Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site rochester.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!grkermit!masscomp!clyde!floyd!harpo!seismo!rochester!blenko
From: blenko@rochester.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.auto
Subject: Re: methanol question
Message-ID: <4545@rochester.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 23-Jan-84 23:38:59 EST
Article-I.D.: rocheste.4545
Posted: Mon Jan 23 23:38:59 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 27-Jan-84 06:36:48 EST
References: <202@pyuxnn.UUCP>
Organization: U. of Rochester, CS Dept.
Lines: 36

Well, I have the following from a source close to the current
issue in a major oil company:

	1. All gasoline producers sell gas which contains methanol.

	2. Some companies produce gasoline with more methanol than
	   others.

	3. Yes, the methanol acts as a filler, and is cheaper than
	   your normal gasoline. The issue of gas mileage seems to
	   depend upon whom you ask.

	4. Methanol content of 1-4% (by what measure, I don't know)
	   is typical for all producers (I wouldn't rely to heavily
	   upon those figures).

	5. The warranty disclaimers which have been cited were
	   apparently directed at automobile owners in the mid-west,
	   who were buying gasoline products containing much large
	   percentages of methanol.

	6. The company employing my source has been in touch with the
	   major automobile manufacturers to gain assurances that
	   methanol concentrations in the gasoline is not harmful
	   to their automobiles.

	6. The current hoopla was started by producers of some of
	   the more expensive brands of gas in order to harrass
	   competitors producing a more economical product (and
	   selling a whole lot more than the more expensive producers).

I don't suppose there is any question that the company's own
interests are reflected in the comments, however, that makes another
party heard from.

	Tom