This may not be new information to some of you and just confirmed my suspicions. I recently spoke to the Arson investigator for BCA (Bureau of Criminal Apprehension -- state crime lab), until recently he was the only one in the state. If you burn something down in Minnesota, he finds out. As [some huge percentage] of fires are set by gasoline, he's put pretty much every brand of gasoline sold in MN through an electron microscope. It turns out that there are only 2 types of gas in Minnesota (per grade/season). This would be "blue planet" (Holiday, BP and some others that meet the EPA 2010 regs) and "regular" (marathon, SA, etc which don't meet EPA 2010). The additives, which are 1 gallon per 7500 gallon tank are insignificant. The different fuels are not any different under the electron microscope. No, i didn't ask whether 2010 or not 2010 was better, that wasn't his department. edit: by electron microscope I mean using gas chromatography
insignificant in what regard? as an accellerant? also what is he using an electron microscope for? wouldnt gas chromotography or nmr give you a better idea of the materials chemical composition? or are you saying the percentage of additives are in his opinion insignificant in quantity as it relates to the the information he is seeking in the context of his job?
i highly doubt it. i do not have any information to back my opinions up, however, with "crappy" gas i throw codes instantly, with my usual station (shell off 169 & 36th ave) i have never thrown one single code. the gas may be some what similiar but, its how they refine it and its how they hold the gas in the holding tanks as well that makes the difference. when gas is burned im assuming it gets rid of all the particals that come from the holding tanks and also when gas is burned i would assume that the refining technique is also burned away so holiday gas can look like shell gas or bp gas can look like marathon gas etc.
****, i misspoke (typed) By electron microscope I mean using gas chromotography Insignificant means that there is no difference that can be seen. They're looking really, really close because if they could say, hey this gas comes from BP, they can go look at the local BP station's camera and see who bought gas in a 5 gallon container. They actually used to be able to do this, a few years ago, only Holiday used 2010 formula, so they busted a number of people by just looking at last night tapes at the local Holiday. You know there are only 4 refineries serving MN right (and only 2 in MN -- the other two are in ND and Superior and serve those areas, all the gas down here is from Marathon and Rosemount, 70% of gas in Mn comes from Rosemount and Marathon)? And some of the time all your gas comes from rosemount because the Marathon refinery keeps breaking (Marathon is also only about 1/4 the size) ? Crappy gas comes from the tanks. Bad tanks let in water or have other contamination. this has nothing to do with the gas company but the tanks. And no, not all the gasoline burns away. (His initial samples are based on fuel bought from a station and never burned). If you pour a puddle of gasoline, it will only burn out (where the oxygen is) leaving a nice bit of uncombusted fuel in the middle.
Ok. That makes a little more sense. But what im getting at is what exactly are they looking "really reaaly closely" at? Im proposing the strong possibility that the specific markers or concentrations of distinguishable constituents that these folks are looking for have little to no relevance or impact to gasoline as it applies to automotive performance. they are likely analyzing the gasoline and looking for characteristics that may make them distinguishable after they are burned... not the actual burn characteristics that i imagine would be more relevant to tuning. So theres still the possibilty that gasoline x burns to completion like gasoline z yet gasoline x takes several orders of magnitude longer to burn I dunno tho... just being skeptical. Would be an interesting conversation with someone more knowledgeable on the subject.
I'm only the messenger. They;re looking for any differences at all in composition. As i noted, the gasoline is never fully burned off so they're looking at unburned gasoline v. unburned gasoline. They're looking for characteristics that make unburned gasoline look different than other unburned gasoline. How things run depend on tank conditions (and obviosuly he hasn't tested the tanks at every gas station). However, bad tanks exist in all brand's gas stations some times. In the twin cities all gas comes from marathon and rosemount only. And rosemount is much larger than marathon (using up to 265,000 bbl/d of oil v. 70,000, both are larger than the 60,000 barrel ND refinery and 33,000 barrel WI refinery)
No idea, he rattled trhem off so quick i forgot them. I really only remember Holiday and BP as "blue planet" (which is the lab's name because Holiday was the first to use it, under the blue planet name). Maybe phillips 66? This was a few weeks ago.
If he is looking at ways to distinguish unburned gasoline from others, I'm skeptical of this method as a way to differentiate the burn characteristics between gasolines. The proof is in the pudding, and that is tuning. If one particular gasoline has a higher propensity for knock than another, that is significant. There is not way around it. Also, water and gasoline are insoluble to each other.
If they're all the same before burning at this level, how can you expect them to burn differently? And really none of the additives are going to affect knock. 70% of gasoline in MN (and all of it in TC under normal conditions) comes from two refineries, one of which supplies SA (owned by marathon) and one of which supplies Holiday, the typical whipping boys in MN gas. That doesn't mean the pump can't pump the water from the underground tank into your car.
Gasoline revisited! http://www.mnsubaru.com/forums/showpost.php?p=419927&postcount=44 I will add that Holiday is the only company that adds additives at Saint Paul Park. Everyone pulls from both depending supply.
So you are saying they are looking for physical (molecular) markers? Rather than studying the thermochemical properties and characteristics of the reaction process. Two COMPLETELY different things. Sounds like they are looking at "what" (as it relates to their area of interest) as opposed to "how" (as it relates to our area of interest... tuning cars). Also, 1/7500 can absolutely be relevant in chemistry. Think ppm and ppb. I understand that you are simply reporting what you learned, but the point I'm trying to make is that there are just too many variables at play to make a blanket statement like "The additives, which are 1 gallon per 7500 gallon tank are insignificant." Did he speak to what constitutes these additives? They certainly may be insignificant from his perspective (in the narrow lens from which he is operating), but to imply, without further inquiry, that this may have some direct correlation to automotive tuning, is a bit obtuse. agreed. Now if nm+ had spoken to a chemical engineer who worked for the refinery or gas company, who also happened to have at least some knowledge in cars (more specifically in performance tuning), then I think the questions (and answers) would be different. Sounds like retreif may have a contact. Good info, but it doesn't tell us whether one brand of gas is better to use over the other. Not taking sides here, just curious (and skeptical) about the conclusions being drawn here.
