RE: Re: WARNING: The Petroleum Equipment Institute

From: Gabriel A. Couriel (BigGabe@FIUFIJI.com)
Date: Mon Jul 15 2002 - 15:28:05 EDT


I got this from the Miami Herald's Action Line section. Action Line is a
consumer help column, where people write in with questions and they find
solutions.

Gabe
http://frontpage.tripod.com/fijigabe0

Posted on Sun, Jul. 14, 2002

Action Line

STATIC ELECTRICITY AND CAR FIRES

Q. My Dad forwarded an e-mail that says static electricity can cause a fire
if you get into your car while pumping gas. Is this true?

O. Lewis,

Miami

A. Action Line was initially a bit confused about how it was possible to get
in your car and pump gas at the same time, but the Urban Legends Reference
Page -- www.snopes.com/ -- straightened that out for us.

Unlike many Internet-circulated warnings, Urban Legends says, this one has a
core of truth. Fires at gas pumps are on the rise, and static electricity
may be a culprit. However:

. The e-mail claims that Robert N. Renkes, executive vice president &
general counsel of the Petroleum Equipment Institute (PEI), prepared a
summary of refueling fires.

That's true.

. It says that out of 150 cases, almost all of the drivers were women.

That's not true. The summary includes information about 81 gas station fires
and makes no mention of anyone's gender.

. It says almost all cases involved the person getting back in their vehicle
while the nozzle was still pumping gas and, when it finished and they went
back to pull the nozzle out, the fire started as a result of static
electricity.

That's not true. Only 29 fires were reported to have occurred when drivers
got back in their cars during refueling.

. It says most had on rubber-soled shoes.

That's not quite true. Those shoes were mentioned in 94 percent of the
reports that bothered to mention footwear.

. It says not to use cellphones when pumping gas.

No cell phones were involved in any of the fires.

. It says you should never get back into your vehicle while filling it with
gas.

The summary says no such thing.

Fires at the pump are rare. Most are caused by people smoking or leaving
their engines running while pumping gas.

Those that aren't have occurred during exceptionally dry weather so it's
reasonable to assume static electricity was the cause.

That's why the PEI is looking for answers to these questions:

. Has the chemical composition of gasoline changed in a way to make it more
conductive to electricity?

. Is the paved surface of the refueling area sufficiently dissipative?

. Tires are being made with less carbon (conductive) and more silica
(nonconductive). Does this make a difference?

. Are all conductive parts, and in particular all metal parts, in the area
of the vehicle's tank system connected in an electrostatically dissipative
manner so that the insulated conductors are not a source of ignition?

. Some fuel tank filler necks are made of nonconductive plastics with a
metal trapdoor opening. Some are connected to molded fiberglass fuel tanks.
Could refueling transmit a charge to the insulated plastic filler neck that,
in turn, might cause a spark to jump to the grounded nozzle?

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net
[mailto:owner-dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net]On Behalf Of Granpa Silver89
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 2:13 AM
To: dakota-truck-moderator@bent.twistedbits.net
Subject: Re: DML: Re: WARNING: The Petroleum Equipment Institute

jon@dakota-truck.net wrote: That is one of my pet peeves... Not people
who put their gas cap
> in the nozzle, but gas stations that remove the plate at the bottom
> of the nozzle so that it won't stay on. These nozzles have been
> carefully designed by the manufacturer, and if a nozzle were to
> slip out of a car and hit the ground, it *would* shut off, unlike
> having a gas cap wedged in there. I realize that it is probably not
> the stations themselves but some stupid law or regulation somewhere
> forcing them to do it, but I find it highly ironic that such an
> action (tampering with the nozzle so that it can't be locked on) which
> is probably done under the auspices of safety is in reality causing
> people to go to great lengths to bring back the missing capability,
> and creating a *much* more unsafe situation than was there in the
> first place. (Sounds pretty typical of the success of a government
> solution, actually...)
>
> I'll admit, I have wedged my gas cap in a nozzle to hold it on, but
> only in the bitter cold when the wind was blowing and I didn't have my
> gloves with me. I'm not about to get frostbite because some idiot
> behind a desk decided that it would be a good idea to purposely break a
> perfectly safe, functional piece of equipment. I would never walk away
> from the pump when doing this though.
>
> Its always such a pleasant surprise when I drive outside of New York
> and get to use fully functional gas pumps in other states!
>
>

I hear you Jon! All the pump nozzles that I have used here in Chicago
do NOT have the locking gizmo. I just got home tonight from a trip
north into Wisconsin - and all across the state there - the locking
parts are in place. Who knows why people think they need to be
removed... I for one, like to use the time that the tank is filling, to
wash my front windsheild. I'll 'prolly get chewed out from folks who
say "Never ever leave the pump while fueling!" - but perhaps is it the
design of the Dak's filler neck, or simply the style of nozzle they use
on gas pumps - but I have never ever had a nozzel fall out. And I always
  make sure it fits in solid. I have come across nozzels that force you
to hold them, because of their design. They will not stay in the tank
filler on their own.

--
-----------------------------------

"Hey Ray! Granpa done gone'n hit another light pole!"

Granpa - (Silver89)

1989 Reg Cab, V6, Auto, 8 footer, 4x2 1989 Reg Cab, V6, Auto, 8 footer, 4x4 w plow



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:05:04 EDT