http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Oil for plastic laptop hinges - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/c2280d0f17bcf6c4?hl=en
* Value pick for the week: BPL - 8 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/336301697917beb9?hl=en
* ot: SCHOOL 1957 vs. 2007 - 2 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/553d5f9cf98cde1d?hl=en
* Ethanol mileage - 7 messages, 5 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/853d8ae76431e232?hl=en
* Please help Burnham RSM-126 oil furnace won't heat hot water after vacation -
1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/eef6515a0b25337e?hl=en
* Discount Furniture - 2 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/693f4965402d44c1?hl=en
* How to get a good Reverse Mortgage? - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/1a1ccdaf51ae319d?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Oil for plastic laptop hinges
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/c2280d0f17bcf6c4?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 10:37 am
From: Dave
Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
> We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
> drugs began to take hold. I remember "Kadaitcha Man"
> <nospam.nospam.nospam@gmail.com> saying something like:
>
>
>>Yet another fucking moron.
>>
>>LUBRICATES
>>WD-40?s lubricating ingredients
>
>
> are utter shite.
That's because the letters WD mean that it is a water dispersing fluid,
as a lubricant, it is utter shite that evaporates quite quickly.
Dave
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 6:11 pm
From: Tekkie®
john hamilton posted for all of us...
> The hinges on our Fujitsu laptop screen appear to be 'all' plastic and they
> get very 'difficult to move' making the screen difficult to fold up and
> down.
>
> We have have tried 'WD-40', but that seems effective for only a very short
> time.
>
> We are afraid to use ordinary oil as we thought it might effect the plastic.
> We were thinking of using olive oil, but somebody has told us that olive oil
> 'degrades' and goes sticky, over time.
>
> We have got some Camellia oil that was given to us, and it's made from
> Camellias and it comes from Japan and is suppose not to 'degrade'. Still
> it's an unknown quantity to us.
>
> Does anyone know what would be a suitable and safe lubricant in this case?
> Since we dont want to cause any problems with the plastic on this lap top.
> Grateful for any suggestions, thanks.
>
>
>
Tri-flow or White Lightening
--
Tekkie - I approve this advertisement/statement/utterance.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Value pick for the week: BPL
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/336301697917beb9?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 8 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 10:52 am
From: George Grapman
I am not sure who is lower on the food chain,stock touts or sports
touts.
== 2 of 8 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 12:08 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
OhioGuy <none@none.net> wrote:
> http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=BPL#chart2:symbol=bpl;range=5y;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=on;source=undefined
>
> My value pick for the week: BPL
> or Buckeye Partners, LP
>
> Why? Take a look at the chart above. They are at the lowest
> they've been in years. The stock is about $6 less than the AVERAGE
> price over the past 6 years. It is significantly down from its
> average of the past year (currently about $38.60 vs $46)
>
> It is consistently profitable: 14% profit margin, 19% operating
> margin
> It regularly increases the dividend: currently paying about 9%
>
> Also, it is a relatively safe investment. The company owns
> thousands of miles of pipelines and storage facilities, and gets
> money by allowing the oil companies to send their product through. Rather like charging a "toll" if you will. BPL
> also operates and
> maintains pipelines owned by third parties.
>
> http://www.ockhamresearch.com/Basic-Materials/Energy/Oil,Gas-Pipelines/BPL
>
>
> It is highly likely that, including the dividend, this stock will
> give a 30% return or higher on your initial investment over the next
> two years.
If it was that simple, it wouldnt be at an all time low.
== 3 of 8 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 2:01 pm
From: Al Bundy
OhioGuy wrote:
> > OG (paulmaubs,alpiya,trivet,none,harryb and Letoll) has one purpose in
> > life. That is to use news groups to do his thinking.
>
> I don't know what those other names are supposed to be, but I've used the
> same moniker on here for the past 3 years. Before that, I foolishly had my
> actual email listed, and had to eventually abandon it due to all the spam.
>
Bull Shit
Not that it matters, but you don't have to lie about it. Those are all
names you post under.
== 4 of 8 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 2:54 pm
From: "OhioGuy"
> If it was that simple, it wouldn't be at an all time low.
Note that it isn't an "all time low", but just the second lowest in the
past 6 years. Part of the decline seems to be due to oil "shipments"
through the pipeline declining about 3% since last year. However, they made
up for that by increasing their fees, though they did decrease full year
guidance a little bit.
The rest of it is evidently people spooked by the volatility and decline
in oil prices, which simply will not affect this company's profits all that
much. (maybe 5%, max) BPL doesn't make their money from the price of oil,
they make their money from volume of oil shipped through their pipelines.
As such, a drop of about 24% in the past 3 months is really an
overreaction of the market. It is not unreasonable for it to correct once
people notice how low it has gone - now that it has roughly a 9% dividend.
That's almost 3X what you get at a bank, for a stable cash cow company, and
for a stock that has an excellent opportunity to appreciate.
Anyway, sorry if I ruffled anyone's feathers with this. I probably made a
mistake by calling it the "value pick of the week", which implies that I
meant to post something like this here weekly. Fact is, I should have
called it the value pick of the year, or something like that. (but thought
maybe that would be a bit presumptious on my part)
== 5 of 8 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 2:55 pm
From: "OhioGuy"
> I am not sure who is lower on the food chain,stock touts or sports
> touts.
You forgot the people who argue about which comic book character would win
a fight, or people who argue over whether the Millennium Falcon or
Enterprise would win a space battle!
== 6 of 8 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 3:27 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
OhioGuy <none@none.net> wrote:
>> If it was that simple, it wouldn't be at an all time low.
> Note that it isn't an "all time low", but just the second lowest in the past 6 years.
If it was that simple, it wouldn't be at a 6 year low.
> Part of the decline seems to be due to oil "shipments" through the pipeline declining about 3% since last year.
Unlikely that that is at a 6 year low.
> However, they made up for that by increasing their fees,
So that doesnt explain why its at a 6 year low.
> though they did decrease full year guidance a little bit.
So that doesnt explain why its at a 6 year low.
> The rest of it is evidently people spooked by the volatility and decline in oil prices,
Doesnt explain why it was at a 6 year low when the oil prices were peaking.
> which simply will not affect this company's
> profits all that much. (maybe 5%, max)
So that doesnt explain why its at a 6 year low.
> BPL doesn't make their money from the price of oil, they make their money from volume of oil shipped through their
> pipelines.
So that doesnt explain why its at a 6 year low.
> As such, a drop of about 24% in the past 3 months is really an overreaction of the market.
We'll see...
> It is not unreasonable for it to correct once people notice how low it has gone
Its also not unreasonable for it to be at a 6 year low when
people know more about its prospects than you do too.
> - now that it has roughly a 9% dividend.
And it remains to be seen how long that continues for.
> That's almost 3X what you get at a bank,
Stocks always pay more than banks do.
> for a stable cash cow company,
And we'll see if it continues to be that.
> and for a stock that has an excellent opportunity to appreciate.
Easy to claim, hell of a lot harder to actually substantiate that claim.
> Anyway, sorry if I ruffled anyone's feathers with this. I probably
> made a mistake by calling it the "value pick of the week", which
> implies that I meant to post something like this here weekly.
Your main mistake was to post it to an entirely inappropriate newsgroup.
A Jap would at least have the decency to disembowel itself.
Dont make a mess of the carpet.
> Fact is, I should have called it the value pick of the year, or something like that.
It isnt that either.
> (but thought maybe that would be a bit presumptious on my part)
Its just plain wrong too.
== 7 of 8 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 5:33 pm
From: Al Bundy
On Aug 12, 5:55 pm, "OhioGuy" <n...@none.net> wrote:
> > I am not sure who is lower on the food chain,stock touts or sports
> > touts.
>
> You forgot the people who argue about which comic book character would win
> a fight, or people who argue over whether the Millennium Falcon or
> Enterprise would win a space battle!
Or people who try to barter for 5-9 seeds by mail, but it's a free
country, trivet.
== 8 of 8 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 5:59 pm
From: George Grapman
OhioGuy wrote:
>> I am not sure who is lower on the food chain,stock touts or sports
>> touts.
>
> You forgot the people who argue about which comic book character would win
> a fight, or people who argue over whether the Millennium Falcon or
> Enterprise would win a space battle!
>
>
But those people are not trying to extract money from others.
Speaking of sports/financial touts they tend to get shy when asked
why they are sharing their knowledge instead of buying stocks or betting
on games.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: ot: SCHOOL 1957 vs. 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/553d5f9cf98cde1d?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 12:10 pm
From: "AllEmailDeletedImmediately"
"Al Bundy" <MSfortune@mcpmail.com> wrote in message
news:71e0fea7-dd75-43e0-a4bc-51c4f796573d@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> AllEmailDeletedImmediately wrote:
>> SCHOOL 1957 vs. 2007
>>
> Just another off topic copy/paste by someone who tries to drive
> traffic to their link. Not frugal and not interesting either.
yes, all i did list it as ot. and what link are you talking about?
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 12:22 pm
From: "AllEmailDeletedImmediately"
"Derald" <derald@invalid.net> wrote in message
news:GM6dnWziddTFXDzVnZ2dnUVZ_qfinZ2d@earthlink.com...
> jeeppintom@webtv.net (Tommy) wrote:
>
>>Off topic>>> some good points, but wrong place.
>>
>>Tommy.
> Boy, you webteevee'ers don't mind just putting it right out there,
> fo you? I guess it's about keeping the reputation intact....
that's what the ot: means -- off topic. this way people can filter out all
the ot:s in the subject line so they don't have to read anything ot.
that's the polite way of posting ot stuff.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Ethanol mileage
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/853d8ae76431e232?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 7 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 12:12 pm
From: "AllEmailDeletedImmediately"
"George" <george@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:1NSdnZIP_8HZEjzVnZ2dnUVZ_t_inZ2d@comcast.com...
> AllEmailDeletedImmediately wrote:
>> "clams_casino" <PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> wrote in message
>> news:rH2ok.16525$yn5.319@newsfe08.iad...
>>> A bit dated (May), but
>>>
>>> "It takes 1.33 gallons of E85 (85 percent ethanol) and 1.03 gallons of
>>> E10 (10 percent ethanol) to travel the same distance as with one gallon
>>> of pure gasoline, the Department of Energy says."
>>>
>>> "A Postal Service study found the new vehicles got as much as 29 percent
>>> fewer miles to the gallon."
>>>
>>> and part that really hurts - "The U.S. pays oil refiners like Exxon
>>> Mobil 51 cents in tax refunds for each gallon of ethanol they blend into
>>> regular gasoline.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aj.h0coJSkpw&refer=us
>>
>>
>> we lose about 3mpg (10%) when we use the 10% ethanol blends. i actively
>> search
>> out stations that don't sell it, but eventually, i think all will be
>> forced to do so. and the
>> pisser? it costs the same as 100% gas.
>
>
> It actually costs more because there are significant subsidies to build
> and operate the plants, tax rebates etc that are pulled out of the
> taxpayers pockets to artificially lower the price. And the ethanol is
> exempt from road use taxes.
it costs me the same per gallon whether 100% gas or 90% gas.
>>
>> selling ethanol blends so far: sunoco, costco, sheetz, some exxons (the
>> one i found was in md)
>> i don't think citgo does, but it's hard to find one these days. and the
>> 7-11 near me doesn't use
>> the ethanol blend either. can anyone else add to the list?
>
> The only one around me is a Mobil station and that is where I fuel up. I
> hope the lack of ethanol labels means they are actually complying with the
> ethanol pump labeling requirement.
>
ask. i think the local 7-11 guy told me they're dispensed separately.
== 2 of 7 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 2:54 pm
From: George
AllEmailDeletedImmediately wrote:
> "George" <george@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
> news:1NSdnZIP_8HZEjzVnZ2dnUVZ_t_inZ2d@comcast.com...
>> AllEmailDeletedImmediately wrote:
>>> "clams_casino" <PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> wrote in message
>>> news:rH2ok.16525$yn5.319@newsfe08.iad...
>>>> A bit dated (May), but
>>>>
>>>> "It takes 1.33 gallons of E85 (85 percent ethanol) and 1.03 gallons of
>>>> E10 (10 percent ethanol) to travel the same distance as with one gallon
>>>> of pure gasoline, the Department of Energy says."
>>>>
>>>> "A Postal Service study found the new vehicles got as much as 29 percent
>>>> fewer miles to the gallon."
>>>>
>>>> and part that really hurts - "The U.S. pays oil refiners like Exxon
>>>> Mobil 51 cents in tax refunds for each gallon of ethanol they blend into
>>>> regular gasoline.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aj.h0coJSkpw&refer=us
>>>
>>> we lose about 3mpg (10%) when we use the 10% ethanol blends. i actively
>>> search
>>> out stations that don't sell it, but eventually, i think all will be
>>> forced to do so. and the
>>> pisser? it costs the same as 100% gas.
>>
>> It actually costs more because there are significant subsidies to build
>> and operate the plants, tax rebates etc that are pulled out of the
>> taxpayers pockets to artificially lower the price. And the ethanol is
>> exempt from road use taxes.
>
> it costs me the same per gallon whether 100% gas or 90% gas.
>
>>> selling ethanol blends so far: sunoco, costco, sheetz, some exxons (the
>>> one i found was in md)
>>> i don't think citgo does, but it's hard to find one these days. and the
>>> 7-11 near me doesn't use
>>> the ethanol blend either. can anyone else add to the list?
>> The only one around me is a Mobil station and that is where I fuel up. I
>> hope the lack of ethanol labels means they are actually complying with the
>> ethanol pump labeling requirement.
>>
> ask. i think the local 7-11 guy told me they're dispensed separately.
>
>
At least in the US ethanol is blended in (along with whatever else is
specified) at the terminal when they load the transports.
I wouldn't count on the clerk knowing anything about what is being
dispensed.
== 3 of 7 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 4:03 pm
From: Jeff
letterman@invalid.com wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 13:14:47 GMT, "AllEmailDeletedImmediately"
> <derjda@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "clams_casino" <PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> wrote in message
>> news:rH2ok.16525$yn5.319@newsfe08.iad...
>>> A bit dated (May), but
>>>
>>> "It takes 1.33 gallons of E85 (85 percent ethanol) and 1.03 gallons of E10
>>> (10 percent ethanol) to travel the same distance as with one gallon of
>>> pure gasoline, the Department of Energy says."
>>>
>>> "A Postal Service study found the new vehicles got as much as 29 percent
>>> fewer miles to the gallon."
>>>
>>> and part that really hurts - "The U.S. pays oil refiners like Exxon Mobil
>>> 51 cents in tax refunds for each gallon of ethanol they blend into regular
>>> gasoline.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aj.h0coJSkpw&refer=us
>>
>> we lose about 3mpg (10%) when we use the 10% ethanol blends. i actively
>> search
>> out stations that don't sell it, but eventually, i think all will be forced
>> to do so. and the
>> pisser? it costs the same as 100% gas.
>>
>> selling ethanol blends so far: sunoco, costco, sheetz, some exxons (the one
>> i found was in md)
>> i don't think citgo does, but it's hard to find one these days. and the
>> 7-11 near me doesn't use
>> the ethanol blend either. can anyone else add to the list?
>>
>> sunoco has sold the blend for quite some time, but the last three are
>> somewhat recent.
>> i emailed gasbuddy suggesting that they start tracking non-ethanol
>> stations. maybe we all should do that.
>>
>
> So, if I can buy a gallon of 100% gas for about 10 cents more than the
> 10% blend, am I better off? I always buy the blend because its
> cheaper, but if I can get 3more miles per gallon, it would seem to me
> that the pure gas is a better deal. However, I am terrible with
> mathematics. Can someone put this into a formula to determine which
> is the better deal, and how much price difference is needed to break
> even.
This is rough second grade math.
If you get 5% less mileage and gas is $4/gallon, that's 20 cents.
Jeff
>
== 4 of 7 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 5:38 pm
From: Al Bundy
On Aug 12, 7:03 pm, Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.com> wrote:
> letter...@invalid.com wrote:
> > On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 13:14:47 GMT, "AllEmailDeletedImmediately"
> > <der...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> "clams_casino" <PeterGrif...@DrunkinClam.com> wrote in message
> >>news:rH2ok.16525$yn5.319@newsfe08.iad...
> >>> A bit dated (May), but
>
> >>> "It takes 1.33 gallons of E85 (85 percent ethanol) and 1.03 gallons of E10
> >>> (10 percent ethanol) to travel the same distance as with one gallon of
> >>> pure gasoline, the Department of Energy says."
>
> >>> "A Postal Service study found the new vehicles got as much as 29 percent
> >>> fewer miles to the gallon."
>
> >>> and part that really hurts - "The U.S. pays oil refiners like Exxon Mobil
> >>> 51 cents in tax refunds for each gallon of ethanol they blend into regular
> >>> gasoline.
>
> >>>http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aj.h0coJSkpw&refe...
>
> >> we lose about 3mpg (10%) when we use the 10% ethanol blends. i actively
> >> search
> >> out stations that don't sell it, but eventually, i think all will be forced
> >> to do so. and the
> >> pisser? it costs the same as 100% gas.
>
> >> selling ethanol blends so far: sunoco, costco, sheetz, some exxons (the one
> >> i found was in md)
> >> i don't think citgo does, but it's hard to find one these days. and the
> >> 7-11 near me doesn't use
> >> the ethanol blend either. can anyone else add to the list?
>
> >> sunoco has sold the blend for quite some time, but the last three are
> >> somewhat recent.
> >> i emailed gasbuddy suggesting that they start tracking non-ethanol
> >> stations. maybe we all should do that.
>
> > So, if I can buy a gallon of 100% gas for about 10 cents more than the
> > 10% blend, am I better off? I always buy the blend because its
> > cheaper, but if I can get 3more miles per gallon, it would seem to me
> > that the pure gas is a better deal. However, I am terrible with
> > mathematics. Can someone put this into a formula to determine which
> > is the better deal, and how much price difference is needed to break
> > even.
>
> This is rough second grade math.
>
> If you get 5% less mileage and gas is $4/gallon, that's 20 cents.
>
> Jeff
>
>
I think it would be best to test it out and see what you get. Fill up,
set the trip meter and go 200 miles and refill.
There is some variation in mileage with the blends specific to certain
vehicles.
== 5 of 7 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 6:41 pm
From: Dennis
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 13:14:47 GMT, "AllEmailDeletedImmediately"
<derjda@hotmail.com> wrote:
>we lose about 3mpg (10%) when we use the 10% ethanol blends. i actively
>search
>out stations that don't sell it, but eventually, i think all will be forced
>to do so. and the
>pisser? it costs the same as 100% gas.
I dropped about 5% after the state-wide 10% ethanol fuel was mandated.
But for the last couple of tanks, the mpg has been back up to
pre--ethanol numbers. Same gas station, same car, same driving route
-- in fact, I have been using the A/C more often than usual lately.
Odd.
Dennis (evil)
--
I'm a hands-on, footloose, knee-jerk head case. -George Carlin
== 6 of 7 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 8:18 pm
From: "AllEmailDeletedImmediately"
"George" <george@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:cPidnQBGcco8mz_VnZ2dnUVZ_hWdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> AllEmailDeletedImmediately wrote:
>> "George" <george@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:1NSdnZIP_8HZEjzVnZ2dnUVZ_t_inZ2d@comcast.com...
>>> AllEmailDeletedImmediately wrote:
>>>> "clams_casino" <PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:rH2ok.16525$yn5.319@newsfe08.iad...
>>>>> A bit dated (May), but
>>>>>
>>>>> "It takes 1.33 gallons of E85 (85 percent ethanol) and 1.03 gallons of
>>>>> E10 (10 percent ethanol) to travel the same distance as with one
>>>>> gallon of pure gasoline, the Department of Energy says."
>>>>>
>>>>> "A Postal Service study found the new vehicles got as much as 29
>>>>> percent fewer miles to the gallon."
>>>>>
>>>>> and part that really hurts - "The U.S. pays oil refiners like Exxon
>>>>> Mobil 51 cents in tax refunds for each gallon of ethanol they blend
>>>>> into regular gasoline.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aj.h0coJSkpw&refer=us
>>>>
>>>> we lose about 3mpg (10%) when we use the 10% ethanol blends. i
>>>> actively search
>>>> out stations that don't sell it, but eventually, i think all will be
>>>> forced to do so. and the
>>>> pisser? it costs the same as 100% gas.
>>>
>>> It actually costs more because there are significant subsidies to build
>>> and operate the plants, tax rebates etc that are pulled out of the
>>> taxpayers pockets to artificially lower the price. And the ethanol is
>>> exempt from road use taxes.
>>
>> it costs me the same per gallon whether 100% gas or 90% gas.
>>
>>>> selling ethanol blends so far: sunoco, costco, sheetz, some exxons
>>>> (the one i found was in md)
>>>> i don't think citgo does, but it's hard to find one these days. and
>>>> the 7-11 near me doesn't use
>>>> the ethanol blend either. can anyone else add to the list?
>>> The only one around me is a Mobil station and that is where I fuel up. I
>>> hope the lack of ethanol labels means they are actually complying with
>>> the ethanol pump labeling requirement.
>>>
>> ask. i think the local 7-11 guy told me they're dispensed separately.
>>
>>
> At least in the US ethanol is blended in (along with whatever else is
> specified) at the terminal when they load the transports.
>
> I wouldn't count on the clerk knowing anything about what is being
> dispensed.
it was the store owner. maybe what he said was that he had to order it
that
way instead of it just arriving. it was a while ago that i asked him.
also, i
think you may be able to smell the difference. the ethanol might have a
alcoholly
smell. i remember yrs ago (pre '95) i filled up a a shell station and the
gas smelled
a lot like alcohol. i never went back. didn't know about ethanol, or even
if that
was what was being used, but i knew gas wasn't supposed to smell like that.
i have no sense of smell now, so i don't know if you can tell that way.
== 7 of 7 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 8:19 pm
From: "AllEmailDeletedImmediately"
"Al Bundy" <MSfortune@mcpmail.com> wrote in message
news:85b6af99-57b5-4f01-a633-4011aa8bdc3b@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 12, 7:03 pm, Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.com> wrote:
>> letter...@invalid.com wrote:
>> > On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 13:14:47 GMT, "AllEmailDeletedImmediately"
>> > <der...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> "clams_casino" <PeterGrif...@DrunkinClam.com> wrote in message
>> >>news:rH2ok.16525$yn5.319@newsfe08.iad...
>> >>> A bit dated (May), but
>>
>> >>> "It takes 1.33 gallons of E85 (85 percent ethanol) and 1.03 gallons
>> >>> of E10
>> >>> (10 percent ethanol) to travel the same distance as with one gallon
>> >>> of
>> >>> pure gasoline, the Department of Energy says."
>>
>> >>> "A Postal Service study found the new vehicles got as much as 29
>> >>> percent
>> >>> fewer miles to the gallon."
>>
>> >>> and part that really hurts - "The U.S. pays oil refiners like Exxon
>> >>> Mobil
>> >>> 51 cents in tax refunds for each gallon of ethanol they blend into
>> >>> regular
>> >>> gasoline.
>>
>> >>>http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aj.h0coJSkpw&refe...
>>
>> >> we lose about 3mpg (10%) when we use the 10% ethanol blends. i
>> >> actively
>> >> search
>> >> out stations that don't sell it, but eventually, i think all will be
>> >> forced
>> >> to do so. and the
>> >> pisser? it costs the same as 100% gas.
>>
>> >> selling ethanol blends so far: sunoco, costco, sheetz, some exxons
>> >> (the one
>> >> i found was in md)
>> >> i don't think citgo does, but it's hard to find one these days. and
>> >> the
>> >> 7-11 near me doesn't use
>> >> the ethanol blend either. can anyone else add to the list?
>>
>> >> sunoco has sold the blend for quite some time, but the last three are
>> >> somewhat recent.
>> >> i emailed gasbuddy suggesting that they start tracking non-ethanol
>> >> stations. maybe we all should do that.
>>
>> > So, if I can buy a gallon of 100% gas for about 10 cents more than the
>> > 10% blend, am I better off? I always buy the blend because its
>> > cheaper, but if I can get 3more miles per gallon, it would seem to me
>> > that the pure gas is a better deal. However, I am terrible with
>> > mathematics. Can someone put this into a formula to determine which
>> > is the better deal, and how much price difference is needed to break
>> > even.
>>
>> This is rough second grade math.
>>
>> If you get 5% less mileage and gas is $4/gallon, that's 20 cents.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>>
>
> I think it would be best to test it out and see what you get. Fill up,
> set the trip meter and go 200 miles and refill.
> There is some variation in mileage with the blends specific to certain
> vehicles.
probably should empty and fill twice with the same blend to make sure
there's not much leftover of the other stuff.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Please help Burnham RSM-126 oil furnace won't heat hot water after
vacation
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/eef6515a0b25337e?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 12:38 pm
From: "RBM"
"Donita Luddington" <doniludd@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:1j5m3pqd1y466.thibcv4nmnbi.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 06:51:26 -0400, RBM wrote:
>
>> it's telling you that there is a combustion problem.
>
> Can you tell me what the most common cause of that "combustion problem"
> might be, considering it was working fine before I turned it off for my
> summer vacation?
Possibly contaminant in the oil. Dirty oil filter. Electrodes out of
adjustment or worn. Clogged or worn nozzle. It's possible that it lost it's
prime, but that would probably indicate a leak in the system, which would
need to be found. I assume you have the burner cleaned and serviced
annually. If not, you're just looking for these type of problems
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Discount Furniture
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/693f4965402d44c1?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 5:32 pm
From: AndyTao <22265737@qq.com>
Compare prices on a wide variety of home supplies and save money.
http://www.ogogo123sina.cn/
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 5:31 pm
From: AndyTao <22265737@qq.com>
Compare prices on a wide variety of home supplies and save money.
http://www.ogogo123sina.cn/
==============================================================================
TOPIC: How to get a good Reverse Mortgage?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/browse_thread/thread/1a1ccdaf51ae319d?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Aug 12 2008 9:23 pm
From: A VFW
In article <xiYnk.11840$Bt6.5480@newsfe04.iad>,
clams_casino <PeterGriffin@DrunkinClam.com> wrote:
> A VFW wrote:
>
> >why do they charge so much to set up what is basically a lien on your
> >property?
> >
> >
>
> risk that some might live longer than expected / risk that values may
> actually ........ drop
Well, I proposed to an possible investor, a closed term of 12 yrs.
and a very modest loan of $120 K plus interest . 1/3 acre in California.
I'm 65 with Diabetes. May live to 83, like my father but the loan gets
repaid in 12 yrs. or sooner. good deal for someone. and I only need
one.
--
If guns are out-lawed. Only the Out-laws & politicians will have guns.
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "misc.consumers.frugal-living"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to misc.consumers.frugal-living+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com?hl=en
No comments:
Post a Comment