Leave the car running while pumping gas, or take the baby out of the car?
07-25-08, 12:11 PM
#46
Thanks for posting that Kurtz! That was a very interesting report! However, none of the 200 fires were attributed to the engines running, and only 1 resulted in death. Every report read pretty much the same
Started fueling. Went back into car to get money. During that time the automatic nozzle clicked off. Went to pump more and it sparked between the nozzle and her hand and caught fire.
There were a couple just like that that occurred while the engine was running, but most were while the engine was not running. They also showed that almost all of these accidents occurred duging the winter months (only 12 out of 200 occurred during summer). Obviously, low humidity is the key here.
07-25-08, 12:40 PM
#48
While there are plenty of UL's about cell phones igniting gas pump fires, the real danger comes from either your car's ignition system or static electricity causing an arc between the fuel nozzle and the tank.
Gasoline fumes are heavier than air and can travel along the ground for a considerable distance on a still day. Despite efforts at vapor recovery at the dispenser (gas station-speak for pump, hose, and nozzle) a damaged system is not always closed. The car next to you may be flooding the area with fumes down around your ankles, and if your engine is running, you can find yourself standing in the middle of a flash fire of devastating proportions.
While these fires are rare, I have witnessed three - all at marinas where vapor recovery is especially critical - they are extremely serious. A quarter cup of gas dispersed in air has the explosive power of a stick of dynamite. I've seen a 54' cruiser have its cabin blown away and its deck separated from the hull by a small gasoline drip from a generator set. That incident killed four of six people on the boat, despite it's being only a couple of feet from the pier.
Pump fires when they do occur are no respecters of people. Whatever the condition of your own car or the sophistication of its vapor recovery system, the guy next to you or the dispenser itself may have a serious vapor leak. It's not worth turning your family into a flambe because you left the engine running. You reduce your hazard exposure by leaving the ignition off until you pay for your gas, get back in the car, and close the door. If something does go up at that point, at least you have the car to protect you.
Gasoline fumes are heavier than air and can travel along the ground for a considerable distance on a still day. Despite efforts at vapor recovery at the dispenser (gas station-speak for pump, hose, and nozzle) a damaged system is not always closed. The car next to you may be flooding the area with fumes down around your ankles, and if your engine is running, you can find yourself standing in the middle of a flash fire of devastating proportions.
While these fires are rare, I have witnessed three - all at marinas where vapor recovery is especially critical - they are extremely serious. A quarter cup of gas dispersed in air has the explosive power of a stick of dynamite. I've seen a 54' cruiser have its cabin blown away and its deck separated from the hull by a small gasoline drip from a generator set. That incident killed four of six people on the boat, despite it's being only a couple of feet from the pier.
Pump fires when they do occur are no respecters of people. Whatever the condition of your own car or the sophistication of its vapor recovery system, the guy next to you or the dispenser itself may have a serious vapor leak. It's not worth turning your family into a flambe because you left the engine running. You reduce your hazard exposure by leaving the ignition off until you pay for your gas, get back in the car, and close the door. If something does go up at that point, at least you have the car to protect you.
Also, modern ignition systems don't make sparks anywhere outside the combustion chamber. If anything, I would be worried about the sparks that can occur inside the starter AFTER the gas is pumped. It seems to me that a stronger case could be made that shutting off a hot car, filling it up, then starting it again could be even more dangerous since the electric starter might set off the vapors from the car that is being refueld NEXT to your car.
Should we all start pushing our cars in and out of the gas station so we don't have any running engines near gas pumps?
07-25-08, 02:50 PM
#49
Lexus Champion
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 1,751
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think I'm paranoid at all, actually quite the opposite. My reason for posting this thread is because I would like to know if anyone can convince me that I should be more paranoid about explosions. So far, noone has given any evidence that there is any danger. Nobody has even tried to theorize about how an explosion could be caused by a running engine. I figured at least someone would try to suggest that the tank could overflow, and the splashes of the gasoline could posibly get on the catalytic converter.
Pro's
3) if something bad happens to me while pumping gas (mugging, robbery, drive-by shooting, etc.)
Baby deaths due to heat exhaustion in cars seems to be so common in Texas that it barely makes the news.
4) Removing the baby from the car seat is a very dangerous act in comparison to gas station fires. After having a baby, I imagine some sort of injury occurs at least one out of 1,000 times.
Con's
1) Something could happen that would cause a fire because I was pumping gas while the engine is idling, and I can't get baby out.
2) Leaving the engine running increases car-jacking risk while baby is in car.
3) if something bad happens to me while pumping gas (mugging, robbery, drive-by shooting, etc.)
Baby deaths due to heat exhaustion in cars seems to be so common in Texas that it barely makes the news.
4) Removing the baby from the car seat is a very dangerous act in comparison to gas station fires. After having a baby, I imagine some sort of injury occurs at least one out of 1,000 times.
Con's
1) Something could happen that would cause a fire because I was pumping gas while the engine is idling, and I can't get baby out.
2) Leaving the engine running increases car-jacking risk while baby is in car.
4) Getting baby out of a car seat is about as risky and dangerous as anything else a baby faces. It requires extreme skill to not drop the baby face down on the concrete. I would guess that it is at least 10,000 times more dangerous than filling up the car while the engine is running.
07-25-08, 03:31 PM
#50
After considerable searching on Google, I haven't been able to find a thread of evidence that there is any danger at all, so I think I will relax, and let my baby enjoy the A/C while I refuel with the engine running.
07-26-08, 12:05 AM
#53
Lexus Fanatic
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 7,468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
all i'm saying is if you don't like our answers (tho i cant imagine you seriously think they were all garbage) then perhaps you should ask a different set of people
07-26-08, 01:47 AM
#54
Lead Lap
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 401
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It basically comes down to risk management and common sense when dealing with flammable or hazardous materials. In this case, eliminating possible sources of ignition or the possibility of your car rolling away while refueling. While the probability of a fire is minuscule with a modern, properly-maintained car, there are always the "what-ifs" and no guarantee that the other cars being refueled are properly maintained. The chance of vapor ignition is the reason why I always have chemical lightsticks in my emergency packs; there's no way I would use a flashlight if I smell gas. I look at it this way: even though a gun may have an active safety system, that doesn't mean you ignore the basics of safe firearm handling.
I find the argument that nothing bad has happened yet to be flawed. The past does not predict the future. Is this worth the chance of being wrong? Since I'm allergic to incineration, to me it is not.
This is just my opinion. If someone doesn't like it, I don't really care.
I find the argument that nothing bad has happened yet to be flawed. The past does not predict the future. Is this worth the chance of being wrong? Since I'm allergic to incineration, to me it is not.
This is just my opinion. If someone doesn't like it, I don't really care.
07-26-08, 02:07 AM
#55
Out of Warranty
Granted all of the boating fires I witnessed in over fifty years on the water were related to the failure of a fuel line or tank leak. All were "freak" accidents, but that's the nature of accidents - each is composed of a daisy-chain of small events that lead up to a catastrophe. Failure to blow bilges is certainly a cause of many of these accidents, but leaking fuel tanks, bad electrical connections in the bilges, even cycling of electrical devices in the boat rather well removed from the source of fuel has been responsible for a number of tragedies.
I taught boating classes for nearly 20 years with the U.S. Power Squadrons, and have spent a good deal of my professional career involved in industrial safety. I've never seen an unpreventable accident. Most are due to unsafe practices, and a minority are due to equipment failure. Fuel-delivery fires, despite a number of safety lockouts engineered into the dispenser and supply system to restrict the amount of fuel available to a potential blaze, are devastating because they spread rapidly, burn hot, and are not easily extinguished.
Right now most states require some pretty sophisticated vapor recovery systems, but only California, to my knowledge, has recently required that these systems be continuously monitored for integrity. Quite simply, most of these vapor recovery systems that carry fuel vapors back to the tanks, or to a vent stack, are retrofits or afterthoughts of the design process. Although the standards are pretty rigid for their installation and initial testing, most states have no formal test program to ensure they are functioning after the station is open for business.
Remember when you pump 15 gallons of gas, you have to displace that same volume of air out of your tank. Your onboard vapor recovery system is not up to the volume requirements of that task, so all of that displaced vapor has to be pushed back into the station's tank. If there is not a good seal between your fuel tank and the delivery nozzle, highly explosive vapors are going to flow out of the tank's filler neck, down the fender of your car, and puddle around your feet, before slowly rolling downhill or downwind.
You can sometimes see the shimmer of this vapor pouring out of your tank, although you won't smell it unless you get down on the ground. Any spark can touch this vapor off, whether static electricity generated by the gasoline flowing through the delivery hose, or by your sliding over the car seat on a cool, dry day. Sparks can also come from your car, and not just from the ignition. Starters, alternators, fan motors, actuators, practically any electrical device on your car can serve as a source of ignition.
Does it happen often? No, it is a rare occurrence - so rare that you will probably never experience such an event. However, when a fuel fire occurs, it has the potential of so much damage and injury, that it is wise to take a few precautions. You wouldn't think about going outdoors in a thunderstorm, waving a metal rod around over your head, and by the same token it is not wise to leave your engine running during refueling. What benefits could possibly offset the risks?
I taught boating classes for nearly 20 years with the U.S. Power Squadrons, and have spent a good deal of my professional career involved in industrial safety. I've never seen an unpreventable accident. Most are due to unsafe practices, and a minority are due to equipment failure. Fuel-delivery fires, despite a number of safety lockouts engineered into the dispenser and supply system to restrict the amount of fuel available to a potential blaze, are devastating because they spread rapidly, burn hot, and are not easily extinguished.
Right now most states require some pretty sophisticated vapor recovery systems, but only California, to my knowledge, has recently required that these systems be continuously monitored for integrity. Quite simply, most of these vapor recovery systems that carry fuel vapors back to the tanks, or to a vent stack, are retrofits or afterthoughts of the design process. Although the standards are pretty rigid for their installation and initial testing, most states have no formal test program to ensure they are functioning after the station is open for business.
Remember when you pump 15 gallons of gas, you have to displace that same volume of air out of your tank. Your onboard vapor recovery system is not up to the volume requirements of that task, so all of that displaced vapor has to be pushed back into the station's tank. If there is not a good seal between your fuel tank and the delivery nozzle, highly explosive vapors are going to flow out of the tank's filler neck, down the fender of your car, and puddle around your feet, before slowly rolling downhill or downwind.
You can sometimes see the shimmer of this vapor pouring out of your tank, although you won't smell it unless you get down on the ground. Any spark can touch this vapor off, whether static electricity generated by the gasoline flowing through the delivery hose, or by your sliding over the car seat on a cool, dry day. Sparks can also come from your car, and not just from the ignition. Starters, alternators, fan motors, actuators, practically any electrical device on your car can serve as a source of ignition.
Does it happen often? No, it is a rare occurrence - so rare that you will probably never experience such an event. However, when a fuel fire occurs, it has the potential of so much damage and injury, that it is wise to take a few precautions. You wouldn't think about going outdoors in a thunderstorm, waving a metal rod around over your head, and by the same token it is not wise to leave your engine running during refueling. What benefits could possibly offset the risks?
07-26-08, 03:09 AM
#56
You can sometimes see the shimmer of this vapor pouring out of your tank, although you won't smell it unless you get down on the ground. Any spark can touch this vapor off, whether static electricity generated by the gasoline flowing through the delivery hose, or by your sliding over the car seat on a cool, dry day. Sparks can also come from your car, and not just from the ignition. Starters, alternators, fan motors, actuators, practically any electrical device on your car can serve as a source of ignition.
I also agree that any spark can be a source of ignition. A running car has a higher potential to be an ignition source than a non running car. How much higher? Don't know, don't care. All I know is we have all seen the fires at gas stations and we all know it does happen. Something was the ignition source of those fires. The goal should be the eliminate or at best limit all potential ignition sources. Doesn't matter if its a 1 in a million shot, if its a potential ignition source, I rather it not be if I had control over it. There are too many other ignition sources we don't have control over. No sense adding ones we do have control over. That is just my theory.
07-26-08, 06:13 AM
#57
Lexus Champion
What's it take to fill up .... five minutes? Most service stations have canopies anyway so the car isn't going to to get dangeriously hot while you open the window next to the baby, turn off the engine, and pump your gas. I think you are making more to this than is necessary. Kids survived for many years living in Texas in non airconditioned houses where the temps would rise to 90-95 deg in the summer. Your child is not in danger in spending five minutes at a 90 deg temperature.
07-26-08, 06:24 AM
#58
Pole Position
Join Date: May 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just roll down the windows. Usually, the pumps are in the shade, so even in summer time, the baby isn't going to be sitting in direct sunlight. It takes less than 5 minutes to fill up the tank, it's not going to get that hot in the car in 5 minutes.
I think the risk of the baby being mildly uncomfortable for ~5 minutes is worth taking over the chance of the car blowing up, being stolen or whatever, no matter how low those odds are. There's a reason they put up the no smoking/turn off the engine signs.
I think the risk of the baby being mildly uncomfortable for ~5 minutes is worth taking over the chance of the car blowing up, being stolen or whatever, no matter how low those odds are. There's a reason they put up the no smoking/turn off the engine signs.
07-26-08, 06:47 AM
#59
I do wish I had taken a different approach at asking my real question instead of using what I thought was obvious sarcasm. I was hoping someone could give me some real, factual information about the true risk of leaving a modern car running while refueling. I haven't received any such information in this thread, and have instead gotten pages of mostly canned, repetitious opinions based on tradition and fear of the unknown.
If your true question truly was what you are saying above, then why did you essentially reject answers from the people that weren't parents, as if they weren't qualified to give their opinions on your precious thread?
07-26-08, 06:51 AM
#60
Pole Position
Join Date: May 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What amazes me is about 2-3 times in the past couple years at the same gas station I have actually seen a guy with his SUV running smoking a cig.. I went to another gas station after seeing that haha.