Jim,
After our trip, 1.55/gallon is .10 to 1.00 cheaper per gallon than we saw .
. . .
Will buy all the 93 oct you send @ that price!
> At 10:00 PM 9/10/2001 -0700, you wrote:
> >Listers,
> >
> >I read the new today, Oh Boy!
> >
> >Here is the story behind the drop in premium gas octane from
> 92 to 91. It
> >has to do with some Union 76 patents, the first being the
> '393 patent (U.S.
> >5,288,393) and four subsequent ones granted Unocal that
> essentially block
> >other refiners from making octane above 91 on a cost
> effective basis without
> >infringing. As a consequence, as a group, the other oil
> companies have
> >decided to dodge the bullet by lowering their octane to 91 using the
> >non-patented method. Isn't it wonderful how our patent
> system stimulates
> >technology?? You might think that at least at the Union 76
> station you could
> >get 92 octane, right? Wrong! Since they all have to pump
> their gas through
> >the same pipe, they are all forced to sell 91 octane gas.
> >
> >When I first heard from Steve Sage about his pinging problem, I was
> >skeptical that a change of 1 octane point could be so
> significant. Lately,
> >though this problem has hit the press and a lot of people
> with older, high
> >compression engines are noticing pinging problems. From what
> I read, the
> >problem will get even worse when they phase out the MTBE in
> a couple of
> >years and start using ethanol instead. Then, we'll be lucky
> if we still can
> >get 91 octane.
> >
> >I think this story is going to get even more interesting as
> the impact of
> >what has been happening becomes more widely known.
> >
> >TTFN,
> >
> >Bob
>
> I wonder if the problem is the patent or is it just California
> bullshit? Here in Florida the Octane is still at 93, but it
> cost an arm
> and a leg at $1.55 a gallon.
> James Barrett Tiger II 351C and others
|