‘Hot gas’ update
Lawsuit filed in Utah; Gilbarco drops plan to sell device in California

News that motorists may not always be getting all the energy from each gallon of gasoline that they pay for has ignited a controversy, and this week it resulted in the filing of a proposed class action lawsuit against Big Oil in the U.S. District Court for Utah.

The lawsuit is an attempt to hold companies such as Flying J, Sinclair Oil, Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Shell and ConocoPhillips responsible for selling "hot gasoline" to motorists in Utah, according to The Salt Lake Tribune.

The lawsuit focuses on the issue of “temperature compensation,” which has been in the spotlight since The Kansas City Star started publishing articles about it in August 2006.

Put simply, as the temperature of gasoline rises, the volume of a gallon of fuel expands; that means drivers who fill up during the summer may get fewer miles out of a tank of gas than during the colder months, when the temperature of the fuel is lower, and a gallon occupies less space.

"This is a serious problem, especially with truckers" whose livelihoods are tied to the cost of fuel, C. Val Morley, an attorney in American Fork, Utah, who filed the proposed class action lawsuit, told The Salt Lake Tribune. "Similar lawsuits have been filed in other areas of the country."

The proposed Utah class action lawsuit wants the oil companies to install temperature correcting equipment on their retail motor fuel pumps or post notices to consumers that the energy of the fuel they are buying varies due to temperature, according to the March 6 report by The Tribune.

And it also asks the court to award each class member the amount of actual damages they suffered or $2,000, which ever is greater.

About 100 years ago, federal regulators determined that a gallon of gasoline would be 231 cubic inches of fuel measured when it was 60 degrees. And it is that 231 cubic inch per gallon standard that is used on gasoline dispensers.

When a gallon of gasoline is 60 degrees it will fill a one-gallon container. But that same gasoline at 90 degrees would spill over the sides of the container, The Tribune noted. It is that spillage that represents the energy drivers allegedly paid for, but didn't get, when they purchased a gallon of "hot gas."

The Utah lawsuit contends that hot gasoline is costing American motorists a couple of billion dollars a year and drivers in this state millions annually. And it contends that money represents excess profits for the big oil companies.

Morley also points out in the lawsuit that the petroleum industry in Canada put "temperature compensation equipment" on most retail pumps in that country because there the problem is "cold gas."

"Where the sales of hot motor fuel, as in the United States, allow the petroleum industry to earn even higher profits, the industry opposes the installation of such equipment as being too costly," Morley wrote. "Where the sales of cold motor fuel, as in Canada, reduces industry profits, the industry supports the use of such equipment."

Sinclair Oil spokesman Clint Ensign said the company hasn't yet received a copy of the lawsuit and therefore couldn't comment, The Tribune reported. "I will say that we are in full compliance with the way the state of Utah requires us to dispense fuel."

Not everyone agrees that hot gas represents a big problem.

Larry Lewis, spokesman for the Utah Department of Agriculture that oversees the state's Division of Weights and Measures, said while the temperature of the motor fuel sold in this state may fluctuate season to season, it likely evens out over the long run to around 60 degrees.

If the controversy gets addressed it likely will be on the state level, said John Bisney, spokesman for the American Petroleum Institute, a trade organization representing the nation's oil companies.

"We're not aware of any state that has addressed [fuel] temperature compensation," Bisney said.

He said that states frequently take their cue on such questions from the National Conference of Weights and Measures. "And they apparently plan to vote in July on proposed model legislation that each state may want to consider."

One state that was charting its own path in addressing the issue was California. State regulators there issued a pump-making company the nation’s first “certificate of use” for fuel dispensers that would allow gas stations to start selling fuel adjusted for temperature, according to a March 4 article in The Kansas City Star.

In doing so, the nation’s largest fuel-consuming state jumped to the front of a movement to stop the sale of hot fuel, which is costing consumers an estimated $1.7 billion annually, according to an estimate by The Star.

“It’s legal right now in California” to sell temperature-adjusted fuel, Dennis Johannes, director of California’s Division of Measurement Standards, told. The Star
Gilbarco Veeder-Root, the manufacturer that sought the certification, has for years offered a temperature-adjusting pump in Canada — where cold temperatures would otherwise condense fuel and crimp industry profits, The Star reported. But a Gilbarco spokesman now says the company has abandoned plans to sell the temperature-adjusting pump in California or anywhere else in the United States, The Star reported in its March 4 article.

Lucy Sackett, marketing communications manager for Gilbarco, confirmed the company had no plans to sell the pump in the United States, and had also dropped plans to certify a retrofit kit for existing fuel pumps, The Star reported. She characterized the moves as “business decisions.”

Gilbarco decided there would not be demand from its customers — oil companies, gas stations and truck stops — for the pumps or retrofit kits that would make temperature-corrected fuel available.The company, a subsidiary of Danaher Corp., posts revenues of more than $650 million annually selling equipment to the retail petroleum industry.

“It doesn’t make sense for us to move on it at this time,” Sackett said. “We have to listen to our customers.”