No, I'm not an engineer - I'm a drycleaner... All fuel stations in northern virginia have labels on the pumps that say "Contains up to 10% ethanol". Even in areas where ethanol is not required by the EPA. That's why I want to test. There are a few stations that I think are ethanol free by the better than expected results I get on tanks of fuel from that station. If you look at my gaslog pay particular attention to the mileage I get on the tank following a fillup at Exxon in Catlett, Va. I suspect they don't have ethanol because I usually get better than anticipated mileage following a fillup there. The pumps have huge "May contain up to 10% ethanol" signs on them though.
I'm with Jay. In my area (RI and MA), they are required by law to post notices on the pumps, but they aren't required to be accurate -- they all say "May contain" and/or "up to".
This is the case where I am in upstate ny also. This is what the stickers on the pumps say. In 2 weeks, I will be going downstate towards ny city and I suspect it will be the same down there. Also, there is more traffic down there so I suspect that my gas mileage will be a little different (worse). But it won't have anything to do with the gas per se but the traffic. Also, I was in Boston yesterday and stopped for gas at a gulf station and they had the same stickers there but I only stopped for gas that one time so I can only guess if all the gas stations in mass have the same stickers.
But Jay, as to one particular exxon station having less ethanol than the rest, I don't know. It would seem more logical that all exxon stations in the same area/state are getting the same blend. There are a lot of variables, though, so it could be possible that something elce changed during that tank of gas. Not trying to give you a hard time but just thinking out loud.
The exxon was in a very rural area about 50 miles from my house. Depending on the route I choose I can make it on my way to visit my parents. (Its about 10 miles from their house). The station doesn't even have vapor recovery installed on their pumps, which leads me to believe that its in an area that isn't EPA restricted. I figure that the first thing the EPA does when trying to clean up an area is make stations install vapor recovery, ethanol would be the next step.
Its really strange though. I've gotten so used to vapor recovery that when using a pump without it I start the pump and have to step to the side because I can't stand it.
Are you an extremely bored engineer who is ignorant of the law that says the accurate ethanol content must be posted on the pump?
What does your posting show? 5.6%?(Calif. blend) or ???
I too do not trust ANYTHING the blenders do,say, or sell.
In Idaho it just says 'up to' or 'less than' 10%. What BS, its a SCAM.
I test with a 100ml cylinder. Have got 2% to less than 6% always.
No wonder people get less milage than what the "10% Ethanol" proponents/advocats claim. Even the Ethanol LOBBY tests showed improved mileage when the % got above 20%. Makes some sense, less E= less MPG. And as was said, the quality of the blend can be less, ethanol makes up for loss of better, higher mileage producing additives. SCAMMMMMM
I now use MORE gas PLUS all the 'E' they put in it
I am currently testing/blending my own mix with E85/E10.
To at least get a baseline of what REAL 'E10' does, since I CANNOT buy it!!
Idaho is slow, just went to 'E Blend' this summer.
Not to get to far off topic, but, how are your states doing on highway TAXES?
We are SUCKING, literaly.
More efficiant cars=less tax
Driving less miles=less tax
Incentives to BLENDERS of ETHANOL=less tax-----In fact, blenders here get HALF off of taxes, or 100%!!!!! off, depending on the source of info, seems to be a bit of a SECRET.
Do they pass this along----NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
SOLUTION---from the Governor?
If it wasn't so BS/sad, it would be FUNNY.
The Federal gov is in the same boat, not enough tax on fuel
um i dont think so. ethanol produces less btus than gasoline and inherently contains less energy per gallon, therefore less miles per gallon.
Ethanol is a bad idea because it is also a food source. That means that when the price goes up due to the new demand, the people who eat it and the people who burn it are after the same resource. Not good.
don't waste your time or time will waste you