cents" that consumers would save with fair pricing based on standard temperatures, yet nobody seems to see the flip side: add a few cents from every consumer at every fill-up and you're talking about an enormous rip-off by the energy companies.

I don't care if I would only save a few cents -- I'm tired of getting squeezed at every turn by corporate America and I'm happy to see someone holding these firms accountable.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Bizarre Posted by: saml
» RE: Bizarre Posted by: shanaza

Comments are closed-

Links to additional information, and aggregate costs...
Posted by: Wesley69 on Aug 14, 2007 11:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Newly introduced legislation in the Senate, by Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri, would require gasoline and diesel to be sold adjusted for temperature, giving motorists a fair gallon's worth of energy for their money. (See information on the legislation at http://mccaskill.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=280530& )

Gasoline, especially in the summer, expands as its temperature rises. But fuel is sold by volume at a benchmark of 60 degrees, so drivers are paying for "ghost gas," the lost energy content of a gallon at any temperature above 60 degrees. At other parts of the supply chain, the gasoline is sold temperature- adjusted, meaning slightly more gasoline is provided at higher temperatures. The year-round temperature of fuel at the pump in California averages 74.5 degrees, and higher in summer. The national average is 64.7 degrees, according to a study by the National Institute of Standards and Technology. At $3.00 a gallon, and with fuel at 75 degrees, motorists may lose 50 cents or more per tankful to "ghost gas." Gasoline is adjusted for temperature variations from the national standard of 60 degrees when it is sold by the refinery to distributors, and when it is sold again to retailers. At each stage, the buyer receives extra gasoline to make up for expansion and energy loss if the fuel is over 60 degrees. However, the fuel is sold without any temperature adjustment to motorists, causing an annual loss of $2.3 billion to drivers nationally.(For more information and background on "hot fuel", see http://www.oilwatchdog.org/articles/?storyId=5821 .

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

No wonder blogs are ridiculed. How the h#ll does something like this get online?
Posted by: Sojourner on Aug 14, 2007 12:23 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Buyers can get gasoline with a variation in price of at least 10%, in the same city, from the same brand. Gas prices are never uniform. Life is not lived under laboratory conditions.

Are we being screwed over by Big Oil? Not if you are an investor. Invest your money there and it will provide a fat return.

Are we being screwed over by idiot journalists? Don't invest any of your time there, all you get is openmindedness that equals emptyheadedness.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Read the article, moron... Posted by: Wesley69

Comments are closed-

AT $3 (US) a US gallon it's still cheaper than ...
Posted by: SayBlade on Aug 14, 2007 2:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... buying gas in Canada even with the temperature compensation devices. We are paying about $1 (CDN) for a litre of gas in major centres and the equivalent price Americans are paying is $0.79 (CDN) per litre.

Still, it's nice to keep them more honest at the pumps.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Let's review how the oil corportions make their money: it's called crack!
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Aug 14, 2007 2:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No, not what you get by mixing cocaine with ammonia and ether, but the difference between prices for crude oil and refined crude oil products like gasoline.

Crude oil is useless. What's produced from crude oil is valuable. Thus, it turns out that if you control the refineries, you make all the money. Restricting supply in order to drive prices up is the time-honered method of sprucing up profits for Chevron, Exxon, etc.

Thus, oil corps buy oil on global markets at going rates, then try and sell the refined (cracked) products at the highest margin possible.

It's also good to control the crude oil, but this is a long-term concern. Oil refineries are hard to build and cost a lot of money - no upstart corporation is going to start refining crude oil, and therefore oil corporations can collude to raise prices without fear of losing market share.

All this helps explain the goals of the Iraq invasion and occupation. By directly controlling a source of high-quality, low-cost oil ($1/barrel to produce), oil corporations could have unheard-of crack spreads, and no need to pay the Saudis or whoever $60 a barrel.

Oil corps like to complain that environmental restrictions keep them from building refineries, but that's nonsense - Mexico has no such standards. No, by keeping supplies tight they keep prices high - and there's Exxon's $40 billion in profits.

Normally, when prices goes up, demand drops - but demand for basic needs is 'inelastic' - meaning that people will pay the high gas prices because they have no other transportation options.

The US financial system is also tied into the oil markets via the system of global dollar hegemony, which insures that oil sales (NYMEX and LPI) are denominated in dollars. This means that all countries must retain dollar reserves in order to purchase oil. Again, this only works as long as there is no alternative to petroleum products.

The economic reporting in the US is among the worst anywhere on the planet, but there are other sources:

Crude: Barrels of fun to crack you up, Julian Delasantellis

Why oil chiefs are feelin' groovy, Julian Delasantellis

Central banks' easy virtue, easy money
By Julian Delasantellis


"Until the root cause of these price spikes, the oligarchic nature of the oil distribution and refinery system allowing oil companies to engineer and sustain supply restrictions virtually at will, is addressed, you'll always be reading about something, somewhere, be it Iran, Nigeria, Canada, or Cushing, Oklahoma, that is causing gasoline prices to skyrocket."

So, what's the solution? This is where solar panels, wind turbines, electric motors, and battery systems come into play. A 200-mile range with a small car and modern laptop batteries is no problem. That's with exisiting technology that is being kept off the US market by vested fossil fuel interests.

Sustainable, fossil fuel free agriculture is also entirely possible- organic + wind/solar. Those who attack biofuels need to look beyond their noses and consider what means of production are used (any idiot could tell you that industrial fossil fuel intensive soybean-corn rotation followed by coal-fired distillation is a bad idea.)

Why do fossil fuel corps really hate all renewable energy products? Simple - they reduce demand for petroleum products, reducing the crack spread and eliminating the oil corporation's ability to raise prices by limiting supply. This is why fossil fuel corporations have done all they can to sabotage renewable energy for the past 100 years.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Simple Physics
Posted by: localhost008 on Aug 15, 2007 12:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
On the same note they probably buy gold at the equator (lighter) and then transport it and sell it at the poles (heavier).

When I learned of the expansion properties of gasoline back in high-school I wondered whether they took temperature into account during the process of pumping. Years later the answer finally arrives. Thanks guys.

Don't you think they should give refunds for all the money they fleeced from us?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

For everyone who liked this issue
Posted by: saml on Aug 15, 2007 11:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have an excellent bunch of activist issues to get behind. here there are in no particular order:

1. Have you noticed how you can never squeeze the last ounces of toothpaste, ketchup, soup, you name it - from all those plastic bottles. They should refund us the price of all those unused ounces.

2. Have you noticed how they price things with .99 at the end trying to full us in to thinking things cost less then they do!

3. Have you noticed how money are not paged to gold standard anymore - they are just peaces of paper. We should demand to be paid in gold.

Discuss!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Any Thinkers Out There ??
Posted by: gellero on Aug 15, 2007 8:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What difference does it make how the substance is measured?? This is NOT a zero-sum game.

The owners of the commodity set the price to get the return they want and/or can get in the marketplace.

HOW THE COMMODITY IS MEASURED ( for the consumer) HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. !! THE PRICE IS NOT FIXED.........

SHEESH.................

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternet Comments:

Comments are closed-

Have you ever....
Posted by: Derek Maddox on Aug 14, 2007 2:57 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Have you ever wondered why gas stations bury their tanks underground? It would be much cheaper and more convenient to have them above ground, but they ALWAYS bury them.

IT'S TO KEEP THE GASOLINE AT A CONSTANT TEMPERATURE!!

There might be a slight difference in volume between the extremes of summer and winter in some places, but if that difference were "returned" to the consumers it would amount to a couple of pennies on each tank of gasoline. The costs of retrofitting every gas station in the country with a temperature compensation device would add more to the cost of gasoline than it would save!!!

If this is the best Kucinich can do (and I'm ready to believe that) then it's time for him to hang it up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Have you ever.... Posted by: douglashoyt
» RE: Have you ever.... Posted by: blondesprite
» RE: Have you ever.... Posted by: oregonox
» RE: Have you ever.... Posted by: oregonox
» RE: Have you ever.... Posted by: penn

Comments are closed-

Technical Facts
Posted by: mtnclimber on Aug 14, 2007 4:48 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a PHD in chemical engineering, I can assure you that the density difference of gasoline from 32F to 132F is not significant. As the first comment states, you would save about 4 cents per tankful of gasoline or a couple dollars per year! Big deal. You'll save alot more money by driving less and having an energy efficient car.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Technical Facts Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» RE: Technical Facts Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» RE: Technical Facts Posted by: Joshua Holland
» Chump Change?? Posted by: gellero
» RE: Technical Facts Posted by: bafs102905

Comments are closed-

a small amount considering the soaking we are taking at $3 a gallon gas
Posted by: KaptainSpiffy on Aug 14, 2007 6:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and we subsidize exploration. we don't collect what is owed by oil companies when oil is extracted from public lands. we don't collect when oil spills need to be cleaned up.

i'm sure i've missed something.

oh. the war in iraq. the coming war in iran.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

A better way to immediately return money to consumers, no "assembly" required...
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Aug 14, 2007 6:20 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...other than the consent of the general sort, would be to stop taxing people so much on a gallon of regular. Believe it or not, there are working poor people out there who could actually do a better job putting food on the table if they weren't paving bridges to nowhere, AK...or even worse.

Erm, wait...what was I thinking? Author is probably right--it would be far easier to have private contractors install devices in every last gas pump in the Union--to no significant effect to the consumer--than to install a people-centric give-a-damn attitude amongst our wise and lubberly Congresscritters. Wouldn't it be so much different if we could just hire someone to take a wrench to our Washington problem...instead of just the special interests? Hah! There I go daydreaming about a collaborative, thoughtful, problem-solving government, rather than...well...the ultimate quadrennial political superbowl, with the requisite 51.0001 winners-with-a-firm-mandate and the other 49.0009 of the people. You know, the losers--the minority. Your swifties, your moveons, etc. provide cheerleading duties, but be advised: they might serve to give the base some pep, but they aren't very fun to watch.

Wait...hold on just a sec. I guess I'll support this initiative; I just need a few months to get some family members in the weights, balances and metering industry, though. Now that's personally progressive governance in tune with the current system!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Meh. Whomever you're trolling for... Posted by: ABetterFuture

Comments are closed-

Has anyone noticed the following
Posted by: Indigo_Black on Aug 14, 2007 7:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
about the oil companies doing the following:

1) Changing their gas cards to credit cards and charging 24% or more interest on any outstanding balances and

2) there seems to be a change in pricing in the last month or so charging a different rate as much as a dime difference per gallon to use a credit card rather then paying cash?

Talking about sticking it to the consumer!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» That IS Consumer oriented !! Posted by: gellero
» WHAT I'VE BEEN SAYING Posted by: panama420

Comments are closed-

This is loud noise
Posted by: Obijuan on Aug 14, 2007 9:19 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As the consensus here clearly states, this is nonsense. By driving an economical car (that doesn't fill up with 20 gallons), this is really a couple cents at most. Not an issue but a distraction.

You shouldn't be paying income tax as it's voluntary, and unconstitutional. That's something to write articles about day after day after day after day.....

Just another non-issue to distract and confuse.

obi

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

This is loud noise
Posted by: Obijuan on Aug 14, 2007 9:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As the consensus here clearly states, this is nonsense. By driving an economical car (that doesn't fill up with 20 gallons), this is really a couple cents at most. Not an issue but a distraction.

You shouldn't be paying income tax as it's voluntary, and unconstitutional. That's something to write articles about day after day after day after day.....

Just another non-issue to distract and confuse.

obi

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

General Strike, The Red, White and Blue Flu! 9/11
Posted by: Bladerunner2020 on Aug 14, 2007 9:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't buy gas, don't go to work, or school. Don't buy anything!
http://www.dailygrail.com/node/5137

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Kucinich & Gilbarco
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on Aug 14, 2007 10:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Gilbarco does not appear to be a publicly traded company. Is there some kind of connection between Gilbarco and Kucinich. This wont save the consumer any money. Gilbarco seems to be the only one with something to gain.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

A bigger loss.
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Aug 14, 2007 10:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Much more expensive is the time wasted in filling your tank. I haven't checked with any gas pump manufacturers but I would bet that there is a mechanism in the pumps that slows down the flow as the price is adjusted upward. It seems to me that it takes as long to pump ten dollars worth of gas at 3$ per gallon as it did at 1$ per gallon.
Bob Reichenbach,
Director, The Lincoln Initiative.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A bigger loss. Posted by: Trazom
» RE: A bigger loss. Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: A bigger loss. Posted by: Trazom

Comments are closed-

We Must Nationalize the American Oil Industry..and all Energy..!
Posted by: TJ-stars4peace on Aug 14, 2007 10:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is the only real solution to so many of our problems in the ever more global economy and for our own National Security..!

You name a topic or issue and half of them would be addressed by this action in the interest of our nation and it's people..!

Including the corruption that has infected our governmental leaders at all levels..

We could with this, let's talk oil only first we could Reduce the cost of oil gasoline heating oil you name it by 30-33% and still garner approx. $60 Billion per year every year towards developing alternate energy sources, it's failing infrastructure, as well as re-newables, new engine technology maybe even Fusion..

It would aid the Airlines which are the only other entity that also may be saved by Nationalizing them as well..

This is also a National Security matter and those state run Oil companies are now the strongest world wide..

We also need to integrate and eventually improve and deal with our electric infrastructure so these should also be Nationalized..it makes sense and we would have a huge economic Boom that would benefit every sector of the economy and these companies even if Nationalized could still be trade on the stock market as they are in China ..!

The Oil infrastructure is failing and dire need until we remove the profit motive from this industry and we could also actually create more jobs with this good paying jobs for Americans as many workers have been cut simply to boost profits as in almost every other industry..!

Exxon -Mobil had a $38 Billion dollar yer last year only spent $900 million on infrastructure etc. alternative energy development and exploration they used the other $37 billion to buy back their own stocks what a waste ..the simple accumulation of corporate wealth..for wealth's sake..

We have real problems as a nation and these Oil companies operate at the expense of our nation not in it's service..

Just as with this little petty rip offs, in this article it shows just how greed ridden and predatory these Oil companies have become and they care not how badly any of their plots injuries America and it's people..

The Oil Companies are not in the business of putting themselves out of business..!

So nothing will change or improve until we Nationalize all of our Energy including Oil and Electric energy production..!

This will take us with strength into the 21st Century and also avoid ruinous needless Wars as well I hope..

This and a Single Payer Health Care System are the future we are our leaders dragging their feet in their service of our nation..?

Money that's why..mere dirty green paper...!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Another one of activist follies
Posted by: saml on Aug 14, 2007 11:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Another one of activist follies

Let’s discover a marginal “problem” that no one complained, knew or cared about.
Let’s attribute the problem to conservatives or corporations.
Let’s come up with a convoluted, unrealistic, or prohibitively expensive “solution”
Let’s claim that costs don’t matter when righting wrongs.
Everyone who challenges “solution” on scientific, logical, pragmatic grounds is considered an enemy of the people.

Never mind that:
Temperature underground hardly ever changes
Liquid undergo minimal volume expansion relative to temperature
It would save less then couple of pennies per tank

And on top of it all iv anything it would make gas cheaper, while the entire civilized world is trying to make it more expensive to reduce it’s usage.

… but all that does not matter to brain-dead activists - because they are there to right some wrongs!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Bizarre
Posted by: Joshua Holland on Aug 14, 2007 11:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How everyone on this thread focuses on only the "few cents" that consumers would save with fair pricing based on standard temperatures, yet nobody seems to see the flip side: add a few cents from every consumer at every fill-up and you're talking about an enormous rip-off by the energy companies.

I don't care if I would only save a few cents -- I'm tired of getting squeezed at every turn by corporate America and I'm happy to see someone holding these firms accountable.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Bizarre Posted by: saml
» RE: Bizarre Posted by: shanaza

Comments are closed-

Links to additional information, and aggregate costs...
Posted by: Wesley69 on Aug 14, 2007 11:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Newly introduced legislation in the Senate, by Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri, would require gasoline and diesel to be sold adjusted for temperature, giving motorists a fair gallon's worth of energy for their money. (See information on the legislation at http://mccaskill.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=280530& )

Gasoline, especially in the summer, expands as its temperature rises. But fuel is sold by volume at a benchmark of 60 degrees, so drivers are paying for "ghost gas," the lost energy content of a gallon at any temperature above 60 degrees. At other parts of the supply chain, the gasoline is sold temperature- adjusted, meaning slightly more gasoline is provided at higher temperatures. The year-round temperature of fuel at the pump in California averages 74.5 degrees, and higher in summer. The national average is 64.7 degrees, according to a study by the National Institute of Standards and Technology. At $3.00 a gallon, and with fuel at 75 degrees, motorists may lose 50 cents or more per tankful to "ghost gas." Gasoline is adjusted for temperature variations from the national standard of 60 degrees when it is sold by the refinery to distributors, and when it is sold again to retailers. At each stage, the buyer receives extra gasoline to make up for expansion and energy loss if the fuel is over 60 degrees. However, the fuel is sold without any temperature adjustment to motorists, causing an annual loss of $2.3 billion to drivers nationally.(For more information and background on "hot fuel", see http://www.oilwatchdog.org/articles/?storyId=5821 .

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

No wonder blogs are ridiculed. How the h#ll does something like this get online?
Posted by: Sojourner on Aug 14, 2007 12:23 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Buyers can get gasoline with a variation in price of at least 10%, in the same city, from the same brand. Gas prices are never uniform. Life is not lived under laboratory conditions.

Are we being screwed over by Big Oil? Not if you are an investor. Invest your money there and it will provide a fat return.

Are we being screwed over by idiot journalists? Don't invest any of your time there, all you get is openmindedness that equals emptyheadedness.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Read the article, moron... Posted by: Wesley69

Comments are closed-

AT $3 (US) a US gallon it's still cheaper than ...
Posted by: SayBlade on Aug 14, 2007 2:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... buying gas in Canada even with the temperature compensation devices. We are paying about $1 (CDN) for a litre of gas in major centres and the equivalent price Americans are paying is $0.79 (CDN) per litre.

Still, it's nice to keep them more honest at the pumps.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Let's review how the oil corportions make their money: it's called crack!
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Aug 14, 2007 2:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No, not what you get by mixing cocaine with ammonia and ether, but the difference between prices for crude oil and refined crude oil products like gasoline.

Crude oil is useless. What's produced from crude oil is valuable. Thus, it turns out that if you control the refineries, you make all the money. Restricting supply in order to drive prices up is the time-honered method of sprucing up profits for Chevron, Exxon, etc.

Thus, oil corps buy oil on global markets at going rates, then try and sell the refined (cracked) products at the highest margin possible.

It's also good to control the crude oil, but this is a long-term concern. Oil refineries are hard to build and cost a lot of money - no upstart corporation is going to start refining crude oil, and therefore oil corporations can collude to raise prices without fear of losing market share.

All this helps explain the goals of the Iraq invasion and occupation. By directly controlling a source of high-quality, low-cost oil ($1/barrel to produce), oil corporations could have unheard-of crack spreads, and no need to pay the Saudis or whoever $60 a barrel.

Oil corps like to complain that environmental restrictions keep them from building refineries, but that's nonsense - Mexico has no such standards. No, by keeping supplies tight they keep prices high - and there's Exxon's $40 billion in profits.

Normally, when prices goes up, demand drops - but demand for basic needs is 'inelastic' - meaning that people will pay the high gas prices because they have no other transportation options.

The US financial system is also tied into the oil markets via the system of global dollar hegemony, which insures that oil sales (NYMEX and LPI) are denominated in dollars. This means that all countries must retain dollar reserves in order to purchase oil. Again, this only works as long as there is no alternative to petroleum products.

The economic reporting in the US is among the worst anywhere on the planet, but there are other sources:

Crude: Barrels of fun to crack you up, Julian Delasantellis

Why oil chiefs are feelin' groovy, Julian Delasantellis

Central banks' easy virtue, easy money
By Julian Delasantellis


"Until the root cause of these price spikes, the oligarchic nature of the oil distribution and refinery system allowing oil companies to engineer and sustain supply restrictions virtually at will, is addressed, you'll always be reading about something, somewhere, be it Iran, Nigeria, Canada, or Cushing, Oklahoma, that is causing gasoline prices to skyrocket."

So, what's the solution? This is where solar panels, wind turbines, electric motors, and battery systems come into play. A 200-mile range with a small car and modern laptop batteries is no problem. That's with exisiting technology that is being kept off the US market by vested fossil fuel interests.

Sustainable, fossil fuel free agriculture is also entirely possible- organic + wind/solar. Those who attack biofuels need to look beyond their noses and consider what means of production are used (any idiot could tell you that industrial fossil fuel intensive soybean-corn rotation followed by coal-fired distillation is a bad idea.)

Why do fossil fuel corps really hate all renewable energy products? Simple - they reduce demand for petroleum products, reducing the crack spread and eliminating the oil corporation's ability to raise prices by limiting supply. This is why fossil fuel corporations have done all they can to sabotage renewable energy for the past 100 years.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Simple Physics
Posted by: localhost008 on Aug 15, 2007 12:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
On the same note they probably buy gold at the equator (lighter) and then transport it and sell it at the poles (heavier).

When I learned of the expansion properties of gasoline back in high-school I wondered whether they took temperature into account during the process of pumping. Years later the answer finally arrives. Thanks guys.

Don't you think they should give refunds for all the money they fleeced from us?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

For everyone who liked this issue
Posted by: saml on Aug 15, 2007 11:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have an excellent bunch of activist issues to get behind. here there are in no particular order:

1. Have you noticed how you can never squeeze the last ounces of toothpaste, ketchup, soup, you name it - from all those plastic bottles. They should refund us the price of all those unused ounces.

2. Have you noticed how they price things with .99 at the end trying to full us in to thinking things cost less then they do!

3. Have you noticed how money are not paged to gold standard anymore - they are just peaces of paper. We should demand to be paid in gold.

Discuss!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Any Thinkers Out There ??
Posted by: gellero on Aug 15, 2007 8:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What difference does it make how the substance is measured?? This is NOT a zero-sum game.

The owners of the commodity set the price to get the return they want and/or can get in the marketplace.

HOW THE COMMODITY IS MEASURED ( for the consumer) HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. !! THE PRICE IS NOT FIXED.........

SHEESH.................

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

 
 
 
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS